Speaker 1: From Bloomberg News and iHeartRadio. It's the big tag. I'm
Speaker 1: west Kosova today. A devastating year of war in Ukraine.
Speaker 1: February twenty fourth marks one year since Russia invaded Ukraine.
Speaker 1: In a televised speech at the time, President Vladimir Putin
Speaker 1: described the attack not as the start of a war,
Speaker 1: but what he called a special military operation. We're putting
Speaker 1: it to dust. Putin and his general's anticipated Ukraine's army
Speaker 1: would fold and Russia would quickly capture Kia of the capitol.
Speaker 1: As we've all seen. Of course, that did not happen.
Speaker 1: Ukraine's military has fought back Russia's forces against all bolts
Speaker 1: and doom and gloom scenarios. Ukraine didn't fall. Ukraine is
Speaker 1: alive and keying in Europe. In the US have provided
Speaker 1: Ukraine with guns, ammunition, and drones, and advanced missiles and
Speaker 1: tanks may soon be on the way. We will not
Speaker 1: only support financially but also empower Ukraine to make the
Speaker 1: most of its potential. And we've given Ukraine what they
Speaker 1: needed when they needed to defend themselves and since the
Speaker 1: invasion that has result at more than twenty billion dollars
Speaker 1: in terms of security assistance. But the war has taken
Speaker 1: a terrible toll. Thousands have died, cities and homes have
Speaker 1: been destroyed, and millions of Ukrainians who fled are now
Speaker 1: living as refugees in other countries Ukraine just into Poland,
Speaker 1: and that's just in the last twelve days. Those numbers
Speaker 1: continue to grow. This is the biggest refugee crisis Europe
Speaker 1: has faced since World Well. Soon hey on the ground,
Speaker 1: as Ukraine braces for an expected next wave of Russian attacks.
Speaker 1: I ask my colleagues Darena Krasna Lutska and Mark Champion
Speaker 1: in Kiev and ros Matheson in London to take stock
Speaker 1: of all that has happened in the past year and
Speaker 1: what lies ahead. Dasha, after a year, I suppose one
Speaker 1: of the most important things that's happened is what hasn't happened,
Speaker 1: which is that Russia has failed in its effort to
Speaker 1: take over Ukrainian that Ukraine still stands as a nation.
Speaker 1: You're in kievd right now. Can you describe what it's
Speaker 1: like there and in the country right now? It's quite
Speaker 1: loud now on the streets when the electricity is katout
Speaker 1: and it still happens on a daily basis. You walk
Speaker 1: on the main street that you can hear that quite
Speaker 1: loud noise from generators and also the smell is not perfect.
Speaker 1: But shops are working, he addressers are working, business is working.
Speaker 1: So in that regard, Ukrainians are fighting in every possible way.
Speaker 1: How are the Ukrainian people feeling about the state of
Speaker 1: what's happening now. It's obviously been an enormously traumatic year.
Speaker 1: We see lots of funerals now because fighting is very
Speaker 1: swee in the eastern part of the country. But still
Speaker 1: Ukrainians are not ready to lay down their weapons and
Speaker 1: the president himself feels this desire to fight further. Ukrainians
Speaker 1: main thought is that if we allow Russia to take
Speaker 1: at least part of our land in several years, it
Speaker 1: will rebuild its forces again and it will try to
Speaker 1: seize more of our land. We saw that back in
Speaker 1: two thousand and fourteen when there was a fragile peace
Speaker 1: secret with Russia that it just resulted in a full
Speaker 1: scale war just several years later. So this time Ukrainians
Speaker 1: are determined to regain control on all the territory and
Speaker 1: try to keep push Russia back as much as possible,
Speaker 1: if I can just add just a little bit to
Speaker 1: what Dasha was saying, I come in and out. You know,
Speaker 1: Dasha lives here the whole time. So when I was
Speaker 1: last year in October, it's kind of noticeable to me
Speaker 1: at least, is that the mood I think is a
Speaker 1: little more sober, a little more grim. You can tell
Speaker 1: that it's been a very hard winter for the reasons
Speaker 1: that Dasha was laying out, but also you know, in
Speaker 1: October you'd just come off these two very successful counter offensives.
