Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Ukraine: Three years on, with Francis Dearnley
2.6k Plays1 month ago
The conversation that surrounds the conflict in Ukraine has become, for the most part, a political Rorschach Test. That’s a problem, because there are shades upon shades of grey in this conflict. Whilst principles and moral culpability still matter, “Good Guy v Bad Guy” morality tales don’t necessarily get us closer to the truth.
As we move into the fourth year of this conflict, it’s never been more important to know what’s really happening on the battlefield, and how it could end. To understand the state of play, Will is joined by perhaps the best pundit on the war from its inception, Francis Dearnley. Francis is an Executive Editor at the Telegraph, and host of the brilliant daily podcast, 'Ukraine: The Latest'.
Follow Will Kingston and Fire at Will on social media here.
Read The Spectator Australia here.
Listen to the 'Ukraine: The Latest' podcast here.
Follow Francis on X here.
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction: Ukraine as a Political Rorschach
00:00:21
Speaker
G'day and welcome to Fire at Will, a safe space for dangerous conversations. I'm Will Kingston. The conversation that surrounds the conflict in Ukraine has become, for the most part, a political Rorschach test.
00:00:35
Speaker
Most people just can't detach from their analysis of the conflict, either their hatred of or love for Donald Trump, or their faith in Zelensky as a modern-day Churchill or a corrupt crony.
00:00:47
Speaker
or their belief in fighting for democracy, or alternatively, pragmatic isolationism. That's a problem because there are shades upon shades of grey in this conflict. Whilst principles and moral culpability of course still matter, good guy v bad guy morality tales don't necessarily get us closer to the truth.
Complexity of the Ukraine Conflict: Beyond Simple Narratives
00:01:08
Speaker
As we move into the fourth year of this conflict, it's never been more important to understand what's really happening on the battlefield and how it could end. Fortunately, I'm joined by perhaps the best pundit on the wall from its inception, Francis Dernley.
00:01:22
Speaker
Francis is an executive editor at The Telegraph and has hosted its brilliant daily podcast, Ukraine, the latest since Putin invaded Ukraine 2004 days ago.
00:01:33
Speaker
Francis, welcome to Fire at Will. Will, thank you very much for having me. What an honor to be given that title in the introduction. I certainly wouldn't give that of myself, but it's very kind of you. Thank you.
00:01:44
Speaker
Did you think you'd still be commentating on this conflict over three years later?
Guest Introduction: Francis Dernley on Historical Comparisons
00:01:49
Speaker
The simple answer is no. But did I think that the war would be over by Christmas? No.
00:01:55
Speaker
So I'm not surprised that we are still talking about this full-scale invasion and its consequences. After all, this is the first time we've seen peer-to-peer fighting in Europe since really the Second World War.
00:02:10
Speaker
And so I think anybody who thought that it was likely we would see that end in the short term was severely limited in the analysis that they were reading. And yet, and yet, many people who were very well informed seem to believe that this would be a very short-term war.
00:02:29
Speaker
Now, I should say, of course, that they' I'm not talking there about people who thought that the war was only going to last for three days.
Failed Russian Strategies and Missed Opportunities
00:02:37
Speaker
I mean, once I'm talking about once we got past that initial week or so, i think it became very clear pretty much within the first week or two weeks that this was going to be a protracted conflict. Once Russia failed to take Kiev, it was almost impossible, I would say, for this to be a war that could end that year.
00:02:59
Speaker
And possibly you could say even into the following six months after that. Where there was an opportunity to end this war, though, would have been in the first year of the war. And perhaps we can talk about that later on, about some of the opportunities that were lost. But on a personal level, did I think that I would be reporting on the war every weekday for over three years?
00:03:20
Speaker
No, I didn't. And that was because I think I had more faith, frankly, in the West and its ability to give Ukraine what it needed to militarily win this, because I am not in the school of thought.
00:03:33
Speaker
that this war is only ever going to be defined as attritional and therefore was only ever going to be something that could be ended at a negotiating table with some kind of concessions by either side.
00:03:45
Speaker
I believe that there was an opportunity for Ukraine to win this war decisively and to liberate all of its territory, but that for reasons that will remain, I imagine, a secret for Ukraine,
00:03:57
Speaker
Many years until the memoirs are written and the archives are opened, decisions were made in European capitals and particularly in Washington that that was not the desired outcome of this war. Well, that is a question that I have on my list, so let's jump to it.
Could Early Weapons Aid Have Changed the War?
00:04:10
Speaker
Some people will say that the numerical advantage that Russia has, the fact that Putin cannot really afford to lose and that he's staked his his entire reputation and and career now on this on this war, and the fact that Russia is a nuclear power,
00:04:30
Speaker
mean that there was never any chance that Ukraine could have actually won and whatever winning means in inverted commas. You don't think that's the case. Explain to me what a different reality looks like. How could Ukraine have won this war?
00:04:42
Speaker
Well, I think if the weapons that Ukraine had requested early on in the war had been granted, then i think we would have seen an ability for Ukraine to push, certainly in the east, even further.
00:04:55
Speaker
So further than the Kharkiv counteroffensive, which liberated vast swathes of territory in the northeast of the country in that first year of the war. I think they could have gone further, and I think they could even have led to a total collapse of the Russian armed forces. and You don't need to take my word for it. There's numerous analyses that's come out since then by many august institutions, military analysts who agree with that conclusion.
Nuclear Improbability: Geopolitical Consequences
00:05:20
Speaker
Putin was very, very concerned at that period of time that there was a prospect of a total collapse. Now, I know that many of people who will be listening to this will be saying, well, what does that matter? Because to your point, Will,
00:05:31
Speaker
There's the nuclear element here, but that all really depends on the degree to which you think that Putin would resort to using nuclear weapons. And I must say, i like many others, do not believe that that was something that would ever be realistically on the cards. For what would he gain from doing so?
00:05:46
Speaker
He would completely sever his relationship with China, which is the last thing they want would be some kind of nuclear escalation. They've made that very clear, both behind closed doors and indeed publicly. It would require him to be thinking in terms of wanting to destroy the territory that he actually is was just contesting and fighting over.
