Putin being pushed to breaking point over nuclear weapons

Putin being pushed to breaking point over nuclear weapons

understanding by the way everywhere in Europe and in the United States that Ukraine would be taken in a week or in a month no one was expecting Ukraine to fight and it’s only because ukrainians are started to fight for their freedom the West started to help them because uh you know the the historical lessons of the second world war are well known right and Pauls knows it well well no one helped Poland in September 39 and it was taken quickly but it did not stop the war right it just provoke Hitler to advance further and further and further so uh when when ukrainians started to fight then countries like Poland and the Baltic states who were under you know the Baltic states were under the Soviet Rule and Poland of course had terrible history lessons with with Russian occupation they the NATO countries to start to assist Ukraine very quickly arguing that otherwise this war would escalate into European war and and they were right so for two and a half years we are holding this barrier but unfortunately again this just provokes Russia to conduct more and more you know military operations and attack and they’re not planning to stop now Putin unfortunately uh he’s Lieutenant Colonel of the fsp I mean he’s not even in general right uh his education stopped at one point uh he’s an experienced politician leader now that’s true but all he remembers that in 1945 Americans used nuclear weapons uh won the war against Japan and became a a superpower all he remembers that in 1962 toov you know agreed to take uh nuclear weapons from CU back to the Soviet Union and lost the chance to win the war against the United States so I’m afraid that for him this myth or this legend about the importance of nuclear weapon uh which prevented two times uh Russia to become a dominant part power uh you know is is very important I’m afraid he might believe that in order to win the war in order to establish itself as a great power you would have at one point to use nuclear weapons and yes this is the real danger this is the danger as long as Putin is in power and that’s why it’s important to take him down to change the regime but once again the way to do it uh the safest way to do it let’s put it this way uh is to uh allow Ukraine to win otherwise uh yes we would have uh you know use uh NATO Ground Forces as macron was suggesting and otherwise the war will es will escalate what would you say Yuri is the biggest single threat to Vladimir Putin at the moment Ukraine the only one the only one there is no there is no uh domestic opposition we we have to face the reality uh there are no opponents all opponents are killed on preventive level and it’s not by chance that he killed people like Boris n or Alexa naal uh they killing leaders on preventive level and there is no uh domestic opposition we do not see it I mean we see some people some brave people who go to prison for their political views but the amount of those people is not critical for for Putin regime um everything is controlled quite well by the FSB the only people who have you know weapons in their hands in Russia uh is the FSB and the the Minister of Defense the Army and those people are loyal there is no way to take down uh Putin peacefully uh there are no people within the Russian government who are opposing him so the only way to take him through the victory of War uh in Ukraine could his position be undermined very quickly though I mean if for instance Ukraine was allowed to strike Targets in for example Moscow deeper into Mainland Russia could you then see internal opposition to Putin rear its head I mean the nature with all these dictators is that you know if they’re going to rule by Terror they’ve got to rule by absolute Terror the moment their Authority starts to appear shaky it can go downhill very quickly I think the answer is yes although I do not want to say that it’s very simple and it’s not going to be very quick but again we know from history that you know the attempt to kill Hitler you know what the result of Germany not uh being able to conduct the war the way German Army was expecting right in 1945 1944 sorry so uh the uh there are some people who are able to deal with Putin uh meaning the FSB for example but in order to do this they have to have a good reason to do this and uh if they have if they would have a good reason to do this they they would do it in order to survive but uh we we even need to help them right because so far so far uh everything uh was normal for them again Russia didn’t feel this way at all after this recent statements and again the statements came from approximately the same time from the United States from France from Germany uh actually if you see what’s happening now in Russia it’s they in a stage of panic I mean because now they know that they’re going to lose this war they were holding they were winning this war slowly but they were winning this war for two and a half years well slightly less but now they they know that they are going to lose that’s why they started you know to threaten the world with nuclear strikes and and it’s happening you know from all levels of the Russian governments you have dozens dozens of publications of the Russian officials claiming that well well now we will have to use nuclear weapons now we will destroy you because you cross the red line yes we cross the red line because For the first time in two whatever