Speaker 1: The Hamas attack on October seven sent shockwaves around the globe.
Speaker 1: We begin tonight with the Middle East in flames.
Speaker 2: Israel has formally declared war after that unprecedented, multi pronged
Speaker 2: terror attack from Hamas.
Speaker 3: The new fears the surprise attack could spark an even
Speaker 3: wider Middle East war. Today, the Pentagon ordered US warships
Speaker 3: and forces in the region to move closer to Israel,
Speaker 3: including that.
Speaker 1: The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas is certainly not
Speaker 1: the only one taking place right now. Russia's warn Ukraine
Speaker 1: will soon enter its third year of fighting. Recent world
Speaker 1: events and the question of here will be the next
Speaker 1: US president have some allies wondering about how much military
Speaker 1: aid to keep providing Ukraine, with the White House has
Speaker 1: war in Congress that the United States is running out
Speaker 1: of money for Ukraine. Official say this will affect Kiev's
Speaker 1: ability to defend itself from Russia.
Speaker 3: Tonight, Republican senators blocked a White House request for more
Speaker 3: than one hundred billion dollars in emergency aid, primarily for
Speaker 3: Ukraine and Israel.
Speaker 4: Congress Republics and Congress has are willing to give put
Speaker 4: the greatest gift he could hope for and abandon our
Speaker 4: global leadership, not just Ukraine, but beyond that.
Speaker 1: I'm joined by Bloomberg's Kiv bureau chief Dasha krasno Lutska
Speaker 1: and Alberta now Deli, who's corresponding at large for Europe,
Speaker 1: to discuss this more.
Speaker 2: I heard from some law officials that maybe you know
Speaker 2: there will be no aid for Ukraine at all if
Speaker 2: Trump takes the seat, and then what The.
Speaker 4: Bottom line is very simple. You cannot fight a war
Speaker 4: if you don't have artillery, and currently Ukraine is receiving
Speaker 4: less artillery than Russia is able to produce.
Speaker 1: I'm your host Roslin matheson today on the big take.
Speaker 1: How is the Israel Hamas War affecting the conflict between
Speaker 1: Russia and Ukraine. Your reporting begins by describing the day
Speaker 1: that Ukrainian President Vladimir Lensky arrived at the NATO headquarters
Speaker 1: in October the eleventh. I was in fact in Brussels
Speaker 1: during his visit, and indeed when he made his first
Speaker 1: visit to Brussels since the war in early twenty twenty three,
Speaker 1: and the contrast was quite striking to me. But Dasha,
Speaker 1: can you start by talking a bit about Zelensky's goal
Speaker 1: going into that NATO meeting.
Speaker 2: At that time, it was clear that Ukraine's controversy was
Speaker 2: about to wrap up as the weather was supposed to deteriorate,
Speaker 2: so surely he came there to update how the partners
Speaker 2: about the battlefield. That probably one of his main goals
Speaker 2: was to ensure that partners will continue to support Ukraine
Speaker 2: with ear defense. One of the key challenges that Ukraine
Speaker 2: is facing now whether Ukraine will be able to survive
Speaker 2: what is expected to be Russian missile attacks or drawn
Speaker 2: attacks at energy infrastructure, exactly what happened last winter. Since
Speaker 2: last winter, Ukraine got some additional ear defense from partners,
Speaker 2: but of course it's never enough. Russia pulled out of
Speaker 2: the grain deal and Ukraine established it's own corrido to
Speaker 2: expert greens, and since then Russia constantly attacked Ukrainian port infrastructure.
Speaker 2: So Ukraine was asking partners to provide some additional defense
Speaker 2: for that particular region.
Speaker 1: It's interesting you talk about things that have changed in
Speaker 1: recent times in Alberto. I'm interested in your view about
Speaker 1: the atmosphere at that meeting. I mean, I remember again
Speaker 1: when Sinsky first turned up in Brussels and it was
Speaker 1: February this year. Just the huge crowds, the feeling of
Speaker 1: a moment, all the officials, you know, rushing to see him.
Speaker 1: It contrasted a bit with what we saw at this
Speaker 1: NATO meeting. Can you talk a bit about that.