Speaker 1: There was quite a bit of optimism, and the main
Speaker 1: question for people was, you know, well, the winter is
Speaker 1: coming in, it will slow down, But the question was
Speaker 1: when will our next offensive be? And now coming back,
Speaker 1: it's not that people are pessimistic or that they've given
Speaker 1: up in any sense. It's just it's more sober, more grim.
Speaker 1: And the question now is, well, you know, when exactly
Speaker 1: will the Russian offensive begin? Any answer that is it's
Speaker 1: you know, if it has begun already, it will be soon,
Speaker 1: and you know we're going to need to survive that
Speaker 1: before we get our turn. So that's the main thing
Speaker 1: that has struck me in recent months. Can you give
Speaker 1: a sense of right now, how much of Ukraine is
Speaker 1: occupied by Russian forces, how much of it is in
Speaker 1: the control of Russian forces, and how much is in
Speaker 1: Ukraine's firm hands. It's hard to estimate because obviously we
Speaker 1: need to rely on official data. What Ukraine regained. It
Speaker 1: seems to me that at least what the official information is,
Speaker 1: and that's what I also hear from people I know
Speaker 1: and who are battling now in the east and in
Speaker 1: the south. The area that Ukraine regained, they managed to
Speaker 1: build some good defensive lines. So even if Russia starts
Speaker 1: counterfensive or another offensive, it won't be that easy for
Speaker 1: them to take again, for example, Hirson under their control,
Speaker 1: or move much further in the south of Ukraine. It's
Speaker 1: around Zapurisia region. But again Russia managed to build quite
Speaker 1: strong defense lines in the area in don Bus region.
Speaker 1: So for Ukraine, if and when it starts its contrafensive,
Speaker 1: it's going to be very difficult to advance in any
Speaker 1: of those directions that people actually expected to advance. Razzi
Speaker 1: year ago of Vladimir Putin believed his military would quickly
Speaker 1: defeat Ukraine, that Kiev would practically fall overnight, obviously that
Speaker 1: hasn't happened. How do you put in these generals get
Speaker 1: this so wrong? Well, that's an interesting question. I'm sure
Speaker 1: Mark has some views on this. Also, because there was
Speaker 1: a lot written in the run up to the war
Speaker 1: about the fact that Russia had spent an enormous amount
Speaker 1: of money over a period of years modernizing its military.
Speaker 1: It had a very large, learned army, It was considered
Speaker 1: to be very well trained. There was the expectation, as
Speaker 1: you say, that that even though Ukraine had had previous
Speaker 1: experience in combat, that the Russian troops would simply be superior,
Speaker 1: better organized, better equipment and so on, and the sort
Speaker 1: of mystique that came around that, and what we really
Speaker 1: saw is in fact big questions now about where did
Speaker 1: all that money go to that big Russian modernization that
Speaker 1: we all wrote about and heard about for years, Because
Speaker 1: it certainly didn't go into training and good equipment, going
Speaker 1: by what we've seen happened on the ground in Ukraine,
Speaker 1: so certainly a lot of it was probably funneled off
Speaker 1: in corruption. Perhaps there were lots of people who just
Speaker 1: simply told the Russian president, no, no, no, the military
Speaker 1: is terrific. This will be an easy walkover for unone
Speaker 1: was prepared to tell him the reality of the state
Speaker 1: of his own military, which had degraded. But we've seen,
Speaker 1: you know, from the action on the ground, not just
Speaker 1: sort of questions about the capacity of the troops or
Speaker 1: the equipment, but really sort of fundamental questions about the
Speaker 1: way the military is organized or organized in this case,
Speaker 1: in terms of the leadership, structure, command and control. All
Speaker 1: of it is seemed to be pretty poor. And the
Speaker 1: question is why simply has Russia not done better for
Speaker 1: a phrase on the ground. But I'm sure Mark has
Speaker 1: some observations about that too. Yeah, I think that's that's
Speaker 1: all right, you know, And if you had to prioritize,
Speaker 1: you know, because I mean a lot of people in
Speaker 1: a lot of militaries outside Russia and Ukraine have been,
Speaker 1: you know, working pretty hard to figure this out because
Speaker 1: it really matters, you know, it really matters whether the
Speaker 1: Russians just sort of messed up this time or whether
Speaker 1: there's something seriously wrong with the way that they fight
Speaker 1: with the equipment they have, and that changes everybody's calculations.