00:06:09
Speaker
He would not be destroying Kyiv because, again, why would you want to destroy the capital of the country that you're wanting to seize for your own ends?
Battlefield Status: Ukraine's Strategic Territories
00:06:17
Speaker
as well. That's before you even bring in the fact that there would have been and still would be a conventional military response from the West that would destroy most of the Russian military.
00:06:28
Speaker
So I never thought that was on the cards. And many very well-informed people who've been spent their entire careers studying Russian nuclear doctrine agree with that conclusion. So I think if you see this in the parameters of a conventional war,
00:06:40
Speaker
then i think it is entirely possible for Ukraine to win it in that first year of the war. Perhaps it may still be conceivably possible in a long now, much longer attritional scenario.
00:06:53
Speaker
Bear in mind that even when Russia was the Soviet Union, and this Russia is not the same skies and scale of the Soviet Union, lest we forget, It has lost wars. It lost the Soviet-Afghan war in the 1980s, which then triggered the collapse, arguably, of the Soviet Union. And that didn't resort to using nuclear weapons then. And so I don't believe that it would have done it in the latter half of 2022 either.
00:07:18
Speaker
Well, want to prod a bit further on Putin's motivations. It's one of the great questions or for any political pundit is trying to get into Putin's head, which is not an easy thing to do.
00:07:28
Speaker
But before we get there, I think it would be useful for everyone just to give us an overview of what is actually the status on the battlefield at the moment. Can you paint a picture of the state the state of the war as we talk on the 5th of March, 2025?
00:07:42
Speaker
Well, aware I'm going to be oversimplifying here, so please forgive me those who've been following this war very closely. I'm going to simplify. i would say let's start, first of all, with perhaps the most interesting and sometimes under-discussed element of the battlefield at present, which is the Kursk incursion. Of course, Ukraine controls territory in Russia, and that is important for the negotiations phase that we are potentially about to enter, because that gives them a key card to play.
00:08:08
Speaker
Russia cannot have the front lines completely frozen as they are and retain all of its own territory. It would have lost territory for its for the front lines to be frozen. That is significant for obvious reasons.
00:08:20
Speaker
How much territory, roughly? So originally, think it about, again, I'm using broad brush here. think it was about 2,000 square kilometers. Now it's a few hundred kilometers. But nonetheless, it is still a sizable amount of territory. And the the central town there that they have controlled, which is the one that many journalists have have visited, is still in Ukrainian hands many, many months on, over six months on since the incursion.
00:08:45
Speaker
So it's a significant thing. thing, not in terms of strategically, you know, this is not vital military lands. This is not territory, for example, that has, don't know, vast swathes of material or it being ah a particularly important defense node or wherever, or crossroads, if you're thinking about it in conventional military terms.
00:09:03
Speaker
This is only an asset really for talks, but that matters. And that is significant. So that's the Kursk picture. And I don't think, by the way, that despite Russia is throwing everything it can to try and push the Ukrainians out, I don't believe they are likely to do so in the short term.
00:09:18
Speaker
The Ukrainians are pretty well booted in there. And I think that the prospect of a of a removal in the short term in some sort of decisive action is is very, very unlikely.
00:09:30
Speaker
Then if you turn to the sort of northeastern front, then there was an attempt a few months ago to seize the city of Kharkiv, which is where I was back in late November, ah very much a frontline city. The lines are about 10-15 kilometers from the city itself. Many would describe it as Ukraine's second city, hugely important literary heritage, as well as, of course, being much closer to Russia, of only about 30 kilometers from the Russian border.
00:10:00
Speaker
And indeed, when one is Kharkiv and goes on Google Maps, ah you get restaurant recommendations actually in Russia. ah So it gives you a sense of how how how close you are. And of course, you can hear the the the missile
Kharkiv Defense: Success and Western Weapons Restrictions
00:10:12
Speaker
strikes. And the difference between being in Kiev and Kharkiv is that When the air raid sirens go off in Kiev, of course, you get a little bit more of a warning about where the strikes are likely to be.
00:10:22
Speaker
In Kharkiv, once the air raid sirens goes off, probably if you were very, very unlucky, there would be very little you could do to get to the shelters in time if you chose to go to the shelters. So because of the distance is so much shorter.
00:10:33
Speaker
But the Russians sought to take Kharkiv again and they failed. They failed for multiple reasons. One, the Ukrainians had prepared a much better defense. Two, as well, weapons permissions were granted by Biden to the that enabled basically strikes to be made on Russian territory by the Ukrainians. Because for so much of this war, the Ukrainians have had to fight this conflict with one arm tied behind their backs.
00:10:57
Speaker
because they were not allowed to use Western weapons to strike anywhere inside Russian territory. So you imagine insane situations like the one I've just described in Kharkiv, where people would, the Russians, forgive me, or Russian people, materiel, would be gathering on their side of the border, only 10 kilometers or wherever from where they were hoping to launch a strike.
00:11:19
Speaker
And yet they could not be targeted by the Ukrainians just because of that invisible line in the sand. So that changed and that meant that eventually the the attack there on Harkiv, the attempt to take it again, petered out.
00:11:34
Speaker
So then if we move then further south really to the to the main area of of of core fighting in the Dombats, in Donetsk particularly, Zaporizhia as well, which is a little bit further south. But I'm going to focus particularly on on on the town of Pekrosk, which for months now really has been the site of really intense street by street, at times hand-to-hand combat.
00:12:01
Speaker
And some have described it as a mini Stalingrad. mean, I've heard that used for almost every town, every city in this war at some point. It's an overused analogy, but it gives you a sense of the visceralness of this fighting.
00:12:13
Speaker
And for many weeks, people were saying Prakash was set to fall at any moment. And it once strategically was an important site. It was, ah again, I sort of use this example of being a kind of a crossroads, a place where If you control this, you control many other paths to other settlements, as well as it being a core place for good production.
00:12:32
Speaker
Production is also a major so industry in that area and important for for fighting of the war. There's question marks now whether about whether it still has that strategic utility. But nonetheless, Pukrovsk is not falling.
00:12:44
Speaker
In fact, many people believe now the Russian offensives there have culminated and therefore they've petered out in essence. Putin has sought to throw everything he possibly can.