Speaker 4: First of all, the main difference is that the first
Speaker 4: meeting was ahead of the counter offensive. There were very
Speaker 4: high expectations that through the counter offensive Ukraine would take
Speaker 4: back significant chunks of territory that Russia has illegally occupied.
Speaker 4: There were lots of promises and pledges. The big difference
Speaker 4: with the second meeting is, first of all, it was
Speaker 4: shortly after an attack on Israel.
Speaker 2: We have breaking news out of Israel this morning where
Speaker 2: Hamas has launched a surprise attack within Israel's borders overnight first.
Speaker 4: Which distracted lots of attention away from Ukraine. Even if
Speaker 4: it doesn't make much of a substantive difference on the
Speaker 4: ground to Ukraine, still, the countries involved in following events
Speaker 4: and their concerns are taken up by another war. And
Speaker 4: the second main difference is that a lot of those
Speaker 4: promises that were made earlier in the year are not
Speaker 4: being met by many allies. Is one of the reasons
Speaker 4: why the counter offensive has not lived up to expectations
Speaker 4: and the mood going into next year is not great.
Speaker 1: There's been a rising sense of frustration in a way
Speaker 1: with NATO and some European states that was already building
Speaker 1: before the Israel Hamas war kicked off.
Speaker 4: There was and there probably is still definitely some frustration
Speaker 4: on the Ukrainian side. So Ukraine wanted much stronger invitation
Speaker 4: to join the military Alliance. Some countries, most notably the
Speaker 4: United States and Germany, did not want to provide that
Speaker 4: strong invitation.
Speaker 2: President Zelensky has accused NATO of weakness and uncertainty over
Speaker 2: the reluctance of some members to set a timetable for
Speaker 2: Ukraine to join the Military Alliance.
Speaker 4: NATO leaders there is probably frustration that some of the
Speaker 4: promises around weapons and specifically artillery are not being met.
Speaker 4: And the bottom line is very simple. You cannot fight
Speaker 4: a war if you don't have artillery, and currently Ukraine
Speaker 4: is receiving less artillery than Russia is able to produce.
Speaker 1: And speaking of artillery, Dasha, could you just describe a
Speaker 1: bit what actually happened in the outcome of the meeting
Speaker 1: and your observations about Presidents Lensky's reactions to the meeting.
Speaker 2: Ukraine realized that it won't get as many artillery shells,
Speaker 2: and it's expected it adds lots of frustration on the
Speaker 2: battlefield as well. Ultily remains one of the key weapons
Speaker 2: in this war, because basically both sides are in trenches
Speaker 2: and they use ultiately a lot to attack each other.
Speaker 2: And of course this war that broke out in the
Speaker 2: Middle East didn't help at all. We know that Pentagon
Speaker 2: sent some shells to Israel, which means less for Ukraine,
Speaker 2: and in general, as President Zelenski said, focus was shifting
Speaker 2: from Ukraine to Israel, and that's what was very frustrating
Speaker 2: for Ukraine and remains very frustrating for Ukraine. The level
Speaker 2: of concern was already very high when the Hamas Israel
Speaker 2: war started.
Speaker 1: We know, of course that there are weapons that Israel
Speaker 1: needs that Ukraine also needs. We know that there are
Speaker 1: limits on the ability of defense companies to produce stuff
Speaker 1: at Spade or to ramp up at Spade. But realistically,
Speaker 1: how much is it diverting physical weapons away from Ukraine.
Speaker 4: I don't think that many to make a difference on
Speaker 4: the ground in Ukraine. That's what most of the reporting suggests. However,
Speaker 4: what the reporting does also show is that there is
Speaker 4: a problem, particularly in Europe, but to an extent also
Speaker 4: in the United States, which is very simply put that
Speaker 4: European countries do not have significant stockpiles of artillery. They
Speaker 4: didn't have significant stockpiles of artillery in the first place,
Speaker 4: and it seemed that there is a mix of capacity.
Speaker 4: Like you say, it takes companies time to ramp up.