two to in a half almost years of war right uh we we changed a strategy and now it’s a strategy to win the war uh except uh you know prior to this it was a strategy that Russia is not losing and Ukraine is not winning that is fascinating so just to finish off by almost going back to where we started you really do think Yuri that what we saw last week that change in position in particular from the Americans over Us weapons being used by Ukraine against Russia inside Russia you think that could be a a gamechanging moment in this war 100% 100% except that we uh we have to continue to help Ukraine because we do remember that for five months the American Health for example to Ukraine was frozen and this was a a a major deal for Ukraine that’s why we have all these problems around HOV now uh and yes uh we we have to continue to help Ukraine with uh weapons with with long range weapons we have to uh take uh down all limitations including the limitation if it still exist I do not know to strike against M if you were Putin you’d know that zinski is suffering from a temporary hopefully shortage of weapons and it’s having to be quite Frugal with the use of weapons if you were a military man you’d be going right this is an opportunity to capitalize I don’t care what the human cost is just throw the bodies at the front line because ultimately will will break through and make a strategic breakthrough and therefore it’s quite possible that for the next couple of months um Russia will be taking that sort of tactical approach to this conflict and it’s quite possible they’ll pay huge price on the battlefield for it that’s really interesting when you say they might pay a huge price in the battlefield you mean in terms of the casualties these casualty rates may continue this kind of meat grind of tactics that’s going to continue almost certainly because we’re not seeing the Russian do anything really different tactically on the battlefield um but ultimately you know quantity sometimes has a quality all of its own that the more people you throw at this the more you wear down the Ukrainian defenses and eventually a bit like pressure on a dam you can only put your fingers in so many other holes and eventually the thing breaks through and that’s what Russia will be hoping that they can apply enough pressure throw enough bodies into the fight um I think what is interesting is the in studies of war and a lot of other military analysts believe that Russia hasn’t actually got the resources to capitalize on a breakthrough what do I mean by that is that it’s not just Manpower when the fled gates open you want to way pour through and capitalize um but to do that you need tanks you need lots of other Battlefield Equipment and you only have to look at the number of tanks that Russia has lost which they don’t dispute they’re bringing their Old Second World War Tanks out of storage to throw at the battlefield um they are struggling for equipment so even if they do make a breakthrough most most military analysts don’t think that they’re going to make a strategic breakthrough in other words start taking significantly more chunks of Ukrainian land um but that then calls into what do we think Putin’s new objective is his his objective initially was to take Ukraine three days probably maximum we’re now here at 800 days over 800 days into campaign I think Russia originally at its peak had 177% of the territory of Ukraine I understand now it’s down at 11% um so not withstanding the Tactical here or there you know tuings and throwings Russia is struggling on the battlefield it’s trying to capitalize on this shortage of weapons and will’ll probably pay a big price for that and of course in the last week we’ve had the major development of the US finally agreeing that American supplied weapons can be used by Ukraine to strike targets inside Russia how significant do you think that will be in The Wider context of this war Sean yes there been a lot made of this hasn’t there James let’s be clear about what’s been offered and what hasn’t been offered because um if I took your statement literally I might imagine your your viewers listeners might imagine that’s a c blanch it’s not America has been very careful to say that um given the opening of a second front or potential second front around KH um by the Russians that um that the US recognizes that Ukraine will need to use weapons outside of Ukrainian territory but it has been very clear it’s in the defense of carke so it hasn’t given C blanch secondly it said they must be targeting military targets not civilian and thirdly my understanding is that they’ve not included ATT attack that Army tactical missile system in that uh in that caveat which is about 300 kilometer range so um but in a way even though there are caveats I’m a great believer you can’t be a little bit pregnant you know you either do that stuff to Target or not and America now has said they can and they joined sort of UK the um uh the French the poles and the Germans all of which have taken the shackles off the ability to use these weapons uh deeper within Uh Russian territory and I think that will be pretty significant let’s give you an example um so um when this second front around KH open up for several months Ukraine has known that Russia has been massing TR between 30 and 50,000 troops in the area but it couldn’t do anything about it um and it had to wait until they came across the border um if they had had the weapons to attack those they would