Conversation with Andor Sándor, erstwhile Head of Intelligence of the Czech Republic.
Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel said in an interview that the West gave Ukraine time to prepare for battle. Do you think Ukraine provoked a Russian attack?
– There are 2 reasons why the Russians attacked Ukraine. The first reason was that Moscow did not want to release Ukraine from its sphere of influence. It would have been if Ukraine had joined NATO. The second reason is to defend the Russian number in the east of Ukraine. I believe that Ukraine would not pose a military threat to Russia, either alone or within NATO. Russia may not have liked Ukraine's western orientation, but Moscow inactive had no right to attack it.
Some experts see the Russian-Ukrainian War as a manifestation of geopolitical rivalry between the large powers. Why did both powers face each another in Ukraine?
– I agree with these experts. If the United States had not pressed Ukraine's membership of NATO, there would have been no war. Ukraine's admission to NATO would mean Russia is weak. The only country that loses nothing in this conflict is the United States. But the West as a full loses much, or already has. I believe that the United States has not changed its policy towards Europe, that is, it will not let any country to regulation the continent. The United States has mostly broken down relations between Russia, rich in natural resources, and the largest European economical power, Germany. The EU is increasingly dependent on American gas and another oil products. The American military complex welcomes large-scale orders from European countries to equip their armies with American weapons and military technology.
The most crucial question is whether the armed conflict will stay local or escalate.
– This is simply a fundamental question to which there is no clear answer. Everyone says that a full war with Russia is in no one's business. Throughout history, we have seen conflicts that no country wanted to engage in, but yet he did. I'm afraid we'll be increasingly drawn into this conflict. We hear from Kiev that they are fighting in this war to defend us even from the Russians. I disagree. Ukrainians fight the Russians to last this bloody aggression and reconstruct sovereignty over their full territory. The failure of Crimea may be the reason why Russia wants to extend the conflict outside Ukraine.
The Ukrainian counter-offensive either hasn't started, or it's dead. Why did the Ukrainians neglect to accomplish a strategical triumph despite crucial Western aid?
– This question can be explained by respective reasons: the Russians knew the intent of the counterattack and had plenty of time to prepare the defence lines thoroughly; – tiny number of tanks, combined armored combat vehicles (AFV), armored transporters (APCs), engineering equipment for minefield cleaning and deficiency of ammunition; – Labour shortages; deficiency of appropriate training, you cannot teach a soldier to fight in 3 to six weeks. Western training officers have no thought what this conflict is about; The diversity of western military vehicles and equipment and their mixing, inadequate logistics; There is no Ukrainian air advantage supporting land forces; Bad tactics of breaking Russian defence lines.
I fear that Ukraine was pressed by the West to launch an offensive without being full prepared and equipped. any successes can inactive be achieved, but the question is whether this will change the result of the war.
The business of Crimea by Russia is the first case since planet War II erstwhile the European state annexed the territory of another country. Then there was an annexation of parts of Donbas. Does this mean that the global safety environment has changed, that the US's single-run dominance has ended?
“The United States is inactive the top superpower, although China is challenging it. But still, the United States remains military dominant. However, the West as a full gradually loses importance and dominance. We are proceeding more and more about the concept of a strategical South, which summarises the plans of the countries of South Asia, India and Pakistan for their strategical and atomic situation, and this must be taken into account. The multipolar planet is inactive a reality we gotta face. Not only the annexation of Crimea, but besides the secession of Kosovo, nationalism and many others endanger global law and designation of borders.
Speaking of Serbia and Kosovo, let us not forget the Yugoslav Wars. Isn't it besides risky to re-enforce territorial claims in Europe in a brutal way?
– The request to recapture the lost territories is risky and can lead to wars. There are many specified cases that can even lead to violence.
According to any opinions, Vladimir Putin's goal is not to recreate the russian Union, but to make Russia large again. Do you share that view?
– I never believed Putin wanted to recreate the russian Union. It deplores the dissolution of the russian Union due to the fact that 25 million Russians have become citizens of fresh independent states. About 50 percent of Russia's economy ceased to exist. On the another hand, Putin restored the Russian national pride.
There are voices from Warsaw that it would be a disaster if Russia had won a strategical triumph in the region. What are the chances that Moscow will effort to grow its influence beyond the western borders of Ukraine?
– What triumph can Russia accomplish in Ukraine? This is the question we gotta ask in this case. I don't think the Russians want to occupy the full Ukraine. You can't do that with 200,000 soldiers. It would take 4 times as much. The Russians will not be able to overthrow the government in Kiev. Nor can they destruct the Ukrainian people. It's hard to call it a victory. They will most likely proceed to occupy parts of the country, simultaneously facing the partisan and guerrilla war of the Ukrainians. Is that a victory? The fact is that NATO expanded to include the erstwhile russian satellite states and the Baltic countries while Russia did nothing. At the same time, it did not quit extending its influence to these countries in order to undermine the stableness of Western countries. Moscow knows very well that rebuilding the russian Union and the socialist camp is an illusion.
To what degree can a prolonged war destabilise the region of Central and east Europe? Will the region become a buffer region between East and West?
– I am afraid that the conflict in Ukraine is simply a war that will end in the dissolution of Ukraine, in dense losses and in ruin. There will be another frozen conflict in the planet that will origin many problems for the part of Europe we live in. Based on historical experience and on perceived threats and burdens, Russia will proceed to be a origin that unites the countries of Central and east Europe.
Hungary is the only country in NATO and the EU that does not supply weapons to Ukraine. There is large political force on the government in Budapest. Is there no indication that another countries will follow the example of Hungary?
– If the erstwhile Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico wins the elections this period and manages to form a functioning government, his country can follow the example of Hungary. There are countries that will not deliver weapons to Ukraine in an predictable future due to the fact that they cannot further weaken their own armed forces due to the fact that their weapons depots are empty.
Behind: Magyar Hirlap
Photo. dvojka.rozhlas.cz