Speaker 1: And I think for a lot of analysts and you know,
Speaker 1: sort of defense ministries and so on. The tendency is
Speaker 1: to say, well, the number one reason why they did
Speaker 1: so poorly was really down to Putin and his immediate entourage,
Speaker 1: who directed the plan and for action more or less
Speaker 1: without the generals because they wanted an element of surprise.
Speaker 1: They also didn't inform even quite senior commanders and certainly
Speaker 1: not the troops until even the day of invasion. So
Speaker 1: they were extremely ill prepared. They made all the wrong assumptions,
Speaker 1: and they therefore went in in ways that really have
Speaker 1: nothing to do with warfare. It was like a parade.
Speaker 1: So and that the lasting problem there is that they
Speaker 1: lost a lot around Kiev, and in those early weeks
Speaker 1: they lost really very large numbers of their best troops.
Speaker 1: They sent their best people in, their best trained people,
Speaker 1: their best equipped, you know, their airborne forces and so on,
Speaker 1: and they were decimated. And now these troops have to
Speaker 1: be backfilled and replaced. You know, the troops that come in. Now,
Speaker 1: the equipment that replaces the equipment that was destroyed huge
Speaker 1: amounts is not as good, it's not as well trained,
Speaker 1: the equipments older and on. So they it's one of
Speaker 1: those things where you can't just try again because you
Speaker 1: don't have the same resources with which to try again.
Speaker 1: And that said, all of that said, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of caution in just dismissing the ability of the Russians
Speaker 1: to learn. One big worry is that the dog that
Speaker 1: didn't bark in this fight has been the Russian air force,
Speaker 1: which is very large and does have very capable aircraft,
Speaker 1: very capable missiles and so on, and they failed to
Speaker 1: impose air superiority, which changed the whole nature of the war.
Speaker 1: I was going to say, Mark, there was one thing
Speaker 1: I was curious about with the air force that you mentioned,
Speaker 1: and it's come up a lot, is why did they
Speaker 1: not use their air force to greater effect in the
Speaker 1: early stages of the war. Why did they not really
Speaker 1: deploy that to full effect and also potentially bombing more
Speaker 1: targets in the early stages of the war. Why did
Speaker 1: they seemingly rely so much on the ground. And that's
Speaker 1: a question that we hear a lot absolutely. I mean,
Speaker 1: I think there's a number of elements. One is that
Speaker 1: taking out air defenses is one of the hardest things
Speaker 1: to do, and they may just not have been very
Speaker 1: well trained for it. It's not the task that they
Speaker 1: spent all their time training for they may not have
Speaker 1: had as many hours in training as they should have
Speaker 1: had and so on. But another factor is simply that
Speaker 1: because in the early stages, the early hours of the campaign,
Speaker 1: there was this complete misconception of what was going to happen.
Speaker 1: So in those first critical couple of days at the beginning,
Speaker 1: the air force went in, it bombed various targets. It
Speaker 1: actually didn't have very good information, it was quite out
Speaker 1: of date, and immediately it became clear that the ground
Speaker 1: forces were getting into trouble. So the air force was
Speaker 1: diverted into a support role for the ground forces, and
Speaker 1: there weren't spending all their time trying to take out
Speaker 1: the air defenses, the airfields and so on, And the
Speaker 1: Ukrainians had time to move their planes so that they
Speaker 1: wouldn't get destroyed, so that they weren't where they the
Speaker 1: Russians expected them to be. So, you know, there's sort
Speaker 1: of a number of elements in there that people are
Speaker 1: sort of trying to pick apart. But obviously, you know,
Speaker 1: none of us were in the cockpits or in the
Speaker 1: you know, in the command structure and know exactly what happened.