00:12:55
Speaker
at the East and at Kursk to try and dislodge the Ukrainians, to try and put himself in the strongest possible position at this phase of the prospect of Trump trying to force peace talks, force negotiations.
00:13:09
Speaker
If Ukraine is able to get past this period now without being forced to sign some deal, which by the way, I think they would reject anyway, but let's say just hypothetically,
00:13:20
Speaker
then I think there's a very strong case to say that Russia is not going to be capable of launching another major offensive for many, many months. The Ukrainian hand is stronger than people think.
00:13:31
Speaker
And that is even going to be the case if the Americans withdraw military support. With the Europeans on side, with the production that is possible and is already in hand, I think it is entirely possible for Ukraine to fight a successful defensive attritional war for many, many more months.
00:13:49
Speaker
But of course, that will mean much more bloodshed. And it is also fraught with risk, seeing how volatile things are in the United States. That's a really interesting comment. I heard a statistic the other day that said at the moment, Russia is manufacturing more ammunitions than the entire European Union combined.
00:14:09
Speaker
The European Union and the European member countries are saying all of the right things. the They're standing behind Ukraine. Do they have the industrial and military capacity to actually be able to step up in the way that you just mentioned in the absence of the US to actually back up the rhetoric?
00:14:29
Speaker
This is one of the central questions and one that I've been exploring on Ukraine the latest now for the best part of six months to a year, ah because we we saw this as being a potential outcome.
00:14:40
Speaker
Once the election of Donald Trump seemed, I would say, more likely than not, we were considering all scenarios and this was one of them.
Europe and US: Supporting Ukraine's Military and Economy
00:14:49
Speaker
I've had experts on the podcast who've talked about the massive dent that would be made with the loss of American support, particularly in terms of intelligence.
00:15:00
Speaker
And of course, as we're recording this, we just heard that Trump is pausing intelligence. for the Ukrainians. That really matters. But in terms of materiel, I think many would argue that it does matter for the most high-tech weapon systems like the Patriots, like the HIMARS.
00:15:17
Speaker
Those are pretty irreplaceable and that will be a severe blow for certain types of strikes that the Ukrainians have been able to conduct using that high-tech weaponry.
00:15:28
Speaker
But if we're talking about a nutritional war, what really matters is being able to have enough ammunition at the front and being able to have enough men at the front. And on those two metrics, I think it is still very much possible for Ukraine to wage this war at this moment.
00:15:45
Speaker
Bear in mind that we are talking... about there being lots of preparations made in the last four or five months by Ukraine to enhance its production internally.
00:15:56
Speaker
It has a very impressive weapons production industry now. And not only that, it is the most high tech, most advanced developer in the world of drones.
00:16:06
Speaker
And we're seeing all the time how drones are transforming the way that this war is being fought and is actually, i would wager now, perhaps different than in the first phases of the war, making it much easier to fight a defensive war, a defensive operation because of those drones.
00:16:25
Speaker
And so I am more optimistic than I was, say, if you've been asking that question to me six months ago, i would have said that Europe cannot fill that gap and that Ukraine has too many recruitment issues.
00:16:38
Speaker
I think there has been a lot of progress made. And indeed, when this same question that in a sense you've just put to me was put to President Zelensky in a private briefing I attended with him on Sunday, which is quite an extraordinary experience, just me and about eight other journalists were were fielding questions to him, he seemed pretty bullish.
00:16:56
Speaker
Now, I know you could say, of course he would. that's He's not going to he's not co sir lie, tell the truth if it wasn't the case. But I i think His view mirrors that of many others that I've spoken to in the last few months, that that Ukraine is ready and Ukraine is defined because they do not see how any imposed peace deal that has Russia's interests at heart will be sustainable peace, that any ceasefire that does not have security guarantees will not achieve the what what Europe, what the West wants, what Russia wants, which is an end to this war on favorable terms.
00:17:35
Speaker
So I think that they are willing to wait and wage an attritional war until they get into a position that means that they can maintain their independence, maintain their sovereignty, and ensure that when this war stops, Russia can't just start it again in short order.
00:17:52
Speaker
And that could even be short order in terms of after Donald Trump's presidency. They're not thinking just in terms of whole ever of a ceasefire holding for six months. They need to know that whatever is agreed at the end of this that there isn't going to be another invasion in five years' time once Trump's out of the picture. So this narrative that Trump often pushes ah oh well, Putin would never break his word to me, even if we were to accept that argument, and by the way, i I don't, but even if we were to accept that argument, Donald Trump is only going to be in the White House for four years.
00:18:22
Speaker
and And Ukraine needs to think about its future much, much longer term than that.
Drone Warfare Evolution: Technological Advancements
00:18:26
Speaker
There's a few strands I want to to pull on there, particularly around the likelihood of further Russian aggression, as well as just that experience of being with Zelensky in that private briefing.
00:18:36
Speaker
But you mentioned drones, and i'm fascinated. Help me understand what are drones actually used for in a war like this one? How has that evolved in that relatively short historical period?
00:18:50
Speaker
Paint that picture for me. It's a great question. I think the first thing I would say is that drones have been important since day one in this war, but it's questions of scale. So drones that were being used in the first phase of this war, and this is what got people very excited in saying that the age of conventional warfare is over, which we can all see is is nonsense. But what got people very excited is that drones that had cameras on them, had bombs on them that were steerable, were basically able to much more easily target, identify, and then destroy Russian columns of tanks.
00:19:20
Speaker
I'm simplifying here, but that's the essence of it. And it's not advanced technology. You know, you and I would be able to buy one of these drones, not necessarily buy the munitions that would blow a Russian tank, but you know what I mean? Like we'd be able to buy this simple technology, yeah be able to spot ah where the enemy is and then, you know, crash it into it and blow it up like a kamikaze drone, that sort of style.
00:19:39
Speaker
So first phases of the war, those kind of weapons are being deployed, being utilized. But what's really changed over the last three years is how many more of them have been developed and the technology that's being used that makes them far more advanced.
