Pubblico qui di seguito la trascrizione dei sottotitoli in inglese di un’intervista televisiva reperibile su YouTube rilasciata il 18 febbraio 2019 da Alexey Arestovich, attuale consigliere militare di Volodymir Zelensky, presidente dell’Ucraina.
Dio ci scampi dai “combattenti della libertà”.
Interview for Апостроф TV with military expert, currently military advisor of president of Ukraine, Alexey Arestovich
– Of course, the question that is interesting, how is it possible to stop the war and return the occupied territories? (here it means the war in the Donbass region, ATO zone)
– We cannot stop it…
– Can something still push Putin to this decision now?
-To end the war?
– Nothing. His main goal is to restore the Soviet Union and win
the Cold War. Replay the Cold War. Destroy the collective
security system in Europe, collapse the NATO and European
Union, if not de jure then de facto.
– And then play one-on-one with the countries of the European
Union, each one of them separately, of course, is weaker than Russia.
That’s how it is, united European Union is stronger, otherwise
it’s weaker. Therefore … A man has 150 billion wealth as
they say, he has a nuclear umbrella, he is 70 years old …
– If the goal is to gather the USSR under one country, then why he stopped at Ukraine, why didn’t he go further, the same Belarus?
– Why should he be in a hurry?
These are strategic goals, as I once said,
the operation is planned until 2032-2035.
They are not done quickly, such things.
– And what should be the result in the 32nd year?
– Well, I think that a new form of empire.
They will find some way to reconfigure foreign policy,
domestic policy. Russia, Belarus, Ukraine (or part of Ukraine)
possibly Armenia, Moldova, Kazakhstan…
– Well, it doesn’t matter, these are regional agreements… Ukraine and Belarus for sure, 3 Slavic nations should definitely be gathered. And Russia, as a new major player, in a word that is not unipolar but multipolar,
– where it takes its role, very significant role, an important one,
top of the five or even four states or state unions, and pursues
its policy as it sees fit. In any case, the CIS, and no one should
interfere in this territory.
– Dominating Europe, of course.
And this should be the result of such policy.
– Why by 2030?
– These are normai planning. If the situation,
before Putin carne to power … the collapse of state …
from 91 to 99 – lasted for 8 years.
Then to restore it, you would need double the time.
– They decided to do it in 2007, finally. After Maidan (Ukraine Revolution in 2004) they began to plan. It took one and a half to two years to plan. In 2007, they delivered the Munich speech and withdraw from the arms control treaty in Europe.
– They planned to complete it by 2023, well, given the sanctions,
and the opposition, then it is necessary to multiply the time by
at least 1.5 more. The 32nd – 35th year comes out.
– What situation in Ukraine can prevent this?
– Only accession to NATO. If we do not join NATO, then
we are finished. We do not have the strength to be neutral.
We will not remain neutral.
– For some reason, naïve people think that neutrality is when you can spend little on defense because we are not going to fight with anyone. Neutrality costs 10 times more than a war with someone else.
– Switzerland being a neutral country where all the girls, and boys serve military, crazy military taxes, and so on. Despite the fact that is not surrounded by Russia. It is surrounded by France, Italy, Germany and Austria. (democratic states)
– They are top 4th level in the world the intensity of combat training,
continuous combat training. Despite the fact that they have
6 or 8 mountain passes there, blow them up and sit for yourself,
no one will touch you, as it were.
– And we have 2,700 km of land border with Russia,
which are bare steppes. Do you have any idea how much neutrality will cost us? And count the rest of the countries that have territorial claims against us.
– Therefore, we will not maintain neutrality, we will not have
enough resources. Geographically, no country would be able to
maintain neutrality in this position.
– If we cannot maintain neutrality, we will drift either to
the “Taiga Union” (the Eurasian Union with Russia) or to
the NATO, there are no other options.
– How can NATO accept us if we have ATO
(Anti Terrorist’s Operation in the east) – war.
– This is one of the main myths about NATO, that they do not
accept countries with territorial disputes, with war.
– They accept it with ease. Moreover, they accept states
that have territoriaI disputes among themselves.
Greece and Turkey for example.
– Yes, but there were military operations on the territory of Cyprus. But we have on the territory of Ukraine.
– Yes, but, Turkey created what? His DPR (People’s Republic) in Cyprus.
– They are condemned in every possible way far this,
but nevertheless they are a member of NATO. Do you understand?
There are 36 conflicts within NATO. Well-known:
Spain believes that Gibraltar is occupied by Britain,
both are members of NATO.
– Britain “fought”, without shooting, but with the use of
military means with Iceland (Cod Wars). Well, there are
a lot of claims of countries to each other in other places,
– but the most striking are the Spanish-British conflict and
the Greek-Turkish one. Nevertheless, all is well in NATO.
And all territorial claims there can be listed for a long time.
– Well, is it then a matter of political will?
– Definitely. If we compare us with Bulgaria, which joined
in 2004, then we were ready to join in 1999.
– Why then is NATO in no hurry to accept Ukraine?
– Because they did not have a consensus on whether they
need Ukraine at all and whether we will finally drift towards
Russia with these our Yanukovychs. (president 2009-2014,
meaning pro-russian politicians)
– And now everything is simple. Now that British citizens have
been poisoned with military chemical weapons on their territory
and after the downed Boeing, an attempted coup in Montenegro.
– after the wave of refugees in Europe, after Syria.
Finally they realized in the West that Russia is
waging war not against Ukraine or Georgia,
but against the West.
– And when they figured it out, very late, somewhere by the
beginning of 2018, the most advanced ones figured it out by
- Now they consider it very simple, if they don’t take us
to NATO, then Russia gets +40 million people and a million of
– and if they take us to NATO, they get +40 million
and a million military who already have experience
of war with Russia.
