What Donald Trump’s coming to power in US means for Ukraine
The stream is dedicated to the US presidential election.
There have been many, many discussions about what Donald Trump's coming to power in the US means for Ukraine. I was not involved in covering the US presidential race.
Trump immediately stated that he came to establish peace, to end wars. The Wall Street Journal, an American publication, described the situation as a vision of what the new administration, the American team, could do in the war. There was a statement by President Zelenskyy as a response to all these rumours. I will briefly give my assessment and what is possible now
Wall Street Journal: "One of the ideas proposed by Trump's transition office, detailed by three people close to the president, is that Trump would bring Putin and Zelenskyy to the table on the condition that Kyiv promises not to join NATO for 20 years, and in exchange, the United States continues to arm Ukraine to deter future Russian attacks."
"According to this plan, the front line is fixed in the place where it is now. Both sides would agree (according to the Trump team's vision - Y.B.) to almost 1,300 kilometres of demilitarised zone (i.e. the entire current front line, up to and including Kursk - Y.B.), Who would guard the territory is unclear. One adviser said that the peacekeeping force would not include US troops and would not come from a US-funded international organisation such as the UN."
"We can provide training and support, but the barrel of the gun will be European"(i.e. they want peacekeeping troops from Europe - Y.B.). We are not sending American men and women to maintain peace in Ukraine, and we will not pay for it. Let the Poles, Germans, British and French do it".
So, this eloquent statement is enough. Earlier, Trump was presented with a plan to receive weapons from Ukraine until Kyiv agrees to peace talks with Russia. Ukraine can still try to regain the lost territory, but it will have to do so through diplomatic negotiations. There was a statement by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy: we need weapons, not support in negotiations. Hugs with Putin will not help, said Zelenskyy, who in 2020 said that he needed to look Putin in the eye. "He did, and we are already seeing other tougher rhetoric:"Hugs with Putin will not help. And we need enough weapons. Some of you have been hugging him for 20 years," which is a subtle jab, because Zelenskyy has been hugging him for 2 years before the war. Thank God that Zelenskyy finally realised that there was no point in hugging Putin before. Only pressure can restrain him."Most of the countries represented joined this work for the sake of effective diplomacy. Every point of the peace formula was discussed. Nuclear security, food energy, the return of prisoners and deportees to Ukraine, compliance with international law, and much more. We need to push Russia to do this. A just peace, a common victory. The plan for victory is on your table."
We can see that the general position of Ukraine is voiced here. Ukraine demands increased pressure on Russia and more arms supplies. Ukraine has demanded this before and will continue to make the same demands of the new US administration. I would like to remind you that Trump will take office only in January 25. This will happen later, and President Biden will be in power until then.
Here is what follows from this. First, statements from Washington. Before the election, there were many statements by various representatives of the Republican Party criticising the Democrats' funding, the Biden administration's funding of Ukraine, and the supply of weapons. A significant number of Republicans did not vote for financial assistance to Ukraine. And there were statements about limiting arms supplies and the need for negotiations. But what do we actually have now? President Trump said there would be peace. Now we have no real step-by-step plan, no doctrine that would at least set out the framework for negotiations, how Trump, his administration, his advisers are going to start negotiations with Russia. There are no specifics in these conversations. All the political statements that we heard from the Republicans were just political declarations, value judgements of the processes of war, diplomatic and political. But everything Trump said - I will end the war - is not supported by any facts. I think that at the moment, from what we've heard from Trump, what we're hearing now after the election, Trump has certainly not developed any strategy at the moment, and the Republicans have none. They have a general desire to end the war, a general desire to limit US funding for the war and not to send US troops to the war in Ukraine or to a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine in any way.
Obviously, the bet is that Trump will get the authority, start talking to Putin, start formulating his position, and then we will hear, I mean, it won't be until January, I think not even February, that we will actually hear some more or less specifics at that point from Trump about what he is actually going to do. How are they going to force, I mean, first of all, how are the Republicans going to force Putin to the negotiating table? They have no idea. Even what is written in the Wall Street Journal is a question about Ukraine. Why does Ukraine need these talks? Well, this is all for Ukraine. We will supply you with weapons, there will be some support. But there are no specifics. Why should Putin sit down at the negotiating table? How to influence him? That's the first question.