00:19:56
Speaker
But the key aspect, and anyone who's studied logistics in war and how important this side of it is will understand, is how cheap they've become. you know, what were once quite expensive technology to produce is now vastly cheaper to produce. And that means you can produce them at scale. And it's scale that counts when you're talking about a war of this size and of this magnitude.
00:20:18
Speaker
And you imagine that you are trying to develop weaponry for an offensive, say, let's say for sake of argument that that tank, I'm i'm literally just making up figures here. Let's say that tank costs you $10 million dollars to produce. It's actually a lot more expensive, but let's say it's $10 million to produce.
00:20:36
Speaker
And a drone that costs $200 can destroy it Now you magnify that across an entire battlefront and in so many different other aspects of warfare, including naval. And you can see why the shift is not so much technological because they were doing it from day one.
00:20:53
Speaker
The shift is economical. And that economic economy has meant that it's basically now cheaper for both sides to develop vast amounts of drones and throw them at each other.
00:21:04
Speaker
I say throw them because that makes it sound a little bit, that may sound a little bit glib, but that's literally what the Russians are doing. They wind these drones up and they just sort of fling them and let them crash, which by the way, is of course, like equates to a war crime. So in Kharkiv, you hear these drones and they're not targeting military infrastructure.
00:21:20
Speaker
They're just sent in like the V2 rockets in the Second World War and the Blitz, and they're just sort of sent in into to crash. I mean, it's just civilian war crime 101, really.
00:21:32
Speaker
but the both But in the more targeted sense, what's happening is if you imagine that you're a soldier in a trench at the front, Now, rather than, you know, you sort of going over the top or being major offensives, basically you're on the front line.
00:21:47
Speaker
The Russians might send a small detachment of men over to try and make some sort of advancement or to see where the enemy is. And the Ukrainians will send a drone out to kill that small group, to kill that individual.
00:22:03
Speaker
And if they can't kill him with one drone, they'll just send immediately another drone out and that one will finish them off. And that is basically why we're in this kind of attritional warfare at the moment is it's actually extremely difficult when you've got really cheap drones in their thousands at a front line that can just hunt out people as soon as they, as it were, lift their head above the parapet.
00:22:25
Speaker
So it is transforming war. The other element of it, of course, is the technology that's being developed to counter this. And that is also having quite a lot of effect. We're seeing cities that were getting absolutely hammered only a few weeks ago, now getting nowhere near as struck by this drone technology. And that's partly, we understand, because of advanced electronic warfare, which is bringing those drones down early or steering them off course.
00:22:51
Speaker
It basically, it fries their systems, for want of a better term. Right. Precisely. And so that is why, and I'm sorry, I'm not a drone expert. There'll be some people be able to talk about this in far more granular detail and far more articulately, but that's the essence of it.
00:23:05
Speaker
It's about economy. It's about the scale of them and what you can do with that. One final word on it, Crimea, of course, so often articulated as being vital for Russian defense of its realm because of the Black Sea and all of that.
00:23:18
Speaker
The fact is, there is no real Russian naval presence in Crimea anymore. Crimea has lost its strategic utility because of these drones. The Navy has had to basically evacuate the ports because drones just mean that they would be easy sitting targets.
00:23:34
Speaker
This is transforming the way we conceive military targets and indeed modern warfare, I would say. But conventional warfare, seizing land, tanks, ordinary weapons, it still, of course, really matters too, as we're seeing very much in these questions about ammunition at the moment.
00:23:51
Speaker
But drone warfare is going to change everything. It's, I think, the fascinating dimension of this war as you look at it in that so many of the elements you could see variations of in World War I in terms of the trench warfare element, but then so many of the elements as well rely on cutting-edge technology.
00:24:10
Speaker
And it's almost this strange dichotomy of the future and the past colliding in this conflict, which makes it, again, morbidly fascinating to observe. I think that's a a fair summary, yes. I think that there was a phrase I remember reading, I'm going to butcher it now, so forgive me, but it basically said what you've just said, which is that we're seeing ah a war that started as being a kind of World War II tanks sent across the border, blitzkrieg, as it were, then became a World War I frozen
00:24:40
Speaker
trench warfare in the second year of the war and is now in this much more hybrid phase where, to be honest, people are asking, we don't really know what this is going to mean for front lines being able to move very much.
00:24:53
Speaker
So it's really very much ah a a hybrid war, to use that term, that's that's overused, but it's it's very, very accurate in this case. You said you were in the same room as Zelensky less than a week ago.
00:25:05
Speaker
He has become ah hate figure for the American right. Everything from his costume to his requests for money have come under scrutiny.
Defending Zelensky: Leadership and Challenges
00:25:14
Speaker
There some people who call him corrupt.
00:25:17
Speaker
What are your reflections on Zelensky the man and Zelensky the wartime leader? Well, I think that so many of those who accuse Zelensky of many of the things you've just described are basing their analysis, if I can call it that, on disinformation.
00:25:39
Speaker
It's as simple as that. The ideas that Zelensky is in some way privately profiting from this war, I think is not only inaccurate, I think it's disgusting. I think that this is a man who has had to make life and death decisions every single day for the best part of three years and whose vital decisions early on in the war, particularly to stay in Kiev and to continue fighting,
00:26:08
Speaker
has saved his country from being totally occupied by the Russians. Now, some of you listening to that will say, well, great, you know, okay, you lose your country, but maybe not most so many people will have died.
00:26:21
Speaker
But the fact is that we see what Russia does. in the territory that it controls, in the occupied territories. We do a lot of work on Ukraine, the latest, from about resistance activities in the occupied territories.
00:26:33
Speaker
What takes place in those in those places is utterly, utterly horrific. It goes beyond war crimes, really. it It's something on a a scale that many believed inconceivable in the 21st century, which I think is part of the reason why it's not being talked about enough. It's actually quite hard for many people to to grapple with it.
00:26:52
Speaker
We're talking about tens of thousands of Ukrainian children seized from their parents, from their families, moved to Russia, re-educated to learn how to use weapons, to despise their own country, to then be given Russian passports.
00:27:08
Speaker
Then if you're even just talking about the territories themselves, people similar executed, um with without you know any any anything so much as a trial, oppression, all of the measures that one would basically expect of, say, the Nazis in the Second World War is being carried out on a daily basis in the occupied territories.