Speaker 4: Let's not forget that Russia is in a war economy,
Speaker 4: so it is having twenty four hour a day shifts,
Speaker 4: seven days a week, all day. It is all that
Speaker 4: they are doing. Basically a third of their public expenditure
Speaker 4: is dedicated to the war and to producing these weapons
Speaker 4: and artillery, trying to get components wherever they can. It's
Speaker 4: literally the primary focus in Europe. The primary focus is
Speaker 4: not the war in Ukraine, it will be voters concerns
Speaker 4: on the cost of living or other issues education, et cetera,
Speaker 4: et cetera, et cetera. But there is also an element
Speaker 4: of political will in the sense that, for example, a
Speaker 4: story that we did recently looks at the contracts that
Speaker 4: European governments have signed with these companies, and the contracts
Speaker 4: are relatively small. They are small in terms of the
Speaker 4: amount of money that's being put into them, and they
Speaker 4: are small in terms of time frame. Companies have said,
Speaker 4: we need big contracts, long term contracts, because it takes
Speaker 4: time to build these things. Most European countries, especially countries
Speaker 4: in Western Europe, have not signed those contracts, have not
Speaker 4: put in those requests.
Speaker 1: And why is that the case? Is it political will?
Speaker 1: In the Western part of Europe in particular? Is there
Speaker 1: a concern amongst some of these European nations that they've
Speaker 1: deplay did their own coffers so much that the first
Speaker 1: thing they need to do is actually shore up their
Speaker 1: own stock piles at home.
Speaker 4: I think there is an argument to make that those
Speaker 4: coffers were very slim to begin with. What the war
Speaker 4: has shown is that Europe is completely unprepared for a
Speaker 4: war like the one that is being fought in Ukraine,
Speaker 4: so a war that we had not seen on European
Speaker 4: soil for decades. Most of the stocks that have been
Speaker 4: sent to Ukraine have actually come from Eastern European countries,
Speaker 4: relatively speaking, and from old Soviet type stocks because those
Speaker 4: countries had larger stocks because they are closer to Russia
Speaker 4: and more scared of Russia. On your first question about
Speaker 4: the political will, I do not have a definitive answer
Speaker 4: to that, because at the end of the day, only Macron, Maloney,
Speaker 4: Shorts Sanchez can answer that question. One theory that I've
Speaker 4: heard is that most of these countries are more interested
Speaker 4: in investing money in next generation fighter jets in the
Speaker 4: weapons that they might need for the battles that they
Speaker 4: might one day fight. So they're trying to find the
Speaker 4: balance between investing just enough to send to Ukraine, but
Speaker 4: not enough to fully meet those requirements because probably they
Speaker 4: still believe that they will never need to use them.
Speaker 1: It's interesting, though, Alberta, because the last two was that
Speaker 1: we've seen of late to very much involve what you
Speaker 1: think of his old school traditional equipment, including again artillery
Speaker 1: and ammunition. And to that point, Dasha, Ukraine itself is
Speaker 1: trying very hard to ramp up its own industry, very
Speaker 1: aware that it's so reliant on the US and European nations.
Speaker 1: Can you talk a little bit about those efforts to
Speaker 1: build the domestic armaments industry in Ukraine. How is that
Speaker 1: going and what challenges are they facing.
Speaker 2: Ukraine was a huge producer of weapons during the Soviet
Speaker 2: period and it remained actually one of the world's weapons
Speaker 2: exporter after the use of sukolops. But all those plants,
Speaker 2: they were first producer Soviet types weapons, and Ukraine wants
Speaker 2: to switch to the NATO type new weapons. Technologies were lost.
Speaker 2: We don't have that many engineers now. So Ukraine realized
Speaker 2: after this full scale invasion that it cannot allow itself
Speaker 2: to rely that much on the partners and is now
Speaker 2: seeking to increase its own production. While the government is
Speaker 2: very reluctant to give us any details or what they
Speaker 2: have achieved. Recently, President Zelenski had a meeting and where
Speaker 2: he said that he's quite pleased with the pace how
Speaker 2: much Ukraine managed to produce this year. President Zelenski is
Speaker 2: sure that actually Ukraine can find money to build its
Speaker 2: own plants and to produce those weapons. Drones appeared as
Speaker 2: the one of the key elements of this wall. And
Speaker 2: again if last year Ukraine managed to produce and to
Speaker 2: get quite many so called FPV drones, relatively cheap drone
Speaker 2: that carries some explosive devices. Russia looked at that and
Speaker 2: Russia is very good at putting production at a huge
Speaker 2: level pretty quickly, and now Russia produces lots of those
Speaker 2: FPV drones, and yeah, Ukraine cannot cope with that unfortunately.