– What shouId the president do? What are the first ten steps?
– He must win the parliamentary elections, this is his main step.
Because if the parliament in disagreement with the president,
then reform packages will be blocked, primarily the
direction of joining the EU and NATO.
– It will be necessary to dissolve parliament and hold new
elections. And when this is done, then he will need to
get a MAP (membership action plan) in NATO,
– this is the main task now for the cadence, everything else does
not matter. War shadows everything. AII this economy, social
sphere, all this is always sacrificed to the war. A lost in war –
all other issues become irrelevant.
– AII policies will be decided by Putin’s junta, as if the war is lost,
– That is, when Ukraine receives the MAP (membership action plan)
in N A T O, then it will be possibIe to taIk about some Iines of
ending the war (meaning the war in the DPR and LPR)?
– No, we can not talk about any lines of ending the war here,
on the contrary, this will most likely push Russia to a major
military operation against Ukraine.
– Because they will have to squander us in terms of infrastructure,
and turn everything here into a ruined territory, so that NATO
would be reluctant to accept us.
– That is, Russia will be able to go into direct confrontation
– No, not NATO, they will have to do this before we join NATO
so that NATO are not interested in us as a ruined territory.
– With a probability of 99.9%, our price for joining NATO is a
full-scale war with Russia. And if we do not join NATO,
then the absorption by Russia within 10-12 years.
That’s the whole fork in which we are.
– Wait, and now if you put the bowl on the scales, what is
better in this case?
– Of course, a major war with Russia and the transition
to NATO as a result of the victory over Russia.
– And what is a “major” war with Russia?
– Well, it could be an air invasion operation, an offensive by
the Russian armies that they created on our border,
a siege of Kyiv, an attempt to encircle troops in the ATO zone.
– A breakthrough through the Crimean Isthmus, an offensive
from the territory of Belarus, the creation of new “people’s
republics”, sabotage, attacks on criticaI infrastructure, and so on.
That’s what a major war is, and the probability of it is 99%.
– After 2020, 21 and 22 are the most critical, then 2024-2026
and the following 2028-2030 will be critical.
Maybe even three wars with Russia.
– If such a full scale war starts, will new “people’s republics”
– Well, of course, before the Russian tanks enter, saboteurs
will enter and proclaim the Kharkov, Sumy, Chernigov, Odessa
and Kherson People’s Republics.
– And how can Ukraine get a MAP in NATO and not get stuck
in a full scale war with Russia?
– No way. Well, except that they will hit Russia with means,
that will make it clear that they are not welcomed here.
– Sanctions, embargo? What will they hit with?
– Well, sanctions, embargoes, they can simply publicly and
tacitly warn that it will be very bad for them when trying
to wage a war.
:- For example, to throw an American aviation group here,
and state that Russia should do nothing, not even bother.
NATO contingents can come in, stand around Kyiv, and so on.
They can make it so that power in Russia will change.
– Liberals can come and Russia will again become a good country.
Anything can happen.
– And, under what conditions can the power in Russia be replaced?
– Well, if there is an intra-elite conflict and that part of the elite
that believes what is the continuation of Russia’s policy of
winning the Cold War and the collapse of the EU and NATO there,
– and in general, being an outcast in the West and fighting with
the West is not profitable, and it will gain enough strength to
eliminate the group that is set up for the USSR-2 project.
– Is the option of a peaceful settlement being considered?
– No, won’t happen.
– Why? It seems to me that the West is considering such options.
– The West is considering such options offering Russia to change
its mind. And why would they change their mind, for what reason?
At least one reason.
– If they threaten…
– If they threaten … how you can seriously threaten a country
that has a nuclear shield? Has nuclear weapons?
– Well, it seems to me, to bring Russia to a situation where the
question will already be whether to press t e nuclear button,
this should be a very, some, serious decision.
– That’s not the point. The fact is that it is impossible to exert
serious pressure on people with nuclear weapons, on such a
scale as Russia has.
– Because serious pressure is a threat by force, and you
can’t immerse a person with nuclear weapons by force.
And all these economic sanctions … shh … for a country like Russia.
– For example, Iran – 40 years under economic sanctions much
more severe than those of Russia. Well, and they are screwing with
the whole world, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Syria, the USA, half of Africa
and half of America.
– Iran is intriguing in half the globe, and no one do anything with it. Nuclear weapons are being developed, missiles are being launched. But Russia is larger than Iran and more influential.
– That is, to sum up – do you consider the sole or one of the important decisions of the pursuing president of Ukraine to be important, is this the MAP in NATO?
– Perhaps two more points?
– There are two ways to look at these elections – historical and
socio-economic. We must remember that the socio-economic
method is possible only because someone is fighting very well.
– In general, providing us with allies, support, military assistance
from the United States. That is the only reason we can have
these democratic conversations at all. There is no chance of
neutrality in Ukraine.
– One way or another, we will drift into one or another supranational
military alliance. Only it will be either “Taiga Union ” or NATO.
We were in “Taiga” and I personally don’t want to. We haven’t been
to NATO, let’s try.
– We will definitely not maintain neutrality. This means that the
main task is to join NATO, and no social and economic sacrifices
are such in the face of this task. Even if the dollar will cost 250,
– and since there is no such thing, but there is economic growth,
in principle, in general, everything looks not so bad. But the price
of joining NATO is likely to be a larger war with Russia, or
a sequence of such conflicts.
– But in this conflict, we will be very actively supported by the
West – with weapons, equipment, assistance, new sanctions
against Russia and the quite possible introduction of a NATO
contingent, a no-fly zone, etc. We won’t lose, and that’s good.