Speaker 1: But that seems to have been a contributor Dasha, And
Speaker 1: it wasn't just Russia's poor planning and poor execution, but
Speaker 1: a remarkable response by Ukraine's military, which was everything that
Speaker 1: the Russian military has not been. It has been fast,
Speaker 1: it's been innovative, it's been efficient in the use of
Speaker 1: its weapons. It's even when it was greatly outpowered, it
Speaker 1: made better use of what it had. How has Ukraine
Speaker 1: been able to essentially be so nimble in the face
Speaker 1: of superior firepower. Well, people say that, first of all,
Speaker 1: motivation means right, and here Ukrainians are fighting for their land.
Speaker 1: While when you ask a Russian what he is doing here,
Speaker 1: it's kind of hard to get an answer from him.
Speaker 1: You know, there are lots of captured Russian soldiers and
Speaker 1: some people record interviews with them and they say that, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: we just watched Russian propaganda saying that Ukraine turned into
Speaker 1: our enemy. But they couldn't really explain in a way
Speaker 1: why they would think that Ukraine might attack Russia at
Speaker 1: any point, because Ukraine is much much smaller than Russian
Speaker 1: and has much less resources than Russia has. For Ukrainians,
Speaker 1: it's motivation. In the first days of the war, we
Speaker 1: had such a huge lines to military units as men
Speaker 1: were trying to register and join the army. That it
Speaker 1: just enormous lines, and it was called it was February,
Speaker 1: and people stayed at night to be registered and joined
Speaker 1: the army. So as a result, now the army is
Speaker 1: full of professionals starting from I don't know, from theater
Speaker 1: and bally ending with ten as players and IT specialists, etc.
Speaker 1: But people are motivated, they want to learn. They are
Speaker 1: being trained not only in Ukraine but also by our
Speaker 1: western partners, and they proved themselves to be capable to learn,
Speaker 1: and this obviously makes a much difference as we see
Speaker 1: during the war. So the other thing to remember is that,
Speaker 1: you know, the war began in twenty fourteen, not in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two, and it began with the annexation of Crimea,
Speaker 1: of course, and then an insurgency which the Russians armed
Speaker 1: and at times sent their own troops in to take
Speaker 1: part in. And you had a quite serious war in
Speaker 1: two fourteen and fifteen, about fourteen thousand people died. And
Speaker 1: you know, then you had a peace settlement which was
Speaker 1: really a ceasefire, and the firing never ceased. So all
Speaker 1: along a you know, a front line. There were trenches,
Speaker 1: you know, opposite each other, artillery being chills being exchanged,
Speaker 1: you know, reconnaissance parties going across the other side to
Speaker 1: get behind the line. So for eight years the Ukrainians
Speaker 1: were preparing. They had had a non existent army, in
Speaker 1: part because through the previous pro Russian government had actually
Speaker 1: dismantled parts of the military. Large arms deposts had been
Speaker 1: blown up over a period of years, so it was
Speaker 1: quite deliberate, and so for eight years they did have
Speaker 1: the chance to rebuild and to train. They were rotating.