And the second question. Okay, even if you put Putin and Zelenskyy, Ukraine and Russia, or mediators between Ukraine and Russia, as Zelenskyy says, at the negotiating table, how do you guarantee that Putin will fulfil his part of the agreement? How? If it is immediately declared that America is not going to send troops, then how? America is sending weapons now. So this is not a factor influencing Putin's position. How? There is no understanding now.
And, of course, the third thing that the Republicans don't have is the main thing. What should we do now, before the negotiations begin? There is a massive Russian offensive underway. Russia is enlisting the support of its allies. It receives weapons and even people, personnel from its allies. From Iran, from North Korea, just massive support. North Korea has supplied Russia with more ammunition than NATO has supplied Ukraine, according to South Korean intelligence. During the war. North Korea alone, and there are also supplies from Iran. That is, Russia is being sponsored for the war with the West, and the war with Ukraine is being sponsored by those who are interested in confronting NATO countries around the world and the Western world. The American sphere is going to be affected. That is why we see concrete and effective support there. And this support will only grow.
What about the US? How is Trump going to respond to this? There is none of this. I think the main problem is that what we see is that the NATO countries did not have a unified strategy, and the Americans did not have a strategy on how to win the war, how to force Putin to negotiate. There was just general support for Ukraine. The military bloc, the economic bloc, the supply of weapons, financing. And all the negotiations, all the discussion was about how much to do. How much the Americans could allocate from their budget without completely undermining the financing of domestic development programmes, without causing a drop in the rating, without giving rise to criticism. And vice versa, the Republicans tried their best to discredit Biden's actions, saying that there was a lot of funding for NATO and a lot of weapons. Okay, this can be perceived as criticism of internal processes in the US. What will Trump do now, what will the Republicans do? They have not made any statements about this. So, I'm actually very cautious about America's position, I don't think that Trump's arrival can immediately change anything. I hope that now President Biden will make every effort to transfer as much weapons and funding to Ukraine as he has done in previous years before his term ends. And, secondly, I hope that by doing so, the Democrats will set the bar so high for the Republicans in terms of supporting Ukraine. And now let's see what Trump will do after that. Because from what he says, it doesn't appear that Putin is going to negotiate with him. What will he do next? And that will be the reason for us to say something. No negotiations, no strategy, at least until January, at least until the end of January, at the beginning, I think there will be a few more days, the appointment of a new apparatus. I think that no plans will even be announced until February 25, and no negotiations will actually start.
Secondly, since there is no clear strategy, i.e. it has not been calculated and no consultations have taken place, these negotiations, if they start, will not be quick. It will take a long time.
Thirdly, there are no guarantees that Putin is going to do what he promised. That is why the war is, in fact, entering its 25th year. We should not hope for any quick changes. That is, this whole process of negotiations and the fact that there is no strategy, and that such a strategy needs to be developed, negotiated, there are many, many points on how to do this. That is, of course, whatever he wants, they need to formulate how to make it profitable for Putin to sit down at the negotiating table, how to make him negotiate in a way that is beneficial for Ukraine. To do this, they must first show Ukraine security guarantees, show Putin what he will get for stopping the war, then get some compromise positions, and start to negotiate. That is, all this is such a long process, it is simply physically impossible to do, even in March, even in April. And this is all without any guarantee that it will start later. So, in fact, we are entering the 25th year of the war, and the Republican strategy has not been formulated in any way, and it is not clear how it can differ from the Democrats.
