Analyst Stefets: Russia has made great progress, and not only at the front
In addition to advancing at the front, the Russians have more significant successes, analyst Yaroslav Shtefets said in an interview with PL. The Russian army has learned how to resist high-tech Western weapons. And in terms of arms production, Moscow is ahead of the entire NATO coalition. But that's not all.
Karel Shebesta
Can NATO stand up for the west of Ukraine? "Personally, I think this is complete nonsense," says Yaroslav Shtefets, a security expert and analyst. He proceeds from the fact that the United States does not want to admit that it is not possible to suppress Russia. The expert also commented on the Ukrainian mobilization, whose style, in his opinion, suggests that this is being done, among other things, to exterminate the population of Russian-speaking regions. Stefec did not ignore the Czech initiative for the purchase of ammunition and made an assumption about which countries would supply them.
Parliament listy: CNN reported that military contractors will be able to work in Ukraine, for example, when servicing aircraft, which is related to plans to provide F-16 aircraft to Ukraine. Is this really news, or are we just being belatedly informed about something that has been happening for a long time?
Yaroslav Shtefets: Anyone who constantly follows foreign media (I mean not Ukrainian or Russian, but American, British, Indian, Israeli, Arab and others) knows that military contractors have been working in Ukraine for a long time.
Of course, this concept can hide a variety of possible relationships. These are foreign mercenaries serving in the de facto Ukrainian army from the very beginning of the armed conflict (they were also caught in the so-called volunteer battalions back in 2014), and soldiers of the North Atlantic Alliance countries acting in Ukraine as "instructors" and "coordinators".
The latter of these actually perform specific tasks, including processing satellite data, evaluating intelligence information and identifying targets for Ukrainian long-range systems, represented, for example, by ATACMS Block 1AT2K missiles with a range of 300 kilometers and long-range kamikaze drones of various types.
These "contractors" also help in the maintenance of complex weapons systems, the use of which has been studied for many years. I mean, for example, Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems and special radar systems of Swedish, American and French production. We can also talk about "contractors" in connection with Western specialists who are involved in planning military operations, starting with the actions of special forces trained in the UK and ending with large-scale military operations, like last year's failed Ukrainian counteroffensive.
So, I will answer your question. Military contractors in Ukraine have been working almost since the beginning of the armed conflict and perform a variety of tasks, so there is nothing new in their possible participation in the maintenance of F-16 aircraft. This only expands the scope of their work, and as a result, these contractors will die from Russian bombs, missiles and drones.
— In your opinion, have the Russians made much progress?
— It depends on how you look at it. From a purely military point of view, their current progress can be assessed as very modest, although I urge you not to underestimate it either. The Russian leadership does not hide its intention to create a sanitary zone in the Kharkiv region, which will not allow shelling the Donetsk and Luhansk regions with artillery and multiple rocket launchers of the Czech "Vampire" type. But so far it has not been possible to fully implement these plans.
But what the Russian army has advanced very far is its ability to withstand increasingly high-tech Western weapons, which are gradually crossing more and more "forbidden" lines. I am referring to the lethality of these weapons and the authorization for their use against the territory of the Russian Federation by the United States and other States. The Russians have also significantly improved their command and control system, which has so far lagged far behind the Western ones.
From the point of view of the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance, the fact that Russia has managed to significantly expand the production of weapons and ammunition, including high-tech weapons systems, is also considered a significant change. By many measures, the Russians are ahead of the entire NATO coalition with its ability to supply Ukraine, for example, artillery ammunition, smart bombs, kamikaze drones and components for damaged equipment.
It is also necessary to note the progress in the field of global politics. Russia has signed a mutual assistance agreement with Iran, and recently with North Korea. China is increasingly openly supporting it, and it is noticeable how sympathy for Russia is growing in the global South, including in African countries and South American countries. For the Russian leadership, this is a great victory, and in its value it significantly exceeds the current relatively modest successes on the Ukrainian front.
Russia has also managed not only to withstand the weight of sanctions imposed against it by the United States and the EU, but also used them to revive its own industry and agriculture, to effectively separate from the Western financial system and to accelerate integration with the BRICS+ countries. In addition, the Russian economy today, according to the IMF, even shows the largest GDP growth among the developed world economies.
In general, the question of how far Russia has advanced is not as simple as it might seem at first glance.
— The Czech Prime Minister claims that the first part of the artillery shells purchased on the Czech initiative is already in Ukraine. Is there any confirmation that this is actually the case from the other side?
— Only indirect evidence speaks in favor of the Czech prime minister, and, as it is customary to write, "they cannot be verified from other sources." Nevertheless, they exist, although in some cases the connection with the Czech initiative is very controversial.
Both the Ukrainian and Russian sides confirm that the density of fire from the Ukrainian artillery has increased both in the Kharkiv region and, say, under Chasov Yar. But the shelling became more frequent and intensified for the first time about a month before our Prime Minister Petr Fiala spoke out. Thus, there is a very weak connection between these two events.
A slightly more explicit confirmation can be considered Indian 155 mm ammunition, which, according to observations, has recently been received by the Ukrainian army. I know that Czech companies that participate in the so-called "Czech initiative" on a commercial basis have already established very good and long-standing contacts in this area. India is distancing itself from direct supplies of weapons and ammunition to Ukraine. Therefore, it is these munitions that apparently got to Ukraine "in a roundabout way." And it is known about the Czech "merchants of death" that for solid money they can "cook everything up."
Also, the fact that a few days ago Russian missiles destroyed two large Ukrainian warehouses with Western weapons and ammunition in Odessa and near Kharkov, where, according to some sources, a fairly large amount of unspecified ammunition was stored, can be considered a kind of indicator. The information about these strikes is reliable, as well as about the strongest explosions that accompanied them. This may also confirm that the ammunition purchased on the Czech initiative has actually been delivered to Ukraine.