Speaker 1: Estimates run from three to five hundred thousand soldiers who
Speaker 1: rotted through the trenches spent six months tours fighting, so
Speaker 1: you had almost half a million people who had direct
Speaker 1: recent experience of fighting. At the same time, they were
Speaker 1: getting training from NATO partners, NATO training and so on,
Speaker 1: and they restructured the armed forces so that they would
Speaker 1: have a more kind of Western style armedforce than The
Speaker 1: critical thing there was that you have a strong non
Speaker 1: commissioned officer corps, the sort of low level officers who
Speaker 1: were very much connection, working very closely with the ordinary troops,
Speaker 1: and they are kind of mentoring force, provide experience, support
Speaker 1: and all that sort of thing, and all of that
Speaker 1: has really helped the Ukrainians more than I think anybody
Speaker 1: thought training could help. But it's helped a lot. And
Speaker 1: I think the second thing I was just going to
Speaker 1: mention that I think has made the difference is the
Speaker 1: use of intelligence. Knowing that they were outgunned at times
Speaker 1: by ten to twelve to one in terms of the
Speaker 1: ampt of artillery shells that were being fired, the Ukrainians
Speaker 1: understood that they had to find a way to make
Speaker 1: every shell count and they have. And there's a number
Speaker 1: of apps and so on at the front line that
Speaker 1: are being used at very sophisticated apps that are being
Speaker 1: used in order to connect drone intelligence and other kinds
Speaker 1: of data and just put it in the hands of
Speaker 1: the people who are actually firing the guns. And these
Speaker 1: apps will calculate for them exactly once they've got the coordinates.
Speaker 1: It will calculate for them exactly what the trajectory of
Speaker 1: the missile should be and how they should aim it.
Speaker 1: And they are simply much much better at hitting a target.
Speaker 1: Our conversation continues after the break, we defeated Russia in
Speaker 1: the battle for minds of the world. We have no
Speaker 1: pr nor should anyone in the world have it. Ukraine's
Speaker 1: gained this victory and it gives us courage, which inspires
Speaker 1: the entire world rous. One person who has been at
Speaker 1: the center of this, of course, is Ukraine's President Zelinski.
Speaker 1: He's become a very visible international figure, testifying before the
Speaker 1: US Congress, going to other capitals to make the case
Speaker 1: why the world must keep its attention and Ukraine must
Speaker 1: keep delivering arms and other aid to Ukraine. How important
Speaker 1: has President Zelinsky been in maintaining Ukraine's unity at home
Speaker 1: and also its ability to keep fighting well, incredibly important
Speaker 1: and arguably he's been just the president that Ukraine needed
Speaker 1: in this moment. And it's funny thinking about the run
Speaker 1: up to the war now and away, because people tended
Speaker 1: to dismiss him very much as someone who didn't have
Speaker 1: the heft to be a president during wartime, you know,
Speaker 1: of course, there was all this talk that he might
Speaker 1: even leave the country, and famously he declined the offer
Speaker 1: to do so. But you can see that his skills
Speaker 1: at presenting a message, it's selling in fact, Ukraine's cause
Speaker 1: in this moment relentlessly on social media videos, all of
Speaker 1: it appearing speeches at parliaments, you know, you name it,
Speaker 1: he's done it. He's done anything that he can to
Speaker 1: remind people that this war is going on, that Ukraine
Speaker 1: needs more money and more weapons to keep fighting, and
Speaker 1: no event is too small or too large to do that.
Speaker 1: And you could say arguably that's made a tremendous difference
Speaker 1: in keeping the world's attention on Ukraine in rallying cause
Speaker 1: for money and weapons. If you look at other conflicts
Speaker 1: around the world that have gone on for a period
Speaker 1: of time, you can see that there's been a real
Speaker 1: challenge to maintain that kind of momentum, and perhaps that
Speaker 1: challenge will come for Ukraine if this war goes on
Speaker 1: for another year or beyond. But you can see some
Speaker 1: of that concern creeping in. Potentially now you've seen President
Speaker 1: Zelinsky leaving Ukraine more regularly, coming directly to the rest
Speaker 1: of the world to spread that message. Kind of saw
Speaker 1: that very clearly in his recent trip to the UK
Speaker 1: and to France and to Brussels, very much perhaps recognizing
Speaker 1: that this is a moment where he needs to work
Speaker 1: even harder to do that. So in terms of just
Speaker 1: being sort of the front facing element of the war
Speaker 1: for Ukraine. He's really really done his job. How much
Speaker 1: he has sort of been important behind the scenes in
Speaker 1: terms of directing the war effort and someone is less clear,
Speaker 1: and perhaps dash Roma might have views on that. But
Speaker 1: if he had just had to do one thing in
Speaker 1: this moment, and that's simply to really sort of like
Speaker 1: keep Ukraine front and center for the world, then certainly
Speaker 1: he's delivered Rossio exactly right. He did the right thing.