Okay, so if Trump stops funding the war in Ukraine, how do you think this will affect the situation? Will Putin want to sit down for talks after that? No, he'll want to put everything together in an attack to destroy Ukraine completely. So what's next for the Republicans and Trump? Trump and the Republicans are very fond of criticising Biden for the unsuccessful withdrawal from Afghanistan. The fact that they are now taking responsibility, they are taking responsibility for much more serious things. Now, unlike Biden, Trump has full power. He has a majority in both the Congress and the Senate, and he is now president. That is, the Republican Party takes full responsibility. How do you negotiate with Russia? The Americans, for example, have a lot of nuances. Thanks to the heroic deeds of some people whom we have not yet awarded the title of Hero of Ukraine because we cannot yet name them, the Nord Stream was blown up and the energy bridge from Russia to Europe was actually broken. The Russian energy business has been undermined, critically destroyed by unknown patriots whom we cannot name. And what's next? The American economy has been rebuilt, it has received such a powerful booster in the development of exports to the whole world and to Europe, in particular, of its energy resources. Is Trump also going to, say, cancel or return this? On what terms is he going to negotiate with Russia? All of this is unclear. A new picture of the world has emerged during the war. It is impossible to change this picture in one step. There is no panacea. This is a systemic, complex problem. All this will take a long time. We need to plan our actions, my vision is that the war will be long, and the position of the United States, the position of the whole world, Europe will depend primarily not on what is in the mind of Trump or his advisers. First of all, it will depend on the strength and power of Ukraine's position. And for this, President Zelenskyy needs to stop talking about some completely empty, hollow victory plan that he is still talking about. It's not a plan, it's just an empty political declaration, not tied to reality. And we didn't have to do anything. Is it possible that this is the victory plan that Zelenskyy has announced? No, it is not. What is set out there is simply not feasible. The West does not have such production capacities that would be many times higher than the Russian defence industry with the help of Iran and North Korea and China. There is no such thing. And it will not be in the near future, in the coming years. Therefore, the victory in the war and the possibility of peace negotiations now depend primarily on whether the Ukrainian government is able to finally organise adequate warfare. We have no strategy of our own. There is no victory plan for Ukraine. Zelenskyy gives orders to NATO, demands something, weapons. But who will give it? Who gives it to the weak? Who helps the weak who walk around with their hand out? For Ukraine to have a strong position in the negotiations, it is first and foremost necessary to stop the Russian offensive and organise a strategic defence. Is Zelenskyy doing anything to stop the Russian offensive and organise a strategic defence? Zero! Zero! Complete ineptitude, complete inaction.
In fact, the reserves have been withdrawn from Donbas, and no defence lines have been built. Most of the drones supplied to the army have been supplied by volunteers and civil society, local governments, and are still being supplied, and this does not cover all the needs. The Ukrainian government is completely inactive. If there is such a weak, spineless policy on the part of Zelenskyy-Yermak and all those who write texts for Zelenskyy's evening newscasts, if there is such a talentless policy, then, of course, we will be wiped on the floor. And we will be very dependent on the moods and statements of Trump and others. If we want to become a subject of foreign policy, and we need to as a state and a nation, we must do the things that are in our power, and that is to build a strategic defence and stop the Russian offensive in Donbas. We have the commanders to do this, we have motivated soldiers to do this, we have enough ammunition and weapons to do this. We lack adequate management, we have a lot of populism and empty talk, we lack responsibility for the lives of our soldiers, we lack specific technical things that would allow us to stop the front, reorganise the army and inflict defeat on the enemy, break up its strike groups. Is it possible to do this? Of course it is. It is possible, all Ukrainian commanders say so. In many parts of the frontline, our soldiers, where they are, with the right organisation and the right use of troops, repel all Russian attacks and inflict heavy losses on the Russians. If we do this, if we organise this model along the entire frontline, we will stop the Russian offensive. They will lose many times more than we do. And then Putin himself will be thinking how to get out of this mess, how to pull his leg out of this trap. Or better yet, his head. Because we have many opportunities in this war that we are not using. This is our position. If we have a strong position, we will be able to influence the position of the United States with our policy. The strong, those who can be subjective, are respected. And the weak, whose whole policy is this fake plan for victory... This childish, infantile politics will, of course, make us hostages to the situation. Therefore, we must depend on ourselves first and foremost.
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
Why is Russia so excited about the change of US government?