have undoubtedly caused a lot of difficulty for Russia you can’t easily Mass 50,000 people and keep them hidden it’s because it’s not just about the people it’s the vehicles it’s the weapons it’s the food it’s the logistics they come with a huge tail so uh able to to Target those would be really really uh useful for the ukrainians but I do think it’s another step I think what what’s lovely about this is that when we when Russia first invaded the West didn’t want to get involved Ukraine is not member of NATO we’re not going to get involved gradually Ukraine did an amazing job withstanding the first push and all of a sudden the West went actually Ukraine’s Got a chance here if we helped them so provided anti-tank weapons Russia made a big fuss about it we did it and it made a big difference then there was talk about providing tanks Russia threw its arms up in the air the West proarc was really concerned about what that what might lead to escalation the Brits gave Challenger two then leopard twos then Abrams were involved then we went through longrange missiles and suddenly all everybody went through the same cycle of worry again and eventually storm Shadows were provided um and scal the the the French equivalent not yet the German tourist but maybe in time so I do think this is just a yet another example of a stiffening political resolve that President Putin um shouldn’t have it all his own way this isn’t about NATO getting involved NATO getting involved would be troops on the ground fighting this is simply a question of going right Ukraine needs help what can we do to help well it does beg the question to what extent the Kremlin is bluffing I mean the Kremlin has responded to the decision last week to allow American supplied weapons to be used by Ukraine inside Russia by accusing NATO of provoking a new level of tension the fear has always been that an escalation May in the worst case scenario end up with ping using tactical nuclear weapons do you think that’s a realistic risk Sean well James and this is always an interesting question because uh I’m going to play my grayhair old card here against you youngsters um when I joined the military we were in the middle of the Cold War we were living with the omnipresent threat of nuclear war and the whole concept of the time was called mutually assured destruction mad because nobody would press the button the whole success of nuclear weapons is that the Armageddon that follows is simply the ultimate Terrance against somebody attacking you um so we’ve lived through all these threats President Putin today knows that his unprovoked uh invasion of Ukraine would be halted in a heartbeat if NATO was to get involved if if NATO war planes were to go in and provide air cover if NATO military capability was to be deployed so in his head he has to do everything possible to deter that happening and by rattling the nuclear saber which he’s done consistently throughout this war he has effectively scared Western politicians into being fearful of getting involved he’s even gone as far as forward deploying nuclear weapons to Belarus if you remember um last year finished off earlier this year um but actually there’s no military gain from forward deploying nuclear weapons they can go around the world this is purely a bit of Bluster to try to sew seeds of doubt in the western political mind and it has worked but the harsh reality is that it doesn’t suit Putin to get NATO involved it doesn’t suit Putin to have any form of nuclear at War at all he’s just using it as saber rattling and it’s proving very effective but I referred back uh James to I’ve just come away from a a really interesting conference closed door chattam house can’t talk about the detail but what was fascinating was that in principle the Western leaders are unanimous of the view that whatever happens if Russia was to succeed in using military force to redraw the boundaries of Russia where would that stop if in the modern world any nation was able to use Force to redraw boundaries then it would be the end of the world order as we currently know it and therefore um that cannot be allowed to Prevail now we focus your your chat to me is more focused about the military angle of that but obviously there are three pillars to this one is military one is political and one is economic and what is fascinating is just seeing how those other lines are being developed at the moment to try to put increasing pressure on Russia not just on Putin because bluntly whilst Putin is the front of house the real power history shows is with the oligarchs with the generals and stuff like that and if they generally see their quality of life imploding there’s normally a correction of some form and Russia self-corrects itself and I think what the westers decided is that yes military is important but also politically Russia wants to be a great again their leaders been indicted by the international criminal court and there are other things that can be done Against The Wider body of Russian supporting the war and the economic one is that you know at the moment Russia is spending 40% of its you know spending on defense that’s just not sustainable I mean all of the other things that you would be spending money on as a government loads of them aren’t being spent people are hemorrhaging away from the country it’s not investing in the long term and Russia had I think it was about 700 billion of reserves um that’s down at about 200 billion now um and some of that has been