00:27:27
Speaker
That would have been the case across the entirety of Ukraine. In order to try and control a country that was as opposed to to Russia, and it was very strongly opposed to not only Russian control, but certainly to anything like full-scale invasion. This was not a ah war people believed would be in any way liberatory, which is why they fought so hard.
00:27:51
Speaker
it just was It's inconceivable to me what was inconceivable to me that anybody can think that it would have benefited Ukraine not to fight. and Zelensky's decisions, I think, were heroic and and ultimately have. that Whatever I think the most likely scenarios are now was shaped fundamentally by a decision to stand and fight, which he made. and the i think an important thing as well that that's relevant to this is If you conceptualize this war as just being a war about Ukraine, then I can understand that people may you know say, well, it's not really for us to be concerned with.
00:28:27
Speaker
But the Ukrainians would argue, and I would say persuasively, that they are in a sense Europe's front line. Russia is not just probing in Ukraine, it's probing Russia.
00:28:38
Speaker
Sweden, in Finland, in Estonia, in Latvia, in former Soviet territories that it once controlled. And it's basically trying to unravel NATO and Article 5.
00:28:52
Speaker
And you could argue that it is slowly succeeding because of Western weakness that's got us to this point. And so there's that aspect of it, that they are on the front line and the sacrifices the Ukrainians make are for freedoms in the east of Europe, which are still ah you know very much intact as a consequence. And in id yeah one could argue even been strengthened by the sacrifices that the Ukrainians have made.
European Security Frontline: Broader Implications
00:29:19
Speaker
But I'd say there's also something else at stake here, which is that after the Second World War, ah new international and indeed moral architecture was built.
00:29:30
Speaker
Now, you could say that it had lots of failures and I would agree with that. But if you believe that it would be to the benefit of the world, to the West, to the United States, to Britain, to Australia,
00:29:45
Speaker
that Russia advances in Ukraine, that seizes Ukraine, then I think you are naive in the extreme, frankly. This war is changing the moral architecture.
00:29:59
Speaker
the political architecture, too, of the world that we inhabit. And if Putin is allowed to start an illegal invasion and benefit from it, be seen to be rewarded for doing so, then that creates a very dangerous world indeed, not only in Europe, but in the Pacific.
00:30:17
Speaker
And ultimately, countries like the United States, that whether they like it or not, are seen as the standard bearers of certain values for liberty, one might say,
00:30:28
Speaker
The enemy comes for you in the end. It may start on the periphery, but you are the ultimate target. And so I firmly do believe that Zelensky is a hero.
00:30:39
Speaker
And I believe that history will see him as such, regardless of what individual decisions may have been made strategically at various phases in the war. This is a man who stood by the values that he was elected to defend.
00:30:53
Speaker
And he defended them not only for his own country, but for ours. A lot of people would say that this war has taken a huge amount away from Russia in terms of manpower, in terms of its economy.
00:31:07
Speaker
Given that, how likely do you think further Russian aggression is and particularly further Russian and aggression against a NATO country? I think that depends entirely on how this war ends, to be honest with
Future Russian Aggression and Military Recovery
00:31:22
Speaker
you. I think that if this war ends if this war had ended swiftly with the complete decapitation of Ukraine and the seizure of all of its vast resources, then i think it would have entirely plausible to envisage a scenario where Russia would have sought to be immediately planning it's ah its next move in the next sort of few years that followed that.
00:31:48
Speaker
If Russia were forced to stop the war tomorrow, i think it would take years for its economy and its military to recover in a meaningful sense that could mean it could threaten Europe.
00:32:00
Speaker
And when I say threaten Europe, I'm not talking about the whole of Europe United. I'm talking about it gobbling up bits and pieces, piecemeal, using methods of hybrid warfare, political destabilization, such as what it's trying to do in Georgia and in in Moldova and other places.
00:32:15
Speaker
And I think it would be far more basically a far more imperialist power that might not be doing it in the sense of rolling tanks across every border in a in a sort of Hitler style, but would be seeking to be a much more aggressive.
00:32:32
Speaker
If... If, though, this war ends with it being completely militarily humbled, which I think is still on the table, then I think it will certainly think twice. And I think China, too, would very much think twice about doing anything in Taiwan.
00:32:47
Speaker
At the moment, what's really being contested is the idea that if you hold your nerve, do you benefit in the end? Russia right now, as of this moment, would say, it looks like we will, so let's hold on.
00:32:58
Speaker
But if, again, the tide turns once more and it waits too long and then it begins to really fracture economically and militarily over the longer term, then that risk won't have been worth it. Bear in mind that often...
00:33:12
Speaker
military powers are at their most powerful or seemingly when they've got their most territory. But actually that's quite often when they're overextended. And so it's just worth bearing that in mind. You know, if you looked at a map of, you know,
00:33:27
Speaker
let's say the second world war and you knew nothing about the state of the military picture, you would have looked at a picture of of a map in say mid-1942 and you would say, wow, Hitler's won the war. Hitler's at the strongest possible position.
00:33:41
Speaker
Now we know actually the turning points that cost in the war were six months to a year earlier in 1941. So it's just worth bearing that in mind, I think.
00:33:53
Speaker
And of course, what Ukraine is is thinking about at the moment is, you know, it needs to have security guarantees that can stop this war being able to be started again, where Russia can basically launch a new offensive where it's learned the lessons of the failures of its old.
00:34:08
Speaker
Hence why Ukraine either needs to have some kind of membership of a military alliance in in Europe or indeed with the United States, or be what Ursula von der Leyen, the head of the European Commission, is calling porcupine in Ukraine, which is this idea of that it just being so armed to the teeth that no military power would would dare to to strike at it.
00:34:28
Speaker
But one final thought on this, Will, because it's a big it's a big question that you've just put to me. ah think it's other another lesson from history, and I'm i'm a trained historian from from my time at university, and and and still I see myself in that in that kind of mold.
00:34:45
Speaker
is that if you look at imperialist powers, military powers that have mobilized on the scale that Russia has, the the Soviet Union did, that Germany did in the 1930s.