Speaker 1: After the break how the twenty twenty four US presidential
Speaker 1: election could shape the future of the war in Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Earlier on, we were talking about the very immediate term,
Speaker 1: which is the recent meetings with NATO, coming into the
Speaker 1: winter in Ukraine and the outlook on the Battlefeld, especially
Speaker 1: with the Israel Hamas conflict going on. But let's talk
Speaker 1: a little bit more about stuff that's slightly further out,
Speaker 1: including the US election late in twenty twenty four, because
Speaker 1: it could impact support for Ukraine Alberto, depending on whether
Speaker 1: it's Joe Biden or potentially Donald Trump back in the
Speaker 1: White House.
Speaker 4: I think if we look at lots of the issues
Speaker 4: that we've toald talked about so far, producing artillery and
Speaker 4: providing more weapons longer term commitments, many of these will
Speaker 4: not come to fruition next year. It is more likely
Speaker 4: than not that there won't be a decisive breakthrough in
Speaker 4: the fighting next year because of this lack of capabilities
Speaker 4: and manpower being another big unknown factor. So there is
Speaker 4: lots of concern in parts of Europe, in Ukraine two
Speaker 4: about what happens in the United States next year. The
Speaker 4: US is the number one ally and partner, and no
Speaker 4: other country or block of countries can match its support.
Speaker 4: So what happens in the US matters fundamentally, and it's
Speaker 4: probably the number one variable in terms of what of
Speaker 4: how this war will end or may end one day.
Speaker 1: I'm curious, Dasher on that note, how much is Donald
Speaker 1: Trump being talked about in Kiev respect of the return
Speaker 1: of Donald Trump as the Republican nominee possibly a Republican
Speaker 1: president again? Are you hearing his name a lot in Kiev?
Speaker 1: How worried is President Zinsky and his inner circle that
Speaker 1: he might return?
Speaker 2: People are whispering about him. I heard from some law
Speaker 2: officials that maybe you know there will be no aid
Speaker 2: for Ukraine at all if Trump takes the seat, and
Speaker 2: then what And.
Speaker 1: You've talked about how Ukraine is pressing the US under
Speaker 1: the current administration, at least with Congress to try and
Speaker 1: get more of this aid committed asap.
Speaker 2: It's very unclear how Ukraine will be able to finance
Speaker 2: its budget next year. Ukraine finances the war using its
Speaker 2: own money from Texas, but the rest like salaries, pensions, hospitals, education,
Speaker 2: everything comes from the money of the partners. And again
Speaker 2: the is the key provider of that aid, together with
Speaker 2: the European Union, and for the time being, there is
Speaker 2: no clarity whether the US will give Ukraine what Ukraine
Speaker 2: expects to get. And second question is of course about
Speaker 2: weapons and military at the moment. Actually, as you know,
Speaker 2: there is this stalemate on the battlefield, and Russia steps
Speaker 2: up pressure in several parts of Ukraine, particularly in the
Speaker 2: eastern Donyezk region, and people of course think that Russia
Speaker 2: will try to advance feather and the question is what
Speaker 2: Ukraine will have and its possession to be able to
Speaker 2: fight back.
Speaker 1: Alberta, can you talk a little bit about just what
Speaker 1: is holding things up?
Speaker 4: The main issue seems to be that debate has become
Speaker 4: a political issue. So there are parts of the Republican
Speaker 4: Party whose argument very simply puts, is why are we
Speaker 4: sending money to Ukraine when we don't have enough money
Speaker 4: for or people here in America. And I think it
Speaker 4: will become increasingly difficult beyond this specific debate once the
Speaker 4: election campaign begins, because American elections tend not to be
Speaker 4: very sober affairs, and so you can already predict that
Speaker 4: there will be candidates who will use this as an issue,
Speaker 4: and it will say, why are we paying Ukrainian teachers
Speaker 4: when American teachers in my state don't earn a lot
Speaker 4: of money, so on and so forth. Ukraine's fate will
Speaker 4: get tangled up in those political debates. In the European Union,
Speaker 4: the issue is slightly different in the sense that you
Speaker 4: have two main issues. One is you have some countries
Speaker 4: like Hungary who are blocking the funding, and then you
Speaker 4: have a technical debate where it's being caught up in
Speaker 4: the larger EU debate about its budget and increasing that budget,
Speaker 4: and there is a debate on whether the whole budget
Speaker 4: should be increase and secondly how it should be structured,
Speaker 4: and thirdly if the money that goes to Ukraine should
Speaker 4: be grants or loans. Some countries are arguing, we've given
Speaker 4: lots of money to Ukraine bilaterally, and so we believe
Speaker 4: that that money should be counted towards the overall pot
Speaker 4: and so on and so forth. So it's a mix
Speaker 4: of issues, but I think the bottom line, beyond the
Speaker 4: technicalities is that it's got caught up in politics really, and.