locked away Frozen by the west and remember there’s been this discussion about oh we can’t take that money off Putin that will be illegal it does look likely now they’ve decided it would be illegal to take the money off him but the interest it’s earning is not illegal so actually if we were to seize that 200 billion and if we were to lock it into a bond and and let the money come out in 40 years time then the interest is worth money and you could give that lump some in advance to Ukraine and so there’s all sorts of different ways I think that um the West is going to apply pressure across these three lines but you must make sure the military one doesn’t fail but it doesn’t mean that you have to win on the battlefield in order to achieve the long-term strategic objectives for Ukraine and so for 10 years Russia has been trying to overrun Ukraine and they haven’t done it yet and so I think there’s a certain amount of frustration in what we see and what Russia is doing with its troops it’s throwing Manpower away we see we hear from very reputable sources from multiple directions they’re losing as many as a thousand a thousand plus a day in Ukraine right now that is an is an indication that desperation in my mind so now Mr Putin one of the advantages he’s had in this war is that the West has forbidden Ukraine from firing into Russia and they have allowed the West has allowed Russia to fire at will into Ukraine from all around the the map on the ground and so what is happening now is the West is beginning to allow Ukraine to fire backed I think that adds to the desperation that Russia is facing in this war right now and so what is the weapon that is working the very best for Putin in this war it’s his war of words his war of intimidation we told him 10 years ago what we in the west were afraid of we’re afraid of nuclear and we’re afraid of widening the war so what has Mr Putin played back to the West for 10 years but certainly in the last two years he nearly every week makes some sort of a change or a threat in nuclear business and nearly every week he mentions that he’s going to do something like this which is give long range W weapons to other people to fire at the West so Mr Putin is counting on his best weapon which is intimidation we in the west are severely deterred by Mr Putin’s intimidation he has caused many in the west to take counsel of their fears and make policy based on their fears rather than what needs to be done and so this I think is just one more step he’s he’s desperate he sees now that Ukraine is going to be able to take the war to Russia on their own soil and now he’s got to find a new step in the intimidation game to get the West to back down to get Western leaders to take councils of Their Fear again and make changes in policy and yeah his message is also you could argue contradictory because he also has said um almost in the same breath um that it’s he dismissed the idea that Russia wants war with NATO so so this is a tricky answer because it’s going to appear that I’m talking out of both sides of my mouth I really don’t think that Mr Putin wants a war with NATO excuse me I think he realizes right now his army has done so poorly against Ukraine that it would be absolutely no match on the battlefield for a determined NATO I think Mr Putin knows that but what Mr Putin wants to do again through his intimidation regime is to snip at and bite at and and grab certain things to show to not only his internal audience but the world that he understands that he has the rest of the world intimidated and he’s going to use that advantage to continue pressing forward I mean if you really uh having just returned from multiple trips overseas what is clear to me is that Russia’s gry Zone War in Georgia is is wreaking havoc on the people of Georgia and the government of Georgia I spent time recently with two of the top three um leaders of mova and what Russia is doing in mdova is bordering on kinetic now bordering on breaking out of gry zone so Mr Putin is incredibly active now he’s trying to redraw water space in the northern Seas he’s recently we’re going to start hearing about it in the news tried to orchestrate a murder in the United States and so Mr Putin is active out there all around the world and he’s counting on this nuclear intimidation to back down Western leaders because it’s been very successful so far could you tell me a bit more about what you learned on your travels then about about Russia’s gr Zone activities so I think that um I don’t want to One Nation directly but having talked to leaders uh and two of the national leaders of some of these nations it is clear to me that the Western nations are beginning and that includes some of the larger Western nations are beginning to Tire of these incessant freely free willing Russian operations in their countries we’re starting to recognize what they doing in our cyber spaces what they’re doing with money moving money around what they’re doing orchestrating deaths in foreign Nations this is uh beginning to now raise the eye of leaders to the point of taking some sort of action and how that will play out maybe that will be a conversation at the Washington Summit coming up soon what what kind of action are you talking about is being considered I don’t I I can’t speak for NATO I can’t speak for uh those people anymore I would tell you that there are folks in these nations that are going to start taking more concrete action I people are starting to talk about