Speaker 1: He concentrated on delivering the message to the world, and
Speaker 1: he's very good at that because his background is showbiz.
Speaker 1: He knows how to do videos, he knows how to
Speaker 1: reach the audience. He has an excellent speechwriter, so the
Speaker 1: you know, words really touch people. And locally he doesn't
Speaker 1: really at least was not really involved in planning operations.
Speaker 1: He picked up a very capable top army chief and
Speaker 1: the guy is doing his job and he not just
Speaker 1: the Lenski himself doesn't interfere in that because, as he said,
Speaker 1: it's up to military people to decide operations. Mark These
Speaker 1: appeals President Zelinski has made around the world have been
Speaker 1: met with a lot of aid from the US, from Europe,
Speaker 1: from other parts of the world, providing a lot of
Speaker 1: munitions and some sophisticated weaponry will. US and Germany are
Speaker 1: poised to announce that they will provide main battle tanks
Speaker 1: to Ukraine. Germany's Defense minister says chance Schultz is talking
Speaker 1: to his allies about supplying keep with the Leopard tank. Today,
Speaker 1: I'm announcing that the United States will be sending thirty
Speaker 1: one Abram tanks to Ukraine, the equivalent of one Ukrainian battalion.
Speaker 1: And that's the conversation that we've been having most recently
Speaker 1: about how can we provide air defense to protect the
Speaker 1: Ukrainian population. That has been the thing that we've talked about,
Speaker 1: probably most in all of our conversations, which is why
Speaker 1: we've provided thousands of surface to air missiles and air
Speaker 1: defense systems, and we'll continue to do so, and more
Speaker 1: are coming over the next few weeks. I think in
Speaker 1: the beginning of the ward, there was some question about
Speaker 1: whether the West would give as much as it has
Speaker 1: for fear of provoking Russia into a wider war. And
Speaker 1: yet as it's gone and the West has really stepped up. Certainly,
Speaker 1: I before this war began and certainly present putin the
Speaker 1: expectation was that Europe would not really be as united
Speaker 1: or determined as it has been, and that it couldn't
Speaker 1: last very long. The record, you know, in the response
Speaker 1: to Crimea, the response to the fighting in Georgia in
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight was not good in that sense.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm very strung that the perspective is different.
Speaker 1: So the first thing to remember is this is a
Speaker 1: high intensity war that we haven't seen since World War Two,
Speaker 1: and that you know, those kinds of wars they require
Speaker 1: just mass mobilization of economic resources, people, etc. And so
Speaker 1: seen from Kiev, you know, there's a lot of gratitude
Speaker 1: about the weapons that have come, a complete understanding that
Speaker 1: without them they wouldn't really have been able to survive,
Speaker 1: certainly wouldn't be able to think about whether they can
Speaker 1: take the territory back. But at the same time real
Speaker 1: failure to understand why it always takes so long, that
Speaker 1: it is this long, ratcheted process where you begin with
Speaker 1: you know, shoulder held anti tank missiles, and then it
Speaker 1: takes a while before you get to you know, bigger artillery,
Speaker 1: even though it's very clear that the Ukrainians desperately need
Speaker 1: the big artillery, and then it takes a while before
Speaker 1: you get to you know, the next thing, you know,
Speaker 1: to the big air defense or to the tanks, and
Speaker 1: now of course they're you know, sort of pressing for jets.
