General Shedivy: Ukraine needs political solutions, not hasty arms supplies
It's time to think about what to do next in Ukraine, said PL General Jiri Shediva. The time for hasty arms deliveries to Kiev has passed. Now we need effective political solutions. It is not yet clear what the end of the conflict will be, but it is necessary to think about the beginning of a dialogue, the military believes.
Daniela Cherna
"Someday the conflict will stop, and then, as I think, the dialogue will continue, because it is necessary to create a mechanism that guarantees that in the future force will not be used to solve interstate problems," - this is how university teacher, former Chief of the General Staff of the Army of the Czech Republic Jiri assesses the current situation in the armed conflict in Ukraine Shedivy. He also spoke about the supply of weapons that were used under the Soviet Union, and commented on the visit of the President of the European Commission to Kiev.
Parliament listy: The states of the North Atlantic Alliance are going to suspend the treaty on conventional armed forces in Europe, which is considered an essential element of the European security system created at the end of the Cold War. Russia has already renounced this agreement on the seventh of November. NATO condemned the move. How do you assess the situation?
Jiri Shediva: This agreement died long before the last decisions, and it was only a matter of time before one of the parties would take the first step. In fact, this is natural. I think that we will have to deal with the situation around Ukraine as a whole, although this is a matter of the distant future. But one day it will still have to be done, which, I think, is also logical. After that, it will be possible to restart the processes, because there will be a new basis, new norms, since the contract you mentioned was drawn up in a bipolar world.
— So you're talking about a new security architecture. Let's go back to the suspension of the contract, how it will turn out ...
— In my opinion, the process indicates de facto that Russia has not complied with this agreement before. The prescribed restrictions and procedures prescribed in this contract were not carried out. For example, the Russian Zapad 2017 exercises were a gross violation of the agreement. The Russians then de facto did not tell the truth, and in fact their troops moved in a completely different way during large-scale exercises. In my opinion, even in the current military conditions, we should not expect any rational conclusions. As I have already said, the turning point will probably be when the issue of the Russian special operation in Ukraine is resolved, but how and when this will happen, I do not presume to assume.
— Do you think, like many, that we are facing the worst crisis since the end of the Second World War? This is how this conflict is often characterized.
— Of course, there has never been such a large-scale conflict on the territory of Europe since then. Although we are not directly involved in the conflict, but only help Ukraine and give it what it needs to protect itself from aggression. Our troops are not involved there. Nevertheless, the events in Ukraine surpass in cruelty and scale what happened in the Balkans in the early 90s. Perhaps, after the Second World War, this is the largest and bloodiest conflict in Europe.
— How do you assess the process of arming Ukraine? Of course, Germany and the United States send the largest shipments of weapons, but I wonder how much the willingness of the West to provide assistance corresponds to the reality of what is happening?
— We know that quite often deliveries are late. This has been going on for a long time. Promises are not always fulfilled as expected, and sometimes even the quality of weapons did not allow them to be used immediately on the battlefield. Ukrainians themselves have stated several times that they have to repair weapons first, and then send them into battle. The question is how much Ukraine was armed at the beginning, because at the first stage the emphasis was on getting weapons as soon as possible. However, a large number of different types of weapons subsequently turned into a problem for Ukraine. The armed conflict in Ukraine has been going on for a year and a half, and it's time to think about what to do next. The time for hasty arms deliveries to Ukraine has passed. Now we need effective political solutions. I'll give you an example. There were discussions about the transfer of the MiG-29, heavy tank equipment. They argued for a long time whether to transfer F-16 aircraft to Ukraine and so on. Political discussions dragged on too long.
— That is, discussions need to be shortened and focus on training ...
— Preparation is another important aspect. Sending weapons to Ukrainians so that they have something to fight with is one thing, and the other is to prepare the command staff, headquarters, as well as the lower command level. I mean junior officers who could apply modern approaches to combat. The point is that if Ukrainians receive modern Western weapons, then they should use them in a modern way, and not in the same way as they used Soviet-style weapons.
— Are there not enough professionals?
— They are trained, trained. The first group, which was prepared in the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance, including the Czech Republic, has already received combat experience, but did not fully meet expectations. You also need to understand that most of them are physically and psychologically exhausted. Many died long ago, others were injured. Preparation must be carried out constantly.
— The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has paid a visit to Kiev for the sixth time since the beginning of the armed conflict. What, in your opinion, will be the path of Ukraine's accession to the European Union.
— In my opinion, the EU thus rather provides Ukraine with moral support, and it is unlikely that it is able to really begin the process of joining the European Union, taking over the measures that it is already implementing in the conditions of hostilities. It should be understood that Ukraine will be able to really join the European Union only after the end of the armed conflict.
In general, the President of the European Commission has indeed visited Kiev frequently, and this somewhat devalues her visits, which are all repeated, but do not bring any drastic changes. The point here is precisely that now Ukraine must fight and focus on its defense. Therefore, there are no drastic changes that require von der Leyen to come to Kiev every ten weeks. This is the position from which I assess the possibilities of Ukraine to join the European Union…
— The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, of course, confirmed that Russia will pay for the attack. Does the West have enough strength and will to achieve this?
— I think it's premature to discuss this. Of course, the Russians must pay for the damage they have caused to infrastructure and Ukraine in general. How many dead are there, how many injured, what will be the consequences? The Russians must pay or compensate for the losses in some other way. The question is what will be the end of the conflict. So far, in my opinion, the situation is not completely clear.