seizing using Russian money and and taking those actions where they can make the pain increase for Mr Mr Putin um interesting about you’re talking about the the awareness of gry Zone activity and um something that did hit the news recently um is uh Russia having been condemned by EU leaders for this provocative Behavior after border guards are moved around 20 boys along the Nava River used to demarcate the Estonian Russian border being seen as part of this broader pattern of hybrid actions by Russia on its Maritime and land borders in the Baltic region um I mean is that how you see it and what do you think Russia is trying to do with it well I think it this is exactly what what Russia is trying to say first of all Mr Putin is having a bigger problem internally he has to show some progress he has to show some success he has to show that he’s standing up to the West he has to continue to lie to and convince his people that the West is trying to attack Russia and that the United States is the great engine of the West in trying to attack Russia and so these niblings like I said before these little niblings around the edges the sea spaces in the north the border with narva all of these things are ways that Putin is trying to show his people that he is strong he’s standing up to the west and the West is the great enemy and I think that we in the west have decisions to make if we allow Mr Putin to do these things in the northern Seas redraw the lines pull up the water buoys he allows these things to ha if we allow these things to happen on the border then Mr Putin will continue to push I was reminded by one of the one of the national leaders on this trip he told me the the story that Lyon apparently said that when you are when you face your enemy you fix your bayonet and you push your bayet into his belly and if his belly is soft you keep push pushing if the belly is hard then you pull back and reconsider your options and so Mr Putin is pushing his bayet into our belly all around the edges of NATO and he will continue to push where we’re soft and he will stop pushing where he meets hard resistance the question is are we ready are our leaders ready to make the tough decisions to present a hard belly rather than a soft B and and in that particular instance on On the Border area the the water border area between um Russia and Estonia I mean the response really so far has been kind of come and explain yourself Russia I mean it’s not exactly what you’d expect if dis show a sort of a a tough stance on that what what do you think the correct response should be well I’m again I learned very quickly as the sacer I couldn’t tell any one nation what to do Estonia will make some decisions on its own and that’s a great country and they get it uh but again Russia’s going to push until they hit something hard and so when are we going to take those steps to tell Mr Putin no more it’s well known that this is not a healthy population and you have a hard time finding too many Russians that actually want to join the Army and come into Ukraine uh they they know what happens now the Russians also know the Kremlin knows that this is not sustainable that’s why they have avoided recruiting heavily from Moscow and St Petersburg because they don’t want a bunch of funerals happening in those cities uh instead the funerals tend to happen out in the uh poorer regions of the Russian Federation Central and Eastern Russia um where people are willing to take uh the bonus um of of money if they join the military and you know the Kremlin doesn’t care about those casualties but I don’t think that they can maintain their industry and an army of the size that they need given the casualties they’re suffering hello and welcome to Frontline for times radio I’m James Hansen and today we’re once again talking about the latest on the war in Ukraine and I’m delighted to be joined by leftenant General Ben Hodges General Hodges served for 38 years in the US Army commanding in Iraq and Afghanistan and was commander US Army Year from 24 14 to 2017 we always appreciate your time on Frontline General welcome back well James thanks and I always appreciate the privilege of being on your program I wanted to start by putting to you something we were discussing on yesterday’s episode of Frontline I was talking to the historian Dr Yuri faltinsky and he said in his view last week’s decision by the US to allow American supplied weapons to strike targets inside Russia could be a turning point in this war do you agree well turning point is a uh pretty strong word especially when you consider how limited the actual policy decision is it still prohibits the use of the 300 kilometer attachs uh for use inside at legitimate targets inside Russia and it also limits this uh new policy to the area that is affecting that is linked to Har so not EXA I don’t see that as quite the uh such a turning point uh it’s good news obviously and and the ukrainians didn’t waste any time in hitting targets uh air defense weapons Logistics Etc on the Russian side of the border and you know surprise surprise Russia did not retaliate with nuclear weapons so you know we just continue to deter ourself because of an excessive fear that Russia might do do something about it I I think this this hesitancy and indecision and incremental decision making is a reflection of the fact that we have not committed to helping Ukraine win we still don’t have a clearly defined instate for this war and it’s difficult to have good policy