Well, obviously, Russia is happy every time. They have a change of power, because Trump's rhetoric is favourable, that's what they want to hear, that there is such a split in America in terms of support for Ukraine. Of course, this is a joy for them. And Russia, the information machine of the Russian Federation, it always works to cause optimism and to look for some kind of adversity of the opponents. We should not pay attention to this. We know that Republicans behave differently. Let's remember that Ronald Reagan, for example, was a Republican. Trump is not like we have in Ukraine, a new face came who does not owe anyone and does something on his own. The Republican Party relies on the support of large segments of the population, public institutions, civil society institutions, and big business, including the arms industry. And I think that this will not be such an easy party for Putin, that Trump will come in and give up everything. Because the response, the reaction in American society in this case, I think, will also be very violent. And on top of that, the Democrats will not go anywhere, and they will remain a powerful, influential opposition force. That's why Russia is rejoicing, and it's not from a great mind. Russia is always rejoicing, it's their information policy, they are looking for something that can destabilise us, including psychologically, informationally, to sow disbelief.
When will Syrskyi be released?
But when will it be removed? I think it will be removed. Zelenskyy looks like this. He has no rational perception of reality, we can see that. He's even scared of going to the frontline and hasn't been travelling for months because he's afraid to look soldiers in the eye and visit them. So what's happening now? The government is just hiding like an ostrich. Zelenskyy hid from the war, so he is comfortable with Syrskyi, as a person who follows any order, even a stupid one, anyway. How long will this go on? As long as dissatisfaction with Syrskyi's actions does not accumulate to such a level that he is simply poured out, like his predecessor, just to remove and channel dissatisfaction with the actions at the front, the situation at the front, to some figure. And he will appoint some other person. So when will this happen? Well, I think that now after the loss of Vuhledar, now after the loss of Selydove, the loss of Novohrodivka, the loss of Hirnyk, the loss of New York, a large number, several dozen villages. Unfortunately, we are on the eve of losing many more settlements and cities in Donbas. I think that criticism in society will increase, and then Zelenskyy will look at sociology, look at the number of likes and reposts on Facebook, and then he will remove him. Unfortunately, he does not think otherwise. This is a person who has no independent vision of the war, no strategy, and he is just reflecting. Therefore, I hope that public opinion will allow us to make personnel changes in the army leadership in some time. Unfortunately, this is the only way it works here.
Is it true that the orcs went straight to Dnipro?
No, they are very far from the city of Dnipro, of course. But on the Dnieper, on the Dnieper River, in the Kherson region, they have been there since the beginning of the war, on the first day of the war. So now the enemy is at the maximum distance, approximately in the Pokrovsk direction, about 27 kilometres from the borders of the administrative Dnipropetrovsk region.
How long or at all will we be able to fight without US military support?
Unfortunately, we will not be able to fight for long without US military support, but this does not mean that we will immediately fall, collapse, and it does not mean that anyone in America is considering the termination of military support at the moment. There are statements, there is criticism of Biden's actions in terms of military support for Ukraine, but so far there has been no specific statement from the American leadership or the new Republican team saying we refuse, we will not do the first, second, third thing. One thing is that they were in the opposition, let's see what they will say in power. So there is no need to create a situation in advance, to spin up a situation that still has a certain consistency.
I think Trump will provide more weapons.
This cannot be ruled out at all, I want to tell you. Absolutely. That is, Trump may well be the person who will give more weapons, because, well, he is now saying that there will be peace, but he has no plan, no strategy. Even the logic has not been voiced. What will happen? Well, Putin will not listen to him. What will he do? Well, it would be logical in such a situation to increase armaments. Well, whatever. We are talking about possible actions. So far, there is nothing to argue about, at all, at the moment.
Does Ukraine have a chance without American support?
Well, what chance do we have without American support? Without American support, of course, it will be very, very difficult for us to resist. Because American support has been invaluable from the first day of the war. So, of course, if America doesn't support us, friends, well, it will not end well for Ukraine. From day one, America has been making significant efforts. But I want to say it again. There is no point in these issues at the moment, because there is no statement that America is going to stop supplying or not supplying Ukraine with weapons. Well, there are no statements yet. Even the Republicans have not. They have to form a team now, they have to take responsibility, and in February, perhaps, we will hear specifics. Maybe there will be something even earlier. Well, there are no such statements at the moment.
During your recent visits abroad, what is the vision of Europeans for the future, not public statements, but real ones?