00:34:58
Speaker
And these are imperialist powers, and that's an important point. What tends to happen is that the system itself becomes geared and programmed towards war. And that is something that is very important here. Anybody who thinks that Russia will end this war and lay down its arms, I think is extremely deluded.
00:35:19
Speaker
This is a society that has become far more fascistic, And will, as I say, when you've got that many men mobilized, there is an incentive to fight. Men do not want to sit idle.
00:35:31
Speaker
Systems urging action. And there are always dangers that when you demobilize tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of men, that they then sow unrest at home.
00:35:42
Speaker
Look at what happened after, of course, the demobilization of the German armed forces after the First World War. They sowed massive discord in the Weimar Republic and eventually brought it down. So in many ways, societies that turn the corner and are allowed to become as mobilized as Russia has over the last three years,
00:36:01
Speaker
then you could argue that actually they become powers that can only wage war.
Western Responses: Historical Lessons
00:36:06
Speaker
And so for that reason, again, ah think it is vital that Russia is stopped in Ukraine and that Europe wampps ramps up as much as it possibly can to stop it making any further success or inroads.
00:36:19
Speaker
That's fascinating reflection that I think has gone under said. What were your reflections watching the now infamous Zelensky, Trump, Vance, White House press conference recently?
00:36:34
Speaker
I thought it was absolutely morally repugnant, frankly. I thought that I'm not going to get into whether it was an ambush because I think actually we're just not in a position to know. One can speculate.
00:36:48
Speaker
Many people i've whose opinions I trust who are very well informed on White House affairs, on the individuals concerned, believe it was. But even if it wasn't, I thought the accusations that were made by J.D. Vance in particular were utterly appalling, inaccurate.
00:37:06
Speaker
The bit that really where things flipped is when Zelensky was making the point, which is true historically, is that Russia does not respect ceasefires or peace deals.
00:37:19
Speaker
and he was pushing back. And this idea that Ukraine should be grateful and hasn't thanked the United States is simply not true. There are hundreds of statements where President Zelensky has thanked the United States.
00:37:33
Speaker
But also, if America sees itself, and maybe it doesn't anymore, but if America sees itself as the leader of the free world, Why on earth should there be this mentality of of of god gratitude in the sense that you know the the biggest beneficiary of the free world is the United States?
00:37:56
Speaker
It is an economic superpower that benefits from free trade and its global influence and reach. And, you know, if one looks at this through thousands of years, who was the ben the biggest beneficiary or what was the biggest beneficiary of Pax Romana?
00:38:11
Speaker
Rome, not the provinces. So even from the position of self-interest, even if you do approach it from that mentality, which I think again is is morally wrong, but even if you do, then I would say that it is not in the interest to be harming Ukraine and to be shaking hands and extending a hand to Vladimir Putin.
00:38:31
Speaker
This is a man who literally only weeks ago said that the enemy of Russia is the United States. He has articulated that publicly. And to hear Donald Trump say in that exchange,
00:38:43
Speaker
me and Putin have been through a lot together. This idea that in some way he's received the yeah the the accusations that were thrown around about Trump being too close to Putin, et cetera, et cetera, that that that in a way that they're kind of blood brothers as consequence of this.
00:39:00
Speaker
i mean, again, Look at what Ukraine is suffering as a consequence of of this man's decisions. Hundreds of thousands of people displaced, tens of thousands kidnapped, tens of thousands killed, including civilians.
00:39:15
Speaker
i mean, you cannot call yourself leader of the free world and be respected when you start saying things, as Trump and Vance did, that are supportive of Russia.
00:39:30
Speaker
And i understand I can understand Zelensky's anger and and upset in that moment. And bear in mind, as he said in the press conference I was in with him on Sunday, he said when it was put to him, did he regret it? And he was, I'd say, i'd say a bit uncomfortable when it was put to him. Would he a apologize? Did he regret it? He did look uncomfortable.
00:39:47
Speaker
But he said, I had no choice but to speak for my people. You know, could you really ask a democratically elected leader to just kiss the boot, as it were? That is not the the the role of ah of a leader in that situation. I also just think just in pure good manners, this is a man whose whose first language is not the one you're speaking to him.
00:40:07
Speaker
yeah know Show the man a little bit of courtesy. There was no courtesy present in that summit. And I think that if we can call it that, whatever you want to call it, press conference, I don't know. And I just thought it was a really demeaning spectacle for what the values of the United States hold themselves to be or held themselves to be. Perhaps we should talk about it in the past tense.
00:40:30
Speaker
Yeah, sometimes i've I've wondered how much the English as a second or or indeed third language thing plays into some of the communication disconnects, perhaps.
00:40:41
Speaker
the the argument... from some people would be even if everything you've said, and I broadly agree with it, is morally and factually accurate, it doesn't make sense to litigate, I think it was J.D. Vance's term, litigate these issues in public if it means that Putin will therefore be less likely to come to the negotiating table.
00:41:03
Speaker
And as a result of that, this war will go on for longer and more people will die. That is an argument that you'll hear. How do you respond to that line of thinking? Well, I would say that, again, what President Zelensky was saying is that without security guarantees, which is what he is asking for, without security guarantees, any ceasefire, any peace deal is meaningless.
00:41:21
Speaker
The line from Trump and Vance is that this minerals deal, where you get a few dozen, I don't know how many of it, maybe it' be a few hundred, a thousand Americans involved in extracting minerals from eastern Ukraine,
00:41:35
Speaker
would be enough of a security guarantee is for the birds. I mean, that was actually something that was basically done in the first Trump administration in Afghanistan. There was a minerals deal that was signed with the Afghan government.
00:41:47
Speaker
And of course that didn't. And then they still withdrew the American troops and we all know what happened there with the Taliban. And so his point is very simple, that you can make whatever overtures you want for peace.
00:42:00
Speaker
with Russia, but Russia, unless it only respects strength. So you could say that the other way of flipping this is, you be thankful that Zelensky is pushing back now and pushing back in public forums, because if he just nodded along with the idea of ah of ah of ah and a ceasefire being the the way forward, then we will all pay the price, including potentially American lives in the East, if Russia decided to break its Better we know that now than we know it in a few years' time when Russia strikes again.