if you don’t have a clearly defined instate why is that do you think because you know repeatedly since the start of this conflict since The fullscale Invasion time and again we’ve seen Ukraine requesting certain pieces of military support and initially being met with resistance whether it’s anti-tank missiles or main battle tanks or the attack thems or now being able to use Western weapons inside Russia and resistance at first to giving way eventually had we been more proactive as In fairness to you generally you’ve been calling for all along surely we’d be in a very different situation I think it’d be a completely different situation I mean think about Russia’s inability to exploit the six-month window in which no us Aid was forthcoming and Europe did not step up to fill that Gap so almost half a year and Russia was not able to really uh exploit that in any meaningful way uh they’ve barely moved Beyond abiva or bakut uh and they’re not going to be able to capture harke or overrun the Ukrainian defenses around there now to be clear it’s it’s hell for civilians that live in har uh and it’s very difficult for Ukrainian troops that are getting pounded by Russian Artillery but the fact is Russia does not have the ability to overrun or knock out Ukraine and so if we had been providing everything that was needed for Ukraine to win versus providing them just enough to keep them in the fight I think we would see a significant losses even more significant losses of Russian military capability sackur General cavoli said you can defeat Mass which is Russia’s only Advantage you can defeat Mass with Precision by going after headquarters Logistics and artillery uh and you know we we did not provide that to the ukrainians as we should have well that does beg the question what more we should be doing at the moment how much more proactive should the West and Ukraine’s allies be should we be looking at a no-fly zone for instance should we be looking at troops NATO troops on the ground as macron has sort of suggested at times what more do you think we should be doing General well at the risk of sounding like a scratch record the first thing we’ve got to do is is determine what is our desired outstate or outcome what is the Strategic objective for what we’re doing obviously it should be help Ukraine defeat Russia because it is in the Strategic interests of the United States of UK of of everybody in Europe that Russia is defeated forced back to its own borders the 1991 Sovereign borders of Ukraine to force Russia to live within their own borders uh to defeat them in Ukraine it’s in our interest that that happens for economic reasons for security re reasons and also for the reason of values uh what we claim as we value so much the international rules-based order respect for sovereignty respect for freedom of navigation respect for human rights respect for international law that’s what’s at stake here and of course the Chinese are watching to see if we really are serious about those things so the first thing that should happen would be my president the German buness councelor your Prime Minister President macron and others say it is our strategic objective that Ukraine defeats Russia wins the war if you did that first of all that would open the gates them for providing everything that’s needed secondly that would tell the Kremlin that their only hope their only hope that we were going to quit has been dashed and that they are the ones that should desperately be trying to salvage what they can if we’ve done that now we start talking about practical implementation you know policy decisions like establishing a no fly zone that that is a policy decision but to do a no fly zone this is not like start you know where big giant deflector Shields come up but where you have to put uh Royal Air Force US Air Force German Lua of Pilots up in the air uh and that are prepared to destroy Russian air defense systems that may even be inside Russia you cannot have a no-fly zone if the enemy is able to shoot down your aircraft and you also have to be prepared to go in and pick up Pilots that have been shot down that may have parachuted to the ground inside Russia these are these are important considerations for a policy of no fly zone now you could also of course U think about putting um us or British or French air defense systems with American British or French Crews inside Ukraine to augment what they already have but you you just need to be aware that okay there’s a very good chance that some of them are going to be destroyed because the Russians will come after them so I’m not against having American troops on the ground there but if I was the chief of the US Army and I was told get ready to deploy um your men and women into Ukraine I’d say great we’ll be ready but what for what purpose what is the objective why are we doing this what are we hoping to accomplish it’s too easy for our political leaders to just to throw troops at a problem to throw airplanes at a problem without ever thinking through to the instate we spent 20 years in Afghanistan and only had a clear objective in the first year and then after that we were had different policies U and it all ended in a catastrophe um because we we lost sight of the original reason for being there which I suppose begs the question General how do you define Ukraine winning this war is it reclaiming all the territory that Russia has occupied since 2022 is it reclaiming the the territory that Russia has occupied