This year, I have been to two countries, France and Lithuania, at the invitation of the defence ministers. So here's what I can say. Everyone there is waiting for Ukraine's position. The main thing that is not clear in Europe, in NATO countries, is Ukraine's strategy. It does not exist, it is not voiced to anyone. Ukraine's leadership is not discussing its strategy at all. By the way, at a meeting with civil society, President Zelenskyy said that he did not have an action plan for Ukraine. He said that we are just developing an internal action plan for Ukraine. Imagine, he's in the third year of the war, and he doesn't even know what he has, what his action plan is. What can we talk about? So this uncertainty undermines the confidence of our partners, our allies, that we understand what we should do next and how to gain an advantage over Russia. These are really issues that cause a lot of concern. And what are NATO countries doing? They are not at war, they are helping, but of course, there is no such anxiety and inclusiveness there as there is in Ukraine. They expect that we will resist, that we will fight, and they are somehow defining themselves, what share they can allocate to support us, no more. And so, there is no such clear understanding of what NATO will do, no unified strategy in NATO. Each country builds its own strategy. But the concern is that they do not understand what we are doing. So, of course, everyone is asking.
Is it true that air defence, special forces and medics are sent to the infantry?
This is actually a practice that has been around for a long time. This does not mean that, for example, all medics are sent straight to the frontline as infantrymen. It means that medics, for example, are sent to the front line in evacuation teams to evacuate infantry and soldiers on the front line. This means that our special forces have been used as light infantry since the first day of the war. Yes, air defence units have been seconded for a long time, but now they are being taken away from there very much. Is there any logic in the fact that special forces are performing the functions of assault units instead of special tasks? Is there any logic to the fact that we have shaheds flying over Kyiv and there are not enough mobile groups to cover other facilities? And all the mobile groups have been sent to Donbas to serve as infantry instead of guarding and air defence of military facilities? Is there any logic in this? Then, the shaheds fly at low altitudes and there is no one in the air defence to shoot them down with FPV-drones, and there are not enough crews to mow them down with machine guns. Is there any logic in this? To be honest, I don't see it. We have a lot of chaotic actions that are the result of simply poor planning. And this is such a Soviet company, you know, there was such a term. Should we send everyone to the infantry? Yes, let's do it. And who can we send? Air defence personnel? Let's do it. Everyone was sent. Then air raids, drones flying over our cities and video broadcasts showing how they are correcting missile and bomb attacks on our countries, but the drones are not shot down, shaheds fly low over the roofs, they are not shot down. And where is the air defence personnel? Let's urgently build up air defence personnel. But you have sent them to Donbas. Let's look for new ones. Because we've already sent them all, and now everyone is on air defence. This chaos is a lack of planning, a lack of a plan for victory in Ukraine itself. Because our government itself has no plan and is not responsible for the victory.
I'll tell you frankly, what we see, this chaos at the front, is not a disaster in Donbas, it's a disaster in Kyiv's minds. Because Zelenskyy, what we see with Yermak, they do not believe in Ukraine's victory. They do nothing to correct the situation in the war, to make changes, to be responsible for the losses. They are scared of it or pretend to be scared in order not to do anything. And all these words that someone is saving people's lives, well, we understand all this, it's a lie. The government does not take responsibility for stopping the enemy at the defence lines. This is the responsibility of the troops at the front. And the society of the Ukrainian nation, which helps our army, and thanks to this, the frontline is standing and we are stopping the enemy. And even where they have advances, these advances are very limited. Even where we have some defensive lines and positions, unfortunately, people simply cannot defend these positions. They are not equipped with anything and there is no command and control organisation in the troops. Unfortunately, the government is not dealing with this, but this is the main problem.
Sternenko's search. Is this a greeting for criticism?