00:42:30
Speaker
yeah I'm not coming at this from the angle of saying that everything that Zelensky touches is is gold. You know, I think probably there were mistakes that were made in that summit. I think it was ill-advised to push back publicly because of the nature of Trump and Vance's personality.
00:42:45
Speaker
I think that just in terms of realpolitik, it's better for these things to be to be taking place behind closed doors as they have for the best part of three years. ah But nonetheless, he was put in incredibly difficult situation there in front of the world media.
00:43:00
Speaker
And I think that for the reasons I just gave, it's very, very difficult for him to have just sat there and and taken it, as it were, and for some of those accusations, which are clearly inaccurate, to to just sort of be accepted by the by the wider public.
00:43:15
Speaker
I want to turn to lessons learned from this conflict. But before we do, there is one big question that I think has been hanging over this conversation. And that is, how do you think this will end? And over what time frame do you think this conflict will end?
00:43:27
Speaker
Timewater Timeframe is really, really difficult for me to say. i don't I'm not in the camp of optimists that think this is going to be over in a matter of weeks. Some people think that there's going to be some sort of solution that's found. I can't say that I'm that i'm among them. My simple reason for that is i do not see a pathway to peace. And what I mean by that is there are certain irreconcilable positions that remain true as far as I'm concerned.
00:43:54
Speaker
And it can really boil down to, I mean, there there are many of these, but I'll give you just one example. And this is the one that I gave to, that I put to President Zelensky on Sunday, is I asked about the occupied territories and whether there was ah any chance, any prospect of territory being conceded to Russia as part of a peace deal that is currently in Ukrainian hands.
00:44:15
Speaker
Now, the reason that matters is because Russia has signed into law the annexation of several regions of Ukraine that it does not control. It only controls one of the regions it's annexed and made part of, by law, the Russian Federation. The other four are contested, with most of them actually still being comfortably in Ukrainian hands.
00:44:35
Speaker
So you can imagine a situation where How can you bridge, on the one hand, Russia saying, this is our territory, this is part of our territory, and Ukraine saying there's no chance, which is what Zelensky there is no chance, he said this unequivocally, no chance of us giving territory up that we is currently in our hands.
00:44:56
Speaker
You can't find a solution to that diplomatically. That's a solution that can only be found, arguably, on the battlefield. So that's just one example of why I don't see peace coming in the short term.
00:45:08
Speaker
think also need to be a bit careful about the language we use. I mean, peace deal is what Russia is talking about. Peace deal is what the current White House is talking about. Many of the terms that are being put to the Ukrainians here and the idea of them not being able to, in a sense, do certain things with their future, not being able to invite European troops into their country, for instance, not being able to being forced or being forced to have an election.
00:45:32
Speaker
These are really terms of surrender. not terms of peace. you know and i think that's just worth bearing in mind too. And there are so many of those that are also seemingly in play here.
00:45:43
Speaker
So when people are talking about peace deals, they're talking about the idea of a deal that Russia is saying they would be willing to agree a deal that would allow them to control territory that is not currently in their own hands and would ensure that there's no prospect of American troops or European troops on the ground.
00:46:03
Speaker
There's no way Ukraine is going to agree to that. Likewise, there's no way that Russia is going to agree to some of the things that I would say Europe would see as a pre-requirement for security long term as well.
00:46:17
Speaker
So my instinct is that still the most likely outcome after this phase of attempted negotiations is that America will say, we've come up with a deal. We think it's a good deal.
00:46:28
Speaker
Ukraine and Europe will say, no, this is a bad deal. This is not possible. This is not morally acceptable and it's not militarily and securely acceptable. And thus the US will say, fine, it's your problem.
00:46:41
Speaker
we're out. And there will draw some military support. And then it will be a battle for for Europe to decide how far it's willing to get to go to stop any further Russian advances and to guarantee Ukrainian security. And many of them will conceive their own security.
00:46:56
Speaker
That I think is the most likely outcome as as we speak at the moment. But I think that we're going through a phase of seeing whether there is any way that um that those two sides can be reconciled. But nobody, no diplomat, no politician,
00:47:10
Speaker
on or off the record, has been able to bridge that chasm to me. And I think for that reason alone, it's very unlikely that we're going to see this end in the short term. Okay, let's let's play that scenario out.
00:47:22
Speaker
If that scenario comes to pass, there will need to be considerably more money coming from continental Europe and more money coming from the United Kingdom. Honing in on the United Kingdom, what do you say to people who go, look,
00:47:36
Speaker
Francis, heard everything you've said about Ukraine being the front lines in the fight for European security, the principled position to support Ukraine.
00:47:47
Speaker
All of that stuff, take as read. But say the UK is now effectively a poor country that still thinks it's a rich country. There are a lot of people at home that are struggling. There are a lot of people who are struggling to keep their homes, all that sort of stuff.
00:48:00
Speaker
The country is effectively broke. And so this becomes a question of prioritization. How do you think about that prioritization question for for someone like Keir Starmer in the months and potentially years ahead?
00:48:14
Speaker
yeah Well, of course, it's a great conundrum, although I think actually it's very difficult for the government to have a leg leg to stand on in terms of if it puts forward that perspective, which many politicians do.
00:48:26
Speaker
given its decisions made, i say the government, i'm talking about and really the the political consensus, the political establishment, the decisions it made during the lockdowns, which saw vast swathes, hundreds of billions of pounds spent to keep the economy afloat in inverted commas.
00:48:43
Speaker
Now, not saying necessarily they had a choice, but I'm just saying that When you're talking about a few billion here, a few billion there, and you made that decision, and it was a decision made very quickly with very little scrutiny, I would argue nowhere near enough scrutiny at the time, it's very, very difficult to then say, well, actually, when it comes to military affairs, literally the defense of the realm that really we don't have the money for it. Sorry.
00:49:07
Speaker
So I think it's not a really very persuadable argument given that, but let's say for a moment that really the country is profoundly bankrupt. I would say that ultimately it's going to be far more expensive in the long term of a totally destabilized Europe because of military unrest and civil unrest as a consequence of of of military systems.
