NATO has absolutely changed: an interview with Podolyak about the achievements of the summit in the USA and the F-16 Ekaterina Solyar Oksana Kharkovska For 8 – 11 In July, a NATO summit was held in Washington. This summit is more positive than those that came before – the Alliance demonstrated a significant transformation. Adviser to the Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Mikhail Podolyak in in an exclusive interview with Channel 24 noted that the Alliance understands all the risks that Russia generates today and is ready to respond. More about the summit in Washington, F-16 and why the transfer of Swedish Gripen fighters was stopped – read further in the material. Recall that in the first part interviewwe wrote about the conditions under which Vladimir Putin might decide to attack the North Atlantic Alliance. Details – read the link. Vladimir Putin constantly talks about his mobilization potential, but we saw that the Prime Minister of India came and told him to bring his people back from the army. Then we see how the DPRK sends its elite troops allegedly to restore the Donetsk and Lugansk regions. There is information that 30 thousand migrants, who were first shown Russian passports, were then told to go defend the “motherland”. All these moments seem to clearly indicate that Russia's mobilization potential is not as great as Putin describes it. Let's start with the fact that Putin always talks nonsense. He does not understand what he is saying. These are fairly banal propaganda theses, which he simply voices as one of the “VIP propagandists”, nothing more. Putin does not have the ability to perform a specific analysis, to understand cause-and-effect relationships, and so on. This has long been clear. To say that this person can voice something truthful and objective is nonsense. Not even because it is propaganda, but because it is simply Putin. If you carefully analyze what is happening today in the Russian economy and in social and structural relations in Russia in general, these are not positive trends. Therefore, it really cannot be said that Russia has a high mobilization potential – 140 million people. This is wrong. Secondly, this is not the same potential from the point of view of organizations and processes. There are conflicts between different ethnic groups, not only migrants from other countries, but even between the North Caucasus and Russia, which are growing. This war today has launched many extremely negative processes for Russia. That is, processes that will one way or another lead to internal conflicts on an ethnic basis. This is obvious already. From an economic point of view, we see big structural problems and they are connected not so much even with sanctions, but with Russia’s inability to fully compensate for technological gaps, to compensate for production gaps. Even Russia’s labor resources today are somewhere at the lowest level, even the chairman of the Central Bank of Russia speaks about this. Therefore, yes, the trends are negative. The question is different. Why are these genocidal strikes being carried out today? Because Russia needs to speed up forcing Ukraine to the fake negotiating table. There is a fake negotiating table, during which Russia will continue missile attacks, because it will believe that it will then be able to issue ultimatums. They will say, if you give up the territories, then there will be no missile attacks. I want everyone to realize this. They want exactly this format today, they want to scare everyone. That is why they continue to pretend that they have everything, that they are ready for a long war, have great military potential, and so on. In reality, this is all wrong. Russia is experiencing certain crisis phenomena, and they will mount. In order for there to be significant problems in Russia's social infrastructure, tactical defeats are needed. Sanctions should be much more effective, and European companies should be deprived of the right to work in Russian markets. That is, counter-sanctions should be imposed on them. You want to work in Russia and receive superprofits – no questions, but everything you receive there will be sanctioned as fines. And finally, there should be isolation of Russia. On the one hand, you can't say that Russia should be isolated, and on the other hand, you can't suggest that Russia periodically come to certain cultural, sports or political events. This looks completely absurd. Russian propagandists say that Russia “has already won” in terms of the goals Putin spoke about. In particular, they say that Ukraine “is practically destroyed, the energy sector is destroyed.” The Russians hope to finish it off. It turns out that the task was to destroy the neighboring territory. No, the task was very simple. This is a genocidal war against Ukraine and the maximum destruction of Ukrainians. That is, it is all derivative. All these attacks on energy have one goal – the destruction of a large number of civilians of another sovereign country. I don’t understand at all what kind of security for Russia someone is always talking about. Because Russia is the only aggressive country on the continent. No other country is aggressive. And even such quasi-formations like Transnistria exist only with the help of Russia and are aggressive springboards. No more, but no less. If there is no Russia as an aggressor, then there will be no all these aggressive tendencies on the European continent. Then there is no need to build any sanitary borders, borders in general, and so on. The European Union is the concept of Europe. A united, large Europe, which has many of its own internal problems: migration, multiculturalism, economics, economic