No, you know that Andrii Portnov, deputy head of President Yanukovych's administration, is very influential under Zelenskyy and is, in fact, one of the shadowy overseers of law enforcement and the judiciary under Zelenskyy. Portnov's lawyer and partner, Oleh Tatarov, was appointed by Zelenskyy to the position of deputy head of the Presidential Office, curator of law enforcement agencies. Therefore, Portnov solves all issues through Tatarov. Any issues. He needs to push on someone, to smear, to settle things. He uses everything, because there are many judges there whom he appointed and appointed because they are connected to him. Of course, he also has a lot of influence in the government. And the publication that is associated with Portnov in the media just wrote about this, that someone had put Sternenko on the wanted list. I think it's just the desire of the Presidential Office to put pressure on Sternenko and other people. And they themselves provoke, produce these attacks, help Portnov continue to fight. We believe that Portnov personally and publicly waged a campaign against Sternenko, did everything to put him in prison. And this is a continuation. And Portnov now has such opportunities under Zelenskyy that he can even order anything he wants. This is all happening because, obviously, the Presidential Office is dissatisfied with the public activities of those people whom they do not control, representatives of civil society. And, of course, there is an information war going on, a search for information, compromising material, illegal surveillance, sending out subpoenas and everything else. So why has Sternenko become famous and influential now? What is Zelenskyy, the government, the Ministry of Defence and everyone else not doing? He supplies the army with drones, raises money from people, and where else can he raise it? The government receives ten times more funding from the state budget from our partners and does not provide drones, so money is being stolen. Mavics, autels, FPVs, the state does not cover even 20% of this. Previously, they were not supplied at all for a long time. At the end of the year, up to 25% of the use of the FPVs is what the state buys. And 75% is funding from civil society and volunteers. And for mavics and autels, the state finances about 5% of the main reconnaissance drone. Well, maybe 10%, we'll set the bar at 10% as high as possible. The rest is bought by who? Civil society. That's why, of course, they don't like Sternenko, they don't like anyone who doesn't sit and bow to Yermak and say that you are the best head of the Presidential Office, dear Andrii Borysovych. And anyone who doesn't write to Zelenskyy - you are the greatest. If a person does not say that these are the greatest and best managers, does not praise them, then he is already bad, he is dangerous, and they will put pressure on this person. And people like Partnov, they use Zelenskyy's dependence on the Party of Regions, on pro-Russian agents, and manipulate them in their commercial and political interests.
How many heads of MSECs and prosecutors with disabilities have already left Ukraine?
No one left. Why should they leave? They are doing well here. All the money, property, their people continue to work. They haven't fired anyone. The head of this corrupt vertical in the MSEC, Health Minister Liashko, all his deputies, they are still working. Well, they've changed these collectors now, and someone else are being appointed now. They are doing well. The prosecutors, well, they have removed Kostin and punished him terribly, sent him as an ambassador to the Netherlands. It was just fear. The prosecutors were frightened by the harsh punishment. And no one else. Not a single disabled prosecutor has been detained, there are no trials against them, a few heads of the MSEC were detained with cash, and most of them have not been detained, they have nothing. So no one is leaving.
Tell us your opinion on the replacement of the brigade commander of the 28th brigade with a younger man, 27 years old. What do you think about this?
Well, I'm actually very upset, because Oleksii Khalabuda was a very competent brigade commander, and the army needs such brigadiers as him. Because he was a man who tried not just to give orders, but to create the brigade's combat capability, to be responsible for people, for personnel. Well, the army needs such commanders. The fact that Khalabuda was not retained, that his brigade was not reinforced, that he was allowed to move to a staff position, well, I am frankly very upset about this, and this is precisely the result of the fact that there are serious problems in the command of the ground forces, in the way Oleksandr Syrskyi leads the Armed Forces, and there is a lack of adequate personnel work. And the fact that a 27-year-old man is put in charge, friends, well, 27 years old, with all due respect, well, it's impossible, it's nonsense. Even at 30-32, it's too early, because a brigade is not just a number of people, it's not a large company, it's not even a large battalion, it's an administrative structure, there are a large number of structural units, subdivisions, different areas of activity, a large number of people. To manage such a large structure, you need life experience, you need some kind of training, a long time in different positions. You cannot put young people in these positions, young people. It is impossible to do this. Unfortunately, it is a bad practice for our management to appoint very young team leaders. And it always ends very badly. All the examples are of very young people. I want to tell you that the hero of Ukraine, national hero Dmytro Katsiubailo, DaVinci, was offered the position in '22, Valerii Zaluzhny offered him to become a brigade commander. DaVinci, I think most people know, was the most experienced Ukrainian soldier at the tactical level. He was the commander of the first separate assault company. He was a volunteer who had been fighting continuously, uninterruptedly, for 9 years in the war, 8 years in the 