Speaker 1: And so from that point of view, if they had
Speaker 1: been given everything they've been given right away, then you know,
Speaker 1: the outcome might have been much better for Ukraine. This
Speaker 1: question of tanks and jets has been going on for
Speaker 1: quite some time now. At first the Germany, poland other
Speaker 1: nations were hesitant to give over tanks, and now as
Speaker 1: Mark describes that sort of softening and those are moving
Speaker 1: toward Ukraine. Jets seem to be a real sticking point though.
Speaker 1: Do you think ultimately that Ukraine will receive jets from
Speaker 1: Western militaries. You know, more and more countries are sort
Speaker 1: of looking at how much they've sent in and also going, well, wow,
Speaker 1: we're running really low ourselves, and defense companies just can't
Speaker 1: sort of turn on a switch to the factory and
Speaker 1: magically produce a whole lot of extra equipment with great speed.
Speaker 1: That's why we're seeing talk about a common fun potentially
Speaker 1: for the EU for ammunition, But that would be to
Speaker 1: sort of like get companies to start making ammunition in
Speaker 1: six to nine months from now and in a lot
Speaker 1: of countries have got stockpiles that have been depleted, and
Speaker 1: you know, there's a point where they have to sort
Speaker 1: of say, well, we can't actually send anymore. And of
Speaker 1: course they haven't said modern fighter jets, but as they
Speaker 1: don't necessarily have a lot of them to start with,
Speaker 1: and countries like Poland so well, we can't send them
Speaker 1: unless we had a guarantee from the US of replacement,
Speaker 1: and there's no certainty about that either. And if you
Speaker 1: look at the language around fighter jets, yeah, they're sort
Speaker 1: of saying, well, we could look at it. Maybe in
Speaker 1: the longer term, there could be an assessment about it,
Speaker 1: but the language on that remains really really cautious and
Speaker 1: suggests that that's really quite a large hurdle to get over.
Speaker 1: We'll be right back after when you're fighting. Ukraine is
Speaker 1: looking at another year ahead. I don't think anyone expects
Speaker 1: this war to be over anytime soon. What can we
Speaker 1: expect in the months ahead, Well, the question is is
Speaker 1: Russia really going to launch a major offensive or has
Speaker 1: it already started as Mark talked about earlier, And is
Speaker 1: it not sort of one big shebang moment, or is
Speaker 1: it just sort of a gradual increase in intensity in
Speaker 1: the coming months, because Russia obviously sees a window here
Speaker 1: before Ukraine does start to get some of that more
Speaker 1: advanced weaponry, which is sort of months away, so now
Speaker 1: would be the time to try and gain more territory
Speaker 1: rather in the East. And that's a difficult time potentially
Speaker 1: for Ukraine in the coming weeks to be able to
Speaker 1: sort of hold that back, And that's perhaps reflected in
Speaker 1: the sense of how people are feeling that Mark and
Speaker 1: Dasha were talking about earlier in Kiev at the moment,
Speaker 1: because any kind of full offensive by Ukraine is probably
Speaker 1: some months away and more likely to come in the South.
Speaker 1: But as you say that, beyond that we just headed
Speaker 1: for the reality that a war that will go on
Speaker 1: for another year or more even possibly three four years,
Speaker 1: does it turn into a grinding conflict just in the
Speaker 1: East and the South. And the challenge there for Ukraine
Speaker 1: obviously is again keeping momentum for the world on its
Speaker 1: plight there and supporting its military or do people sort
Speaker 1: of get to the point where that fatigue does set in.
