Turned to
retired Army Four-Star
General Wesley Clark for insight.
In addition
to being a CNN
military analyst,
he's also a former NATO
supreme allied commander.
General Clark
you see the news out of Ukraine.
What does it say to you
about the effectiveness
of the Patriot systems
versus Russia's hypersonic missiles?
Because, I mean,
they had been touted
as being nearly impossible to intercept
Well, that's what Mr.
Putin said.
But it turns out that the Patriot
can intercept a hypersonic missile.
After all,
the Patriot was designed
to intercept ballistic missiles
that were incoming.
And so
they're moving at much more than three
or four times the speed of sound.
So the Patriot has a radar,
the guidance system
and the energy and the missile
to be able to strike
an incoming hypersonic missile.
Do you know,
I mean, how large Russia supply
these hypersonic missiles is?
I mean, cannot afford to keep
using them in waves of attack
I think it
is really
a logistics issue for both sides.
The question is,
how many Patriot missiles
can Ukraine afford to fire?
And as I look at it,
Anderson, is a sort of strategic
calculus by the Russians
to try to exhaust the Ukrainians air
defense missiles
prior
to the time that Ukraine launches
its main attack
so that Russia can deploy
its tactical aircraft
and an air to ground roll
against the Ukrainian counteroffensive
we sell.
We saw the founder
the Wagner
group claim that an American fighter
had been killed in Bermuda.
Do you think Russia's
made a mistake focusing
so much of its forces on Bermuda?
I mean, not only the Viognier group
but Russia's main army as well,
Well, it certainly seems to me
like a mistake.
We may never know why
they did it,
but it seems
that it's become a symbolic objective.
And the Russian high
command has obviously told its generals,
take back,
I don't care what it costs, just get it.
And so they've thrown
countless assaults in there.
They've taken a lot of losses,
and now they're vulnerable
to being actually encircled
by the Ukrainians.
And this would be a huge symbolic defeat
for Russia.
It might open the way to a surprise
offensive that goes right
through moot by the Ukrainians
at the heart of the Russian positions.
What do you think
a Ukrainian offensive
will hope to accomplish?
Ideally, the Ukrainians are going to get
the offensive going in the south
toward Crimea.
But we have to be prepared to be sure
there's going to be more than one
axis of attack.
There may be one in the north,
one of the one in the east
or dark mood or Donetsk
and then one in the south, perhaps
a military pole,
or maybe they'll go across the Dnieper
Retired U.S.
Air Force colonel and CNN military
analyst Cedric Leighton joins us now
from Washington.
Colonel, good to see you.
Good to see you, too, John.
Okay, so these hypersonic
Russian missiles,
which are fighter key
known as console
or that's Russian to dagger,
one of Moscow's most advanced weapons,
which Vladimir Putin claimed
would overcome all existing
and prospective
anti-aircraft and anti-missile
defense systems.
So for Ukraine
to say they intercepted six
during the same exact
six with one blow
seems either incredible or incredulous
What are the chances
that Ukrainian air defenses
are able to take out
the hypersonic missiles,
which in the past
was considered possible,
but only in theory?
Well, perhaps the hypersonic missiles
aren't really hypersonic. John.
And so that's something
that we're going to have to examine.
You know, the Russians, of course,
have touted the capabilities
of the commercial missile force
several years now.
And in the West,
we believe that it was a very effective,
highly useful weapon
that was, in essence, a game changer.
In the field of ballistic missiles.
But in this particular case,
I think that
what we're seeing
is something
that the commercial was
less than meets the eye
and if it's true,
the Ukrainians were able to shoot down
six of them.
That's a significant dent
in the purported
Russian inventory of commercial missiles.
Which was supposedly somewhere
around 50 or so,
according to Ukrainian intelligence.
So what did he was fired at Kiev
by the Russians.
It wasn't the hypersonic was a sort of
old wine in the new bottle.
Yeah, I think
I think that's possibly the case.
I think that what we may have seen
is that
it has
perhaps some hypersonic capabilities.
I could still go for
this could still be a supersonic missile,
but I'm sure the missile was not going
ten times the speed of sound,
which would have been the maximum speed
advertised for the chemical.
It will slow the Kremlin.
The attack on Kiev
using a combination of air,
sea and land based
missiles and drones was,
as you would expect.
It was a complete success.
Listen to this.
Senator, go to this.
The purpose of the strike was achieved.
All the signed objects are hit.
A high precision strike
by a hypersonic missile system dagger
in the city of Keefe, a U.S.
made Patriot anti-aircraft missile
system was hit
so eight missiles were fired.
Ballistic and supersonic,
maybe hypersonic.
The end result of some damage
to a Patriot defense system.
And that's been confirmed by the US.
That doesn't seem good.
Bang.
For your buck at the end of the day.
No, not at all.
And in fact,
the Russians seem to have had a
huge difficulty, a huge problem
in achieving
the target list that they were
that they were reportedly hitting.
So they
I don't think they were very successful.
It's pretty clear that they achieved some
degree of damage
in certain areas,
including partly
the Patriot system, like you mentioned.
But it is nowhere near
what they were supposed
what the spokesman out of Moscow said.
And all the time
the Ukrainian president continues
to press for these F-16 fighter jets.
He says they're needed
to secure Ukraine's airspace
to repeat performance
of what happened on Tuesday.
To that end,
Downing Street released a statement.
U.K.
Prime Minister Sunak and Dutch
Prime Minister
Ruiter agreed
they would work to build
an international coalition
to provide Ukraine
with combat air capabilities,
supporting with everything from training
to procuring F-16 jets.
Ukrainians are talking between 50 or 40
and 50 F-16s,
enough for about three squadrons,
I think.
Is this more to do with Ukraine's
mid to long term security needs?
Because it doesn't seem
they'll be in action
for this counter-offensive
yet?
They're definitely not
going to be in action
for this counter offensive
unless they've been
preparing them in secret,
which is doubtful.
But I think we're looking at
is like you alluded to, John,
a mid to long term prospect,
especially as Ukraine
integrates itself
even further
into the Nieto defense structure.
And when that happens,
which I'm sure it will,
they are going to be getting F-16s
or similar aircraft to really in essence,
put together
only an Air Force,
but an integrated air defense package
that will protect their airspace
much better than they've been able
to do before.
We've heard from the Kremlin
which has warned Britain
that there will be a military response
after supplying these long range
missiles, cruise missiles
to the Ukrainians,
as well as saying this training
for the Ukrainian pilots on the F-16s.
What exactly does that mean, some
kind of military response?
It could mean several things, John.
What I think they're looking at
is they're trying to make it
as difficult
as possible for the British to provide
support to the Ukrainians.
The British are supporting that.
And they're proceeding,
you know, with the training for the tanks
for the various
missiles that they're providing
and now for aircraft
training, fighter jet training.
So what the Russians will probably do is
they'll probably
try to up their game,
perhaps in the cyber realm, perhaps
in other unconventional areas,
perhaps some sabotage actions.
Those are the kinds of things that we can
perhaps see.
But the British
are not going to be deterred
by anything that the Russians
are going to plan at the moment.
That certainly looks that way.
Colonel, so much for your time.
We appreciate it.
You bet, John.