since 2014 what should we consider Ukraine and Ukraine’s Victory to be well James that’s that’s the easiest question you’ve asked me president zalinsky has said it’s restoration of Ukrainian sovereignty which means the 1991 borders I completely agree with that that should be our objective otherwise um if we only push back to the N the 2022 border that means that Russian aggression that’s started in 2014 that led to the illegal annexation of Crimea and the support of the so-called separatists in the donbass that they would be rewarded for that what did you think of Demitri medad Dev because you met him didn’t you on several occasions yeah I did meet him he was at the at the NATO Summit in in Lisbon which is probably the most positive Summit we had with the Russians uh um in in a very long time certainly the last time we had a positive one with them in 2012 the Russians didn’t show up uh Putin was already president at that time uh again president uh as he said and I I met him in in Sochi the North Atlantic Council travel to uh uh to Sochi and met with him at the at the presidential uh data there uh you know he was genuinely seemed to be genuinely interested in in in the Cooperative relationship and trying to figure out ways in which we could uh uh we could move forward I met with um uh foreign minister lavro uh many many times and and we had the relationship in which we had a list of Grievances and they had a list of Grievances and we try to go through them and tick them off and see how we could uh resolve them we resolved some we didn’t resolve all of them um but in the end uh uh Vladimir Putin when he came back in 2012 after the large scale protest that had occurred uh in in Russia surrounding the both his reelection and then the Parliamentary elections afterwards uh uh had changed and he clearly was um uh moving towards a a uh a sense that we could not have a relationship with NATO that NATO was the enemy uh that NATO was imposing uh its own uh desires on countries that uh that where um where Russia thought it needed to have uh it say uh what it calls it near abroad uh and uh and we’ve seen the consequences since 2014 when the war against Ukraine really started this War’s now been going on for over 10 years um we’ve been living with uh with the consequences When Donald Trump effectively invited Putin to do whatever he liked uh to alliance members who didn’t pay up as he put it in other words not spending 2% of GDP on defense how much damage do you think it did to Nato and what kind of opportunities do you think that kind of comment presented to Putin I think it did extraordinary damage uh I was at uh at the Munich security conference um which uh each year sort of you know call it the the Academy Awards for global national security WS uh uh in in Munich uh shortly after Donald Trump had made those remarks and at the same time uh was also uh a time where um uh uh naal uh was uh was found dead uh in in his prison and the Russians had taken a a critical town in the denk area and the mood among Europeans among allies uh was that they were squeezed between Trump and Putin Trump that is a country that uh in the United States should he come back as president uh could no longer be relied on as it had been since 1941 when you think about it uh as a country that cared about European security and Putin because he was willing to do whatever it takes uh for him not only to stay in power and eliminate his opposition but also to extend Russia’s territorial uh and and ideological Ambitions uh as far beyond its borders as it possibly could so it did great damage uh and it has raised fundamental questions among Europeans both official levels and and I’d say even more uh among uh uh publics about can we trust the United States will the United States be there when it matters uh and alliances are based on trust they’re not based just on capabilities they’re certainly not based on dollars and cents they’re based on the idea that if I uh do my part that others will be there when it matters Estonia and other countries sent most of their military to Afghanistan not because they thought there was a threat from Afghanistan but because they wanted to be good allies and they did that because they want the United States to be a good Ally in return and that is what Donald Trump in making these these really outrageous uh statements uh that suggest that uh our commitment to security and countries depends on how many dollars and cents they spend uh is uh is calling into question that in the 75th Anniversary uh year of of NATO what do you think is the greatest threat to Nato uh to the Alliance is it Putin or Donald Trump if he ever becomes president well it’s Putin because he has aggressive Ambitions to to divide uh uh NATO so that he can extend his influence uh uh and control uh uh further uh further Beyond his borders not just Ukraine not just Belarus but the Baltic states Poland uh who knows where it will end so it is that drive uh uh this this aggressive uh imperialist Drive uh that has uh is at the core now of Russia’s uh foreign policy uh that is the threat the problem is that Donald Trump is undermining the best instrument we have for dealing with that threat and in fact making sure that it doesn’t doesn’t come about um because he’s undermining uh the one thing that the United States and its allies have that the Russians and by the way the chines don’t have and that is a faith in alliances the idea that alliances make us more secure uh not because