Speaker 1: So it's probably quite a difficult time ahead for Ukraine potentially,
Speaker 1: and all of that about from this situation that is
Speaker 1: now more challenging. In the east. Ukraine launched, though to
Speaker 1: very successful country offensive operations back last year, because there
Speaker 1: was also an element of surprise, they kind of just
Speaker 1: unexpectedly for Russia, launched it in the north of the
Speaker 1: country and then in the south. Now it's kind of
Speaker 1: options are much more limited, and of course Russians are
Speaker 1: preparing for that for any possible Ukrainian contrafensive. This is
Speaker 1: on one side. On the other side, there is a
Speaker 1: question of economy. Last year, obviously there was some you know,
Speaker 1: some stuff left from the previous years. You know, this year,
Speaker 1: at least from what I hear from companies, it's going
Speaker 1: to be more difficult for them to operate. Plus it's
Speaker 1: unclear what's gonna happen with the world economy. Obviously it
Speaker 1: has an impact here and also a very important part
Speaker 1: of Ukraine's if you want rebuilding after the war. There's
Speaker 1: a question of for immigration, whether people who left the country,
Speaker 1: those were mainly women with kids. They fled the country
Speaker 1: last year. Many of them already found jobs there. So
Speaker 1: once the war is over, the question is whether people
Speaker 1: would come back or rather men who are now prohibited
Speaker 1: to live the country and after the war, obviously answer
Speaker 1: all limitations will be lifted out out whether those husbands
Speaker 1: will rather join their families in the European Union, which
Speaker 1: means Ukraine will lose lots of people. Mark, the last
Speaker 1: time you were on this podcast talking about Ukraine, you
Speaker 1: said that Vladimir Putin's own personal investment, his own reputation,
Speaker 1: is so tied up in winning this war that you
Speaker 1: didn't see any way in which he would accept a
Speaker 1: settlement in which he was seen as having lost. Do
Speaker 1: you think that that's more or less true now? Ultimately,
Speaker 1: most conflicts and with some kind of settlement, And at
Speaker 1: the moment it's almost impossible to see any room for
Speaker 1: a settlement because for Ukraine the issue is to recover
Speaker 1: their territory, and for Russia, for President Putin, the issue
Speaker 1: is to gain the territory that he is the next
Speaker 1: because he annexed several provinces, declared that they were now
Speaker 1: part of Russia, and his troops didn't even occupy all
Speaker 1: of them. So you have these two sets of goals
Speaker 1: that are in complete conflict. So it's very, very difficult
Speaker 1: to see how any time soon there can be any
Speaker 1: kind of settlement, neither side has an interest, neither side
Speaker 1: is exhausted that the Ukrainians have, you know, still a
Speaker 1: motivated force, They're still getting armed, and the Russians have
Speaker 1: mobilized and sent you know, several hundred thousand new troops
Speaker 1: to the front. They now have more in Ukraine than
Speaker 1: they had at the beginning of the war. So it
Speaker 1: remains true. And the question always is what can he
Speaker 1: sell it as a victory? And I do think, you know,
Speaker 1: the sort of glimmer of light there is that, in
Speaker 1: the same way that he has been able to control
Speaker 1: the message at home, you know, as far as a
Speaker 1: kind of mendacious way about what's happening in Ukraine, there
Speaker 1: is the glimmer of hope that if he decides that
Speaker 1: he needs to sell something that is objectively a defeat
Speaker 1: as a victory, he may be able to do so.
Speaker 1: But I think that that basic point that he can't
Speaker 1: afford a strong men cannot afford to lose, that remains
Speaker 1: and it's only a question of what losing consists on.
Speaker 1: Dasha Rosmark, thanks so much for talking with me today.
Speaker 1: Thank you, thanks us, thanks for listening to us here
Speaker 1: at the Big Take. It's a daily podcast from Bloomberg
Speaker 1: and iHeartRadio. For more shows from my Heart Radio, visit
Speaker 1: the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen, and
Speaker 1: we'd love to hear from you. Email us questions or
Speaker 1: comments to Big Take at Bloomberg dot net. The supervising
Speaker 1: producer of The Big Take is Vicky Bergolina, Our senior
Speaker 1: producer is Catherine Fink. Federica Romannello is our producer. Our
Speaker 1: associate producer is zenib Siddiki. Raphael Mcii is our engineer.
Speaker 1: And our original music was composed by Leo Sidrin. I'm
Speaker 1: west Kosova. We'll be back tomorrow with another Big Take