Speaker 1: You mentioned Hungary and Hungary's objections equally at the same time,
Speaker 1: you know, not all countries in Eastern Europe, but taking
Speaker 1: that line, and there remains quite a strong support for Ukraine,
Speaker 1: particular in the Eastern flank. For a bunch of reasons.
Speaker 4: The Hungarian case is unique in the European Union in
Speaker 4: the sense that you have other countries who may have
Speaker 4: specific issues. For example, because I don't know, they're super
Speaker 4: dependent on Russian oil, they don't want certain sanctions because
Speaker 4: they need to keep import in oil. You have certain
Speaker 4: countries who are super dependent on gas or other imports
Speaker 4: and they don't want to cut ties because of that.
Speaker 4: The Hungarian case is unique because no other European country
Speaker 4: is effectively undermining some of the support that europe is
Speaker 4: trying to put for Ukraine. Be it they are blocking
Speaker 4: the European Peace Facility and Dispersements for that. That's a
Speaker 4: fund that reimburses countries that have provided Ukraine with weapons.
Speaker 4: There is a backlog there now. They say that they
Speaker 4: want to block the progress in Ukraine's European Union membership.
Speaker 4: They say that they don't want to send more money
Speaker 4: to Ukraine. They don't want more sanctions, they want to
Speaker 4: remove some of the sanctions that exist. And if you
Speaker 4: look at the types of measures that they want to
Speaker 4: remove or change, they are not measures that directly impact
Speaker 4: the Hungarian economy. The question why is Hungary so pro
Speaker 4: Russia is a question to which I do not have
Speaker 4: an answer. I'm afraid coming up.
Speaker 1: Could Ukraine be pushed into premature peace talks if Western
Speaker 1: aid diminishes. We've been talking in this conversation about the
Speaker 1: challenges for Ukraine as this war goes on, and you
Speaker 1: know what we're seeing as the challenges in keeping support
Speaker 1: from Europe, the US and elsewhere. Dasha, can you talk
Speaker 1: a bit about what that might mean in terms of
Speaker 1: prodding Ukraine or Ukraine feeling it has no choice but
Speaker 1: to go to the negotiating table.
Speaker 2: Ukrainians so far have demonstrated as strong will to fight
Speaker 2: till the very end, and till the very end it
Speaker 2: means that Ukraine restores its borders of nineteen ninety one,
Speaker 2: and in that way, Ukrainians believe, basically this is the
Speaker 2: only way how it can ensure that Russia won't attack again.
Speaker 2: Because they had a kind of a frozen conflict since
Speaker 2: twenty fourteen in the Ukraine's still easternmost regions. This experience
Speaker 2: with a frozen conflict that tend into a massive, full
Speaker 2: scale invasion tells Ukrainians that frozen conflict is not the
Speaker 2: way out. However, especially after Ukrainians discovered what Russians did
Speaker 2: near Kiev in places like Butcha or Irpin or Boradanka
Speaker 2: that became known throughout the world.
Speaker 5: Horrific scenes in Butcher today with the towns may saying
Speaker 5: they've discovered at these two mass graves as Russian troops
Speaker 5: left areas around the capital Kiev, and we should.