conflicts, and so on. But the main thing is missing – what Russia brings. There is no military-type crisis. If it weren't for this tolerance of Russia, when on the one hand you take energy resources from Russia, they are cheap, and on the other hand you turn a blind eye to the type of Russian foreign policy. This was Mrs. Merkel's concept (former German Chancellor Angela Merkel – Channel 24), remember? This led to these tragedies. Ukraine made a decision as a sovereign state. It makes no difference what was discussed internally in Ukraine in 2006, 2007, 2008. A decision was made – we want to be united with Europe. In particular, we want to be in NATO. If Ukraine had been a member of the Alliance then, Russia would have had the opportunity to behave aggressively? No, of course not. Why? Because it would have been clearly stated that the country has sovereign rights. There is a military alliance. Any country says: “I want to be a member of this Alliance if I comply with the statutory documents, go through certain procedural rules, and so on.” Any country can say: “I want to be an element of your security. Because I am smaller in size, there are many large countries that have aggressive capabilities and so on.” If they had not then continued, for example, to make ex-chancellors heads of Gazprom's supervisory boards.” I’m talking about Mr. Schröder (former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder – Channel 24) now; if former Austrian or French ministers had not worked on the supervisory boards of Rosneft or in other raw material agglomerations and corporations in Russia – this is the two-layered political process. Same today. We need to stop at this. Russia has no need for additional security. Russia does not want to talk about defense security. Russia wants to talk about domination in Europe, about constant war in Europe in various formats. Today it’s hot, tomorrow it’s cold, the day after tomorrow it’s hot again, and so on. Cyber warfare, so-called hybrid warfare. Russia wants to exist in such a space. Russia’s key task is to dominate. Not only in Ukraine, in Eastern Europe, but to dominate Europe in general. This must be realized. Or Russia will, piece by piece, as our president says, “bite off” Ukraine, some other country, and so on, until it dominates the space of influence of the former Soviet Union. Or she will lose. Everything is already quite simple. Black or white. How to explain this? Let's return to the concept. What did the elections to the European Parliament and national parliaments show? They demonstrated the fears of the classic European voter. He wants to finally get an elite that will do this: Putin must lose – declare it, take responsibility, provide the necessary components to a country that is ready to stall the same Putin, and win the war. This is what the voter wants to hear, and not some kind of discussion that “collective responsibility is impossible,” “there are red lines,” and so on. The voter doesn't want to hear this. This applies not only to Russia. This is true for many reasons. Therefore, he (voter – Channel 24) votes for those who say they will take responsibility. This could lead to disaster. Parallel processes, when the voter is very afraid of everything that is happening, and he does not see people who are ready to take responsibility. Russia feels this and continues to increase pressure. In particular, propaganda. As a conclusion, we can get a completely collapsed Europe.Internal conflicts are growing in Russia
Russia's Key Task Is Not Even Ukraine
128 F-16, which Ukraine needs, are in warehouses and can take part in battles< /h2>
Antony Blinken's statement the day before that F-16 fighter jets are now on their way to Ukraine from Denmark and the Netherlands. Also, speaking on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Washington, he said that over the next few days they will present a powerful package for Ukraine that will build a clear and durable bridge for Ukraine's membership in NATO. Where are the F-16 fighters flying and on what route to Ukraine are they?
We very often hear statements that it is about to happen, but then it turns out that this “just about” stretches out for a month, two, three. We'll wait. If the General Staff or the Supreme Commander wants to comment on this, that F-16s are already operating somewhere, they will do so.
Besides, it's a question of quantity. If you have 6 – 12 F-16 aircraft, they will not significantly influence the course of events on the front line. Yes, they will somewhere strengthen positions at the tactical, operational-tactical level. But in order to influence strategically, it is necessary to obtain an aviation component in the amount of 128 – 130 aircraft. Then this will have a significant impact, everyone will see a completely different picture on the front line live.
That is, tools that allow you to change the picture. Not everything can be stagnant as it is today. Because a significant increase in Ukraine's long-range capabilities, closed skies and the aviation component will completely change the course of events along the front line.
F-16 are already heading to Ukraine/Getty Images
This is not some kind of fantastic picture. These are sufficient, understandable mathematical volumes of weapons. It’s not like someone has to build it somewhere, sometime. They are in stock. They can be activated and participate directly in hostilities.
Why the transfer of Gripen fighters was stopped
There was also information about that Ukraine allegedly abandoned another type of aircraft – Gripen. Because they said that so many different types of aircraft were too many for us, as I understand it. That is, we strive for one type?