they are paying us not because they are spending money on defense but because we have common interest to come together and defend those interests together uh so ultimately without Putin you don’t worry as much about the strength and unity of of NATO uh but given that we have Putin uh Donald Trump’s questioning of alliances r large not just in in Europe uh but also in in East Asia is a is undermining uh American Security uh American prosperity and ultimately American Freedom uh and that is uh What uh in some ways this election is about um but also what this debate is about about how to think about uh our engagement and continued engagement in the world the NATO 75th uh anniversary Summit is fast approaching its next month um in Washington if you were US ambassador to Nato right now what would you be saying and doing and what would your priorities be at that Summit well we have a terrific Ambassador at NATO and and Julian Smith uh so I know that she’s doing everything that uh she can possibly do uh to uh to strengthen the alliance I think there really are two things uh that we uh that we need to focus on uh one is uh to continue the implementation of strengthening deterence and defense capabilities of a now enlarged NATO that includes Finland and Sweden uh to make sure that NATO will always be there uh to defend every inch of NATO territory against uh the aggression uh both both military and in terms of hybrid capabilities that the Russians uh continue to um to focus on on on NATO uh and NATO territory that’s number one I’m very confident that we will continue to do that the spending is is is going up because uh Europeans understand there is a real threat uh it’s not because the United States tells them to it’s because they actually think it’s important for uh for their own security to do it um uh thank you Mr Putin is the one thing that you can thank him for um um and and the second thing is really to make sure that there is a complete and utter Unity uh uh on the question that Ukraine cannot fail uh that Russia cannot succeed in Ukraine uh that we do whatever it is that we need to do uh in order to ensure that Ukraine uh uh succeeds uh success doesn’t necessarily mean the uh reconquering of every inch of Ukrainian territory that the uh that the Russians have occupied either since 2022 or indeed since 2024 2014 that’s really for the ukrainians to decide um but it is to make sure that Ukraine uh succeeds as a state in which it can determine its own future including its future to be a member of NATO uh and the European Union should it so desire uh and should uh uh the Allies agree as I think they should and and will um but also uh to be uh uh to be able to control uh their Destiny in without fear or or favor to uh to an aggressive neighbor uh and that defeat uh of Russia uh which is already very costly 500,000 uh uh casualties according to the British mod uh on the Russian side um uh to that defeat is important because without that defeat our security will be less uh than it is today the next secret General is expected to be confirmed in Washington next month your fellow Countryman U Mark R what will he bring to Nato and to Ukraine well you know he’s the most senior European States person uh uh around he uh he’s been in power for 13 years uh he is an extraordinary consensus Builder you have to be in order to be in Dutch politics and certainly to be as successful as he has been uh for four different coalitions four different governments uh with a wide variety of political parties he’s well known within the European Union as a consensus Builder as someone who brings coalitions together uh uh and and that is the core of what a NATO Secretary General does uh a NATO Secretary General is far less General and far more secretary uh that is to say the person has no vote uh uh all it has is the power of persuasion uh and the leadership that comes with the power of persuasion and Mark rid is singularly capable of doing that and has demonstrated in the EU he will do it having the most senior European Statesman to be uh the Secretary General of NATO particularly someone who uh who is a genuinely nice person person uh uh and uh and willing to work with anyone at any time uh is is particularly useful at this at this time so uh I uh you know we’re they’re still uh dotting the eyes and crossing the tees on uh on the consensus there’s still some some issues that to be overcome but I expect that NATO will in October have a new Secretary General and it will be Mark R and I think the the alliance will be the better for it Eva DOA a pleasure to speak to you thank you very much for your time my pleasure you’ve been watching Frontline for times radio my thanks to Louis Sykes our producer to support the work of Frontline hit the Subscribe button you can also listen to times radio throughout the day or read it at times.co.uk thanks for watching bye- bye

As Putin continues meat grinder tactics with Russian soldiers in Ukraine, Frontline discusses how far he is willing to go before he considers using nuclear weapons.

📻 Listen to Times Radio – https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio

📍 Subscribe to our channel – http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTjDhFuGXlhx9Us0gq0VK2w?sub_confirmation=1

🗞 Subscribe to The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/subscribe/radio-3for3/

📲 Get the free Times Radio app https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio/how-to-listen-to-times-radio/app