22nd year, uninterruptedly. No one in our army had his experience, because he was constantly performing combat missions, shooting, commanding a combat group, infantrymen, artillerymen, an anti-tank missile system, using drones. So, DaVinci knew the army deeply, and when Zaluzhnyi said to him, Let me make you a brigadier, and you will form a volunteer brigade. And DaVinci said, based on his experience, Valerii Fedorovych, and he had the personnel, he had the people, he would have manned the brigade. He said, Valerii Fedorovich, I will not take the brigade. It is above my level of competence now, I need to organise a battalion, I have to fight with a battalion, I know this level, I can be responsible for it, I am competent at this level, and I will do it. This was said by a man with the greatest war experience. And he gave up the brigade to create and command a battalion. And, of course, they put other people in charge, young people who have not been through anything. They think it's a great position, it's cool, I'm going to become a brigadier. But they don't become brigadiers, they come and start learning the job. And what does it mean, friends, to study for a position during the war? A brigade commander. This training is very difficult. Through losses, through deaths, injuries, through the consumption of ammunition and weapons. This is how people learn. And the problem is that some can learn, and some, unfortunately, even after these lessons, are not able to learn. And we already have several brigade commanders, young, handsome, who always tell Mr Syrskyi, yes, okay I will do it. And they always do everything they are told to do by their superiors. And, unfortunately, they get very bad results. And then they are dismissed just like that, silently, and no one draws any conclusions. Why did they appoint these young people who don't really fit the job? I am against this. I believe that a brigade commander is a unique person, especially in our conditions. It has to be a person with genius, with great talent to be successful in his position. There are a lot of functions. And such people are artificial people. They need to be kept in office. You can't keep changing 3-4 brigades in a year, as Syrskyi likes to do. Well, it doesn't work like that. This is just a misunderstanding of personnel work. So, unfortunately, I don't think this is a good move. I wish the 28th Brigade all the best. I hope that thanks to the advice of Oleksii Khalabuda, who will not abandon his brigade and will take care of it. And I hope that the new brigadier will listen to his advice, listen to the commanders and fighters. And we wish them all the best. But the practice of appointing young people to such important positions, on which the lives of so many people, the outcome of the fighting, and the fate of the country depend, is not the place to learn. The hierarchical structure of the army has a certain logic of promotion. And a person in each position has to gain the right experience. That is, it requires a certain amount of time in office and certain achievements. This is how you can move a person quickly. Show your achievements and go ahead. But if there are no achievements, and the person moves quickly, passing from one chair to another, it will simply be very tragic. And that's it.
K-2 said that the money was for the main thing, the Ukrainian Armed Forces would fight for "thank you".
No, it was K-2 who said clearly that, of course, people come first, but it is impossible to fight without money. He is a commander who clearly understands and calculates what distinguishes him from so many others. He calculates the cost of each life, the cost of each position he defends, the cost of destroying each Russian occupier and the cost of conducting his military operations. And he is clear about everything. This is his strongest advantage. And he calculates all this with money. K-2 knows how to keep records and count money. It's not just him. There are other brigades, as I have said many times, and you know all of them.
Will there be presidential elections in Ukraine in the 25th year?
We don't really know. I frankly think that presidential elections in Ukraine in '25 are impossible. Because it's still unclear, they cannot take place during the fighting, which is intense now. And in order to hold elections, martial law must be lifted. It has to be cancelled. And, of course, we need to stop such intense fighting at the frontline. The attacks on our cities are so intense. That's why it's impossible. I don't see any prospects in '25. I think that the war will drag on and go into the 25th year, and it will be a long process, in fact. I haven't heard anything from America, from Europe, from any country, from the Ukrainian government. At least one factor that could force Putin to sit down at the negotiating table and agree on something. At all. I haven't heard it yet. When I hear it, we will talk about it on air.
Sodol was fired, will there be a case?
Sodol was fired, but there will be no case. Just as the case is lying there, it lives its life, Sodol lives his life. We have many cases in the army. There are cases, for example, about the surrender of southern Ukraine. There are suspects, generals, and cases. Will there be any prospects? Zero. Because if we bring any of the generals to justice, if any general starts talking about how the south was actually surrendered, because of whose decisions. If Sodol starts talking about why he has made certain decisions, the investigator will have to first summon for questioning and then detain the Supreme Commander-in-Chief's Staff, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief himself, and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Syrskyi. Because the generals were following orders and acting in the situation created for them by the country's leadership. Sodol did what Syrskyi had demanded of him. And Syrskyi does what Zelenskyy tells him to do. Does such a criminal case have any prospects now, under this government? I think they will do nothing.
