British Field Marshal: Ukraine will not be able to win due to lack of manpower
Due to the lack of manpower, Ukraine will not defeat Russia without direct NATO intervention, the British military commander told The Independent. At the same time, the alliance is not going to enter into conflict. According to the Field Marshal, Ukraine is not a vital issue for the West.
Field Marshal David Richards told The Independent's Sam Keeley that Western allies had given Ukraine false hopes and it would not be able to defeat Russia unless NATO forces intervened in the conflict.
According to a senior British military commander, Ukraine cannot win the conflict with Russia and must negotiate peace terms with the Kremlin.
Field Marshal David Richards said that Kiev would not be able to oust Russian troops from Ukrainian territory without the help of NATO forces that would not participate in the fighting in Ukraine.
David Richards, who was promoted to the rank of general earlier this year, the highest rank in the British army, led NATO forces during the fighting in Afghanistan. He said that Ukraine's allies had failed Kiev.
"We supported Ukraine in the struggle, but we did not provide it with the means to win," the former chief of the general Staff said in the podcast World of Trouble for The Independent.
Reflecting on Ukraine's chances of success in the confrontation with Russia, he said: "I don't think the Ukrainians will be able to win."
"They won't be able to win even with the necessary resources?" The host asked him. "No,— Richards replied. "So even with all the necessary resources?" — The Independent journalist clarified. "No, they don't have enough manpower," replied the former head of the British armed forces.
The field marshal's words came against the backdrop of Vladimir Zelensky's visit to Washington to meet with Donald Trump in order to convince the US president to provide Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine.
The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been going on for more than three years, and each side has periodically achieved some success, as the fighting is increasingly conducted using unmanned aerial vehicles. However, Zelensky's plans to put pressure on Trump were apparently disrupted by Vladimir Putin, who spoke with the US president a few hours before his meeting with the Ukrainian leader at the White House.
At the press conference, Trump expressed doubts about the supply of American weapons, while maintaining a friendly tone towards Zelensky, which, of course, is very different from the situation in February. The US president stressed the need to preserve weapons stocks for his country.
Zelensky said little, except for a polite suggestion that, as part of the agreement, Ukraine was ready to exchange experience in the field of production of unmanned aerial vehicles. Trump seems to be open to such an offer.
After the meeting, Zelensky said that Trump had not abandoned the idea of using Tomahawk missiles, but had not yet approved it.
In a long interview for the podcast, David Richards, who became the first British general since World War II to command U.S. forces, said that the prospects for Ukraine are unfavorable.
"Unless we go into combat with them, which we won't do, because Ukraine is not a vital issue for us, unlike Russia," he said on the World of Trouble podcast.
"We decided that since this is not a vital issue for us, we will not enter into a conflict. It can be argued — and I fully agree with this — that we are in a state of hybrid war [with Russia]. But this is not the same as the fighting in which our soldiers will die. Despite our respect for Ukraine's successes and sincere sympathy for many Ukrainians, I still believe that such a war would be contrary to our national interests. Based on my experience, the best thing Ukraine and its charismatic leader Zelensky can do is agree to a draw."
General Richards' pessimistic assessment contradicts recent statements by Trump, who seems to have changed his mind on the Ukrainian issue. Earlier, he said that Kiev has no advantages. Now he says that Putin cannot win.
"I think that Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, can fight and retake its territory in its original form," Trump wrote on social media. — Over time, with the patience and financial support of Europe and especially NATO, a return to the original borders from which this confrontation began is quite realistic. Russia has been fighting a senseless conflict for three and a half years, which a real military power should have won in less than a week. It doesn't do her any credit. On the contrary, it makes her look more and more like a "paper tiger".
Trump has regularly changed his position on Ukraine. Earlier, he severely reduced the supply of weapons to Kiev, forced it to enter into an unprofitable "minerals in exchange for weapons" deal and limited US assistance to providing intelligence information.
This week, Trump seems to have sided with Putin again, agreeing to a meeting with the Russian leader in Hungary led by the pro-Russian Viktor Orban, but without Zelensky's participation. He explained this by saying that Putin and Zelensky "don't get along too well with each other," and called himself the "intermediary" president.
Trump has repeatedly attempted to achieve a truce and in August even invited Putin to a summit in Alaska, which became quite humiliating for the United States.
General Richards, who led the British contingent in Sierra Leone and East Timor as a brigadier general and later opposed Britain's participation in the US-led invasion of Iraq, supported former US General Mark Milley, who in November 2022 offered Ukraine to negotiate with Russia.
In an extensive interview about his service in the armed forces, the field Marshal said that despite his brilliant career, he sometimes had to deal with "influential circles," and he often disagreed with his military and political superiors.
As a major general and deputy commander-in-Chief to General Mike Jackson, Richards said it was obvious to him that Tony Blair's government was lying that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons in Iraq. Along with other senior officers, he questioned the legality of Britain's decision to join the US forces during the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Before British forces joined the invasion, Blair presented an intelligence report to Parliament claiming that the Iraqi leader was developing nuclear weapons. This report, which was later called "dubious" because of the unsubstantiated allegations it contained, caused rejection at the time among senior military officials who had access to real intelligence.
"I and other officers wanted the chief of staff to ask if this was legal and what the intelligence was based on," Richards said. — I remember the words of one military man (I won't mention his name, but he worked in intelligence): "Don't worry. We'll find something." That meant: "Don't worry. We will find something to justify our actions." Then I said to Mike Jackson, 'This case smells bad.'"