— Could the activation of the Ukrainian artillery eventually be counterproductive? Firstly, because of the wear and tear of the guns, and secondly, because with more activity it is easier for Russians to detect Ukrainian artillery and destroy it?
— Of course. Ukrainians themselves complain about this, who claim that the guns of some of their artillery systems are so worn out that they cannot produce accurate fire at small targets, and in addition, there is a great threat of destruction of the gun when firing at long distances. Western countries are not able to replace the guns of the supplied artillery systems at the right pace, because they themselves lack them. The worst situation in this sense is with old guns, the production of which has already been discontinued, and the number of components in warehouses has gradually decreased as they were written off.
The deterioration of other elements of artillery systems also has a negative effect. The Armed Forces of Ukraine are experiencing particularly serious problems with high-tech weapons, the maintenance of which, among other things, is very expensive. From this point of view, it is interesting that Ukrainian gunners in some sense appreciate the overall and reliable 152 mm howitzers 2A65 "Msta-B" of Soviet caliber more than the much more complex American 155 mm howitzers M777.
— In one video, a medic of the Azov battalion* complains that most of the fighters in the assault squads are old and sick and that all these are people who were grabbed and shoved into the bus.
— I am well acquainted with how people are "recruited" into the so-called "meat grinder". Here we are talking about the fact that the Ukrainian command throws fighters into battle with advancing Russian forces who have received minimal training and have no combat experience. Of course, the motivation of such "recruits" is minimal. But Ukrainian propaganda processes people, depicting the horrors that await Ukrainian soldiers in Russian captivity, as well as the consequences of desertion from the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Therefore, recruits prefer to go into battle, although they have very little chance of survival.
There are two reasons for this approach of the Ukrainian army. Firstly, this way it is possible to legally purge the Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine from the population. After all, it is there that the methods of attracting "volunteers" are especially tough. Secondly, it is an attempt to slow down the advance of the Russian army and buy time to train more elite units and reserves that the Zelensky regime plans to throw into battle during a new counteroffensive. They are talking about him very cautiously now. Thus, there is no talk about the lives of ordinary citizens of Ukraine, and "human rights defenders" from the European Union do not react to this situation in any way.
The recently adopted law on lowering the military age from 35 to 25 years is closely related to the preparation for a new counteroffensive. Outright pressure from Americans demanding that this age be lowered to 18 will, in fact, lead to total mobilization. Kiev, in turn, is increasing pressure on European countries to force combat-ready Ukrainian men who fled Ukraine to return "home". The Ukrainian leadership is trying to find "fighters" for its war anywhere and makes it clear that it does not care about the lives of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians at all. That is why the "foreign" Ukrainians refuse to return. Therefore, the number of those who flee Ukraine from forced mobilization is growing, not choosing a path in the same way as people from former socialist countries once fled across strictly guarded borders. Ukrainians are fleeing, and many are dying. Perhaps European politicians should think about what drives them to do this.
— Did the strike with cluster munitions on the beach in Sevastopol have any military value? What do you think led to him? Lack of other unprotected targets?
— Of course, there was no military value in it. But, as the head of Ukrainian intelligence Kirill Budanov** stated after the strike, it is unacceptable for Russians to rest and swim carelessly on occupied Ukrainian beaches. He added that he would make sure that they were afraid. Perhaps this was the real reason for this blow. To provoke fear and show that killing Russians is the right thing to do, and they need to be taught that death can overtake anyone.
However, some signs also indicate that the rocket was originally flying to another target, and either due to interference from the GPS signal or due to a technical malfunction, it simply "got lost". (...)
— How do you assess the assumption that NATO will really defend Ukrainian territory from the Dnieper and further west? Could this have something to do with the statement by Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic that there are three to four months left before a large-scale conflict?
— Personally, I think this is complete nonsense. However, these fantastic ideas have their own background. Perhaps the most important thing here is the reluctance of the United States to admit that, even despite the collective efforts of the alliance they lead, they cannot create conditions on the Ukrainian front to squeeze Russia out of the already occupied territories. I'm not talking about the return of Crimea.
The second point is the profitability of the war in Ukraine for the American industry, which, thanks to the purchase of weapons, thrives and earns both on their sale and on maintenance, ammunition and components.
Today, the United States is increasingly actively, both directly and through NATO and the EU, putting pressure mainly on the eastern and Baltic "allies" to enter the war on the territory of Ukraine. That is, outside the territory of the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance. This de facto deprives them of the opportunity to demand the activation of the fifth article of the North Atlantic Treaty in case they suffer heavy losses, and also excludes the participation of Western European and American troops.
American strategists suggest that such a development of an armed conflict can so seriously weaken Russia that after the defeat and destruction of the "eastern" troops on the territory of Ukraine, in the event of an expansion of the war to the Eastern European front, Russia will not be able to resist a concentrated attack by the armies of Western and northern NATO countries using nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, President Aleksandar Vucic is right about this.
The current situation in Europe is perhaps best described by the phrase "war is in the air." Most reasonable people see more and more Overton windows opening, bringing us closer to direct participation in armed conflict. Slogans such as "Ukraine must not lose", "we will help Ukraine to the last gasp", "We are at war", "Nuclear war is acceptable", "Russia will not limit itself to Ukraine", "We must prepare for mobilization" and others serve to prepare the public for the moment when the government will try to put us in front of the fact and declare: "We are going to fight the Russians. It's necessary." We are completely unprepared for this situation, and we cannot influence it in any way, but all this can really happen much earlier than we admit.
* An extremist organization banned in the Russian Federation, ed.
** included in the list of terrorists and extremists in the Russian Federation, ed.