Will the replacement of the Commander-in-Chief with a conditional Prokopenko affect the strategic situation at the front?
I don't think we can talk about something conditional. War requires specifics. In order to change the Commander-in-Chief, in order to get results, we need to develop a strategy. We do not have a war strategy. The new Commander-in-Chief, whoever he is, will ask the first thing: Mr Supreme Commander-in-Chief, how many people can you give me in the army per month? How much ammunition can you give me per month? What kind of weapons can you supply me with over the course of a year? What can I expect? And so, from resource planning, the military command builds an action plan. It has to plan. Therefore, we also need to set out the conditions if we want changes. Who will be the commander? What powers will he have? Because all appointments of senior management are approved by presidential decrees. It is not the Commander-in-Chief himself who signs everything. What powers will the new Commander-in-Chief have? What will he be able to change? Because Zelenskyy likes to do everything himself, in manual mode. The logistics forces are supervised by some businessmen from Yermak, the Ministry of Defence is supervised by others, also from Yermak. Everything is distributed there. All cash flows, there are some "watchers" who are looking after something from the Office. What powers will the Commander-in-Chief have? We see that this is absolutely unspecified. Therefore, the issue here is not the name, but the fact that the government itself must formulate a strategy, requirements and implement personnel changes based on the logic of this strategy. This is not in place, so who should be replaced? There will be no miracle. The Messiah will not save us, the army, or the frontline. There must be systematic, simple and logical decisions by the country's top leadership. So how can we force this? We have only one option for Zelenskyy: either Yermak, Tatarov, and whoever they are communicating with in which countries, or Portnov can advise him further. He listens to Portnov better than anyone else. Portnov, Tatarov, Yermak are all his staff. So how can you influence him? Only public opinion. That's why I'm doing these streams, because only public opinion can make Zelenskyy win the war, act to win. He himself is not going to act and does nothing until he is pressured and forced.
Why do unit commanders block relationships in order to transfer to another unit?
There are a number of factors. People are in short supply everywhere. At the beginning of the great Russian invasion, everyone was saying: go and get those mobilised, there were a lot of them, there were queues. Now there are no queues. Now no one wants to let a person go, everyone needs people themselves. So, of course, resource management is also about managing people, personnel. If we had created instead of these empty, understaffed brigades where money is simply paid to the administrative apparatus, but there are no infantry, no drone operators, nothing, it's all disorganised. If we continue with this, this mess in management, and the wasting of tens of billions of dollars on dead, empty units that cannot be combat-ready and perform tasks. If this does not stop, then, of course, there will be no people anywhere at all. Because all the people who come in are smeared across a bunch of completely unnecessary structures. That's why there is no anyone. That's why it's unrealistic to get any kind of relationship now, and any soldier needs it - only personally by order of Syrskyi. Moreover, Syrsky's order is worthless, and it is necessary to control that Syrskyi controls the execution of his order, otherwise they will simply ignore it and forget. And he will forget himself. He has still a manual control mode.
Once again, I want to say that the key to Ukraine's victory, the key to peace, the first condition, is exclusively our actions. If we want to see a strategy favourable to us from Trump, Scholz, Macron, or anyone else in this world, we must first see an adequate strategy from Zelenskyy's Ukrainian government. We cannot be supported more than we support ourselves. The war cannot be won for us if we do not take the necessary steps to win it ourselves. People support what works, they support the strong. No one supports weakness and no one takes responsibility for weakness. These are seemingly obvious things in our real life that the authorities do not want to realise yet. Nevertheless, we have a large number of people at the frontline: commanders, soldiers, operators of weapons systems who are capable of winning this war, capable of stopping and defeating Russian strike groups.
We hope that we will create the kind of public opinion and influence that will force our government to take adequate and necessary steps. And the victory will be ours.
Glory to Ukraine!