We strive for unified logistics because it is the right thing to do. This is the same service. If you have a large number of aircraft of different brands, this means different engineering logistics, different maintenance, different spare parts. This is desynchronization.
That is, if you use many different types of equipment, especially if it is extremely complex, aviation, avionics are extremely complex equipment, then you increase leverage. You will need to spend much more resources on engineering and logistics support, much more time synchronizing this support, and so on.
There is a certain logic here. But we must proceed from the fact that negotiations are taking place at different platforms and are key for us today. We understand that in this war, taking into account the modified avionics in the same F-16, it can work much more effectively against Russian MiG and Su if everything is done correctly.
The military can talk about this in more detail if they consider it necessary. I don’t think it’s necessary for us to go into detail here about what equipment we have, what we use, and so on. We can only say that there are mathematically calculated parities, formulas, and a lot of technology. find and so on. And collect from warehouses, which will be a fairly effective tool for forcing Russia to tactical defeats along the front line, to a more objective perception of the world around us.
The main achievements of the NATO summit in Washington
The NATO summit is still ongoing. But how did it start, the promises that we heard, the support that we received or did not receive on the sidelines of the NATO summit, how do you assess?
As more positive than those that came before. I see a significant transformation of NATO itself. They understand perfectly well that it is necessary to change the concept from political to military-political.
I see a specific role that NATO is ready to take on. This is the role of the moderation center. This is very important in order to unify supplies, legally fix how the implementation of agreements on security guarantees and military-industrial cooperation between Ukraine and other countries should take place. That is, such a moderation center.
In addition, this is a budget that has already been planned – 40 billion, which can be used for military assistance to Ukraine. Specific packages have also been discussed that will significantly strengthen missile defense. These are the same Patriot, the same aviation components that are mentioned. NATO will deal with this, in particular. That is, from the point of view of a significant increase in direct logistical and moderation support, this is obvious.
The second component is political statements. Today they have a much more voluminous appearance than it was in Vilnius, or before Vilnius. It is clearly stated that Ukraine’s course towards NATO is irreversible, that Ukraine is a sovereign state that must choose for itself how it wants to build its security. It has been clearly stated that Ukraine will or will not join NATO. Will we think about it? No. Will definitely join.
Question – when? The question “When?” is answered by the type of finalization of the war. The sooner this war ends, especially if it ends with the complete defeat of Russia, then joining NATO will be a formalized process. It will be necessary to go through negotiations and fulfill certain conditions for entry, but this will be quite formalized. This is key.
Zelensky held meetings at the NATO summit/Channel 24
I saw an absolute transformation of NATO itself. They make tougher, longer, more analytical statements. That is, NATO understands all the risks that Russia generates today, especially in Europe. NATO is ready to respond to these risks in a certain way. A much more logistical, thoughtful response than it was yesterday.
How to exclude Russia from the UN
Already in early August Ukraine will receive the first tranche of proceeds from Russia's frozen assets in the amount of approximately one and a half billion euros. Defense Minister Rustem Umerov named three priority areas – ammunition, air defense systems and support for Ukrainian manufacturers. Once upon a time we also thought that this was impossible. Do you believe that Russia can really be excluded from the UN?
It’s actually possible, there are mechanisms. Russia acquired illegal membership not even in the Security Council, but in the UN itself. The Regulations Committee can send all this back. Because Russia has not gone through all the necessary legal procedures to acquire this UN membership. Of course, all this can be resolved through the regulatory committee in a fairly legally correct manner. If only there was will.
I’ll move on to the key. Yes, this will will exist. It seems to me that if we manage to press the need for military assistance, sanctions assistance to Ukraine, and isolationist trends towards Russia at different levels, then the issue of suspending Russia’s membership will be quite relevant and may well be implemented. Everything here is quite simple and obvious.
The question is that Russia has been building networks of influence for years through corruption opportunities. There are a large number of neutral countries that are not at all deeply immersed in understanding the nature of this war. They one way or another depend on the Russian veto, if we are talking about the UN. All this can be gradually removed by holding certain discussions on different platforms.
But the key thesis is political will. This is what voters are demonstrating today in both Europe and the United States. They want to get an updated political elite, so that they are more responsible, aggressive in the good sense of the word, make decisions faster, are less bureaucratic, and so on.
As soon as this starts working, many issues, for example, regarding Russia’s presence in the UN, in the IAEA, will be resolved quickly, harshly, and Russia will not like it very much.