00:49:29
Speaker
Because We rely on you know Europe. It's our biggest trading partner. And um even if you're in favor of of of Brexit, you'd say it's not a good thing for Europe to be in in chaos. we We need a good relationship.
00:49:43
Speaker
And so I would say, look, this is about short-term pain for for long-term gain. I mean, many people... were were arguing for far, far more military and industrial spending for Ukraine in the first months and year of the war, and were shouted down with the same arguments.
00:50:02
Speaker
And yet it's far more expensive now than it would have been if we'd spent that a year ago. And I'd say that that would be magnified 10 times, maybe a hundred times if we saw war on our continent. and us being involved in it.
00:50:14
Speaker
So I think fundamentally, it's not really... When you're talking about decisions of the realm and its security, ah which I think you are in in that case, particularly because, bear in mind, you know Britain is signed up to Article 5, NATO still exists, you know we're trying to we would be in whether you liked it or not.
00:50:34
Speaker
you You have no choice, I'd say. You have no choice. And actually, it's quite interesting that these arguments were made in the 1930s. I'm reading Churchill's war memoirs at the moment, The Gathering Storm is volume one. And in that memoir, he talks about the arguments made about military spending and why the country couldn't afford it and everything else. And he makes a good point, which is that he's never known any society, and certainly not in Britain, who when the case is made to the public, that military spending, defense spending is necessary, that the public have said no and voted against that.
00:51:07
Speaker
And I believe that. I think fundamentally that actually if you make the case and you say to people, this is necessary for your security and for our security and for the values we uphold, people will back you.
00:51:19
Speaker
And really hiding behind spreadsheets, I think is usually an excuse for but something else, which is ah lack of interest or a lack of engagement with the core issues.
00:51:30
Speaker
But as Churchill said, you know, at some point the crocodile comes for you. i think that's a fascinating thing. question. And I do so wonder whether the psyche of the British people, but i would say the psyche of the West more generally is the same as it was in the first half of the 20th century, whether there is the same level of patriotism, whether it is the same fundamental belief in some of those values that you just put forward.
00:51:57
Speaker
Well, can I just come back to that on that on that on that point specifically, Will? Because I think it's great question. It's a question i I grapple with as well. And I think that there is a case to say that, you know, there are many, many people who would say, why on earth should I give my life for my country when my country treats me so badly? I can't afford to get on the housing ladder.
00:52:15
Speaker
It's seemingly, you know, people who come to the country as criminals are treated better. They get housing, they get benefits, they get asylum when, you know, i get nothing. You know, i can understand it. There has been clearly major, major issues for a very long period of time, which has eroded trust from the public in the government. I'm not in any way denying that.
00:52:37
Speaker
But, you know, Britain is still a state that has existed for a very, very, very long time. And that runs very deep indeed. Ukraine is a country that's only existed since 1991 or 1990. But, you know, but like most people sort of point to 1991 as being when it really but became a sort of solid state that would be recognizable by all of the and the institutions that we have today.
00:53:01
Speaker
And yet look at the way it's fighting. you know? and so, and and in many ways, you know, the state has a ah weaker role in people's lives. there There's more distrust of government.
00:53:14
Speaker
There's more skepticism. And yet when push comes to shove, people will fight. And I think if there really were a perceived existential threat for all of the concerns about certain domestic issues, I do still believe that there is a heart there.
00:53:28
Speaker
But yes, it's right. It's been taken for granted for far too long. We are running short of time, but one final question that's been on my mind recently. What lessons will China take from this conflict?
00:53:39
Speaker
And do you think that an invasion or a military economic blockade of Taiwan is more or less likely as a result of the war in Ukraine? That's a ah great question. I think...
00:53:52
Speaker
it's It's hugely, so the war in Ukraine, i mean, if you ask the Taiwanese, okay, I've got a of Taiwanese contact. if you ask the Taiwanese, what what what was the biggest thing that the West can do for you to to guarantee your independence? They say support Ukraine because they see it all as being an attempt by autocratic powers. And of course, China and um Russia have a very strong relationship, ah a no holds barred relationship is literally how they describe it.
00:54:16
Speaker
as as probing and as trying to erode and destroy the democratic system, the international the the system of international law, which they see as harming their interests, which they probably do.
00:54:28
Speaker
So you certainly, if I think if if Ukraine had fallen very, very quickly, then that would have emboldened China to think, well, actually, it is possible to have very ah short, sharp victories and to benefit from them.
00:54:45
Speaker
So I think in that sense, we should be grateful again to the Ukrainians because it has made, one could argue, short term prospect of an invasion of Taiwan and unrest in the Pacific much less likely.
00:54:57
Speaker
But again, I would say that that question doesn't have an answer yet. You know, if the actual conclusion of this war is that Putin gets many things that he wanted by waiting it out, then maybe China, which famously looks at things in a much, much more long-term fashion than the West does, will say, okay, well, actually, maybe we can launch an invasion in 2027. The West will...
00:55:17
Speaker
the west will huff and puff and put sanctions on us, but eventually we'll get what we want, even if it does mean a long conflict and a severance from the system we've come to know.
00:55:30
Speaker
So it's in our hands, Will. It's in our hands. But be under no illusions that if it does kick off around Taiwan, that won't be the end of it. you know this is We're seeing here countries that have interests in other countries trying to see whether they can change the moral architecture so that might is right.
00:55:49
Speaker
But as soon as you concede the idea of there being spheres of influence, nobody is safe. Remember that. It's a poignant and thought-provoking note to end on.
00:56:00
Speaker
Francis, congratulations on your work on Ukraine. It is brilliant journalism and has been sustained brilliant journalism over a period of years now. Keep it up.
00:56:11
Speaker
Thank you for everything you've done and thank you for coming on the show tonight. Thank you very much, Will, for having me. And I know that many people who listen to this may think I'm, you know, an uncritical and analyst of of this war. But actually, you know, in many ways, I've i've' i've been many very critical of many ways that this has been fought by the Ukrainians and by the West. But I think when we're looking at it in this broad brush way, we need to just not lose sight of the fact that this is probably the most clear cut moral war that there has been for many decades. And we don't want to be on the wrong side.