Mr.
Ambassador, thank you
so much for joining us today.
I do want to begin this conversation
by asking you to respond
to this Bloomberg headline
that is reporting that in the Saint
Petersburg Forum, President
Putin has said
that the country
has transferred
their first nuclear weapons to Belarus.
What is your response to that?
This is a very, very serious situation.
And by this gesture,
by this step,
he is destroying the
what is the rest
of from the international law
and agreements.
If you remember,
us, more than double
the Russians and Kazakhs.
We are signing this Budapest memorandum
that we were laying down
the nuclear weapons.
In return,
we will be defended against anybody
who can come to us.
The Russians
obviously did not respect this with us,
but rearm in Belarus.
It's another
just another blood in violation
of the international agreements.
I believe that we have to take it
very, very seriously.
Does Ukraine view
this as a sign of warning,
perhaps from Vladimir Putin, a threat
that he could use nuclear weapons,
possibly tactical nuclear weapons
in the months ahead?
I believe that he was blackmailing
all of us
Ukrainians, first of all,
by the Europeans and Americans
of all our partners
around the globe,
that at the end of the day,
if he is cornered
he will use some some
some as like in this case,
the nuclear weapons.
And that's what he's doing.
He's bringing
or at least promising to bring to.
But I have to tell you, that
until now,
we much
better equipped
to withstand this pressure
with all this anti-air missiles,
which we're receiving from our partners.
We are down in everything
sometimes on the level of 100%.
So he has to be extremely careful
what he's planning because who knows?
If you send something away, it might
get to the point.
Let me ask you about
this counteroffensive.
It appears
we are now in week
at the end of week one
or two of this counteroffensive.
And it's unusual how Mum Ukraine has been
on any of the roads that it may
or may not have made at this point.
Characteristically and no surprise,
Russia has been publicly claiming
that Ukraine has not been successful
thus far.
Give us
the current state
of this counteroffensive
Obviously, everybody knew
that we would come
as soon as the ground
solid enough
to withstand
the heavy Western tanks
and our own tanks.
And it's not a big secret
that we were waiting
for the perfect moment.
And I guess this first one
is really right in front of us.
It's not yet.
We have not engaged in committed
all the forces we have.
We have pulled in trying
to find the best place for that site.
The dam, which was destroyed by Russians,
is changing our guard.
It's a bit
we have to replant our replant
our operation because the do
the part of this huge
thousand kilometer front
is not accessible
for the heavy equipment.
So this is delaying
our comprehensive bid.
But I guess the Russians have to wait
just a couple of days more.
So is it fair to say
this is still the probing stage
because we know that that Ukraine hasn't
committed the bulk of its forces yet?
Early gains
that have been made
are clearly not insignificant.
But we have seen images of damaged U.S.
Bradley Armored vehicles,
as well as leopard tanks
in this fighting, already suggesting
that these heavier
equipped, more sophisticated
weapons are being used
This is true.
We've never
promised that we will come
and go all the way
without losing some tanks
or very important to some people as well.
This is painful to see this thing.
But at the same time,
you've seen a couple
of these pieces
being repaired
and returned back to the front lines,
which means there is no perfect solution.
This battle will will cost us a lot.
And whatever we're gaining
is just preliminary attacks,
allowing us to understand
and see all of this
very much
a political meaning
and political value as well.
I understand that expectations are high,
but this is sometimes playing
very tricky game on us
and our partners around the globe.
We want them to be careful
and patient with us.
This is not the last counteroffensive
we might have with Russians.
Obviously, I also understand
that the picturesque sort of success
will reenergize
the assistance around the globe.
That's what we need.
If you want to help the return
on investment into Ukraine,
maybe we have seen
to increase this investment,
give more tanks to allow us direct hits.
In the particular points, we will find
You have made this point
about being a bit
frustrated with the level of expectations
that have been set by many
in the media
and many
of Ukraine's supporters
in terms of the significance
of this counteroffensive,
perhaps setting the bar as high
as what we saw around Kharkiv.
Should people expect
to see more of
what happened around here, son?
And how worried are you at
the possibility that continued support
really hinges on the outcome
of this specific counteroffensive?
You know, even even
even here, small operation is actually
was quite successful
because here was the only
significant city
the Russians managed to get
from the very beginning of the war.
So did
the fact that they sort of
got back out of it.
Preserving their lives is not that
until we are knowing that we are free.
Our also
our aim of this whole war is not to kill
maximal Russian soldiers
or kill the maximal Russian things
is just to get them out of our land
and then decide
how we live with them
for the centuries to come.
So the current deliberation, I agree
it was spectacular, the cold.
But the Russians also learned
from their own mistakes.
I guess this operation
will allow them
to dig really deep
and then prepare their defenses.
We have to be much smarter.
We don't want to repeat their losses,
which they had at the bottom
in the round
when their tanks
were just going through the land
lengths of mines
and blowing them in the way.
So that's what we have to
we have to be much more sort of clever.
It does appear that
Russia appears to be more more competent
in terms of defense
as opposed to
their offensive operations
earlier in this year.
How how much of a game
changer would additional long,
long range missiles and more F-16s
or any F-16s at this point really be
at this stage of the battle?
First of all,
the strength of any defensive forces
is the logistics.
That's the deterrence was not needed,
the bunkers
needed, the training soldiers
and the numbers of them are important,
but they should
and this is important
how fast you're bringing
the artillery shells
to the to the frontlines
and low enough forces to shoot
at the upcoming offensive.
So that's what
we are trying to resolve with the
with British soldiers.
We will need somebody else,
our partners, to come in
the United States
with some sort
which would allow us to target innocent
on our own territory.
And that's the longest F-16s without the.
That was the failure of Russian attack.
They could not establish
the air superiority
over the whole period of of of war.
The F-16s or any other Western planes
would allow us to, first of all,
deny them from our skies
and hopefully
to establish our own superiority
by this moment if it managed to do so.
The war will dictate.
A war will result.
Looking at the longer term goals here
for Ukraine, obviously,
first and foremost after defeating
Russia would be to join NATO.
And we have seen the defense chiefs
meet in Brussels yesterday
as far as a line meant that naito
that Ukraine
will join Naito
at some point in the future,
they are all aligned on that line.
But when they will join
when Ukraine can
join is the big question mark here.
And we don't really have a timetable
even set by President Biden.
There does seem to be
this alternative model
that it doesn't have to be
an all or nothing scenario
that Ukraine could go by way of Israel
perhaps, or even Taiwan
would not officially
joining
any sort of membership or alliance,
but getting all of the weaponry
and supplies in order to protect itself.
Would Ukraine settle for that right now?
I believe that it's a bit incorrect
as a comparison because Taiwan and Israel
are not part
of the sort of nodes
in the Atlantic region where Ukraine is.
So I guess in the way it is right away,
I was closer
if they would be in the alliance as well.
So that was a decision
which was done
rather out of necessity
and geographical necessity.
So I would not expect
our friendship partners
to invent something
new and unique for Ukraine
if we have such a proven mechanism,
an instrument as a nation.
And Ukraine
was trying
to get into the alliance for years
and years.
I understand that for some of the members
it is difficult for their own reasons.
But I guess the Ukraine is proving
that's actually
can be a donor
of the allies of security
in this particular region.
We have the strongest army
probably right now in Europe.
And if we knew somebody
who was actually fighting
with the Russians,
the only enemy of the night,
that's Ukraine.
So I don't believe that will be happily
green on some something else
rather than major.
Our president is saying, yes,
we need
security guarantees may be in the way of
of Israel or Taiwan,
but that will be interim solution
until Ukraine will become a
member of NATO's.