Speaker 2: Obviously Krinians were very angry, very upset with Russians and
Speaker 2: kind of had this determination to fight with them. However,
Speaker 2: as the time passes, apart from all the challenges that
Speaker 2: come from smaller than expected aid from Western partners, smaller
Speaker 2: than expected supply of weapons, et cetera, et cetera, there
Speaker 2: is a fatigue here as well. Every day we have
Speaker 2: lots of funerals. If you visit a random cemetery in
Speaker 2: a random small town or village, you will see too
Speaker 2: many new graves. Unfortunately, there are people who are fighting
Speaker 2: already for most two years and their families they want
Speaker 2: them to be back home. The problem is that mobilization
Speaker 2: at the moment is not going well. Those people who
Speaker 2: wanted to join the army, they basically joined it. In
Speaker 2: twenty twenty two, when Russia just started invasion, there were
Speaker 2: huge lines to military centers as people wanted to sign
Speaker 2: up for the army. Now it's a completely different situation.
Speaker 2: We are now facing the second winter of the invasion.
Speaker 2: People do expect another massive attacks at Ukraine's energy infrastructure. Still,
Speaker 2: majority of people say that they are not ready for
Speaker 2: any territorial concessions to Russia in exchange for peace. It
Speaker 2: depends on where you live, right, if you live in
Speaker 2: western Ukraine, it's easier for you. If you live in
Speaker 2: the south of Ukraine, of course it's harder for you.
Speaker 2: So those people who live in the east or in
Speaker 2: the south, they are more willing to compromise with Russia.
Speaker 1: And does that open the door potentially for Presidents Lensky
Speaker 1: to edge towards that if there is that slight shift
Speaker 1: in public mood, that fatigue that you talk about coming
Speaker 1: up to the second year mark of this conflict and
Speaker 1: people saying well okay, especially in the East and the
Speaker 1: south where it's been grinding that war. You know what,
Speaker 1: We're tired of it and if we can just negotiate
Speaker 1: something that makes it stop. Does that open the door
Speaker 1: for him to potentially get towards negotiations.
Speaker 2: For that, it needs to be more people willing to compromise.
Speaker 2: So far we haven't reached that critical level. One of
Speaker 2: his key goals is to ensure that Russia will want
Speaker 2: to tag again. That is forcible, they believe, either through
Speaker 2: the NATO membership or through some security guarantees, so that
Speaker 2: Ukraine is now negotiating with its partners.
Speaker 1: It's interesting on security guarantees, of course, because so far
Speaker 1: what we've seen is the US and Europe say very
Speaker 1: clearly they're not going to commit to putting man Pau
Speaker 1: on the ground in this conflict. And speaking of that, Alberto,
Speaker 1: are you seeing shifts again in the tone from the
Speaker 1: US and some European leaders which are edging towards the
Speaker 1: idea that Ukraine will need to agree to negotiate before
Speaker 1: too long.
Speaker 4: There is definitely a darkening of the mood in the
Speaker 4: sense that the situation on the ground has not changed.
Speaker 4: There is the realization that it is unlikely to change
Speaker 4: decisively next year. There's a big concern about the potential
Speaker 4: of Trump returning. So that's the first question to ask,
Speaker 4: would it be better to talk now or to risk
Speaker 4: it when Trump is in office. Fundamentally, to have peace talks,
Speaker 4: you would need Ukraine and Russia to want to talk,
Speaker 4: and both sides to come to the conclusion that time
Speaker 4: is not on their side. Until that happens, it is
Speaker 4: very unlikely that there will be talks. From Russia's perspective,
Speaker 4: I am guessing that Putin believes that at the very
Speaker 4: least he should wait and see what happens in the
Speaker 4: US election. And from Ukraine's perspective, it has made clear
Speaker 4: that it does not want to lose more territory, and
Speaker 4: once first security guarantees that this can never happen again.
Speaker 1: A better I mentioned Vladimir Putin and perhaps the feeling
Speaker 1: that he can wait to see how the US election
Speaker 1: cycle turns. But also he's got his own election coming up,
Speaker 1: possibly early next year, and the prospect very much of
Speaker 1: another term for Vladimir Putin in Russia, which must give
Speaker 1: him the sense perhaps that time is on his side
Speaker 1: in this one.
Speaker 4: Yes, I think if you look, now, I think it's
Speaker 4: not a big scoop to say that Putin is going
Speaker 4: to win the next election if you look at the
Speaker 4: situation now. His view, and it is probably backed by facts,
Speaker 4: is that time, at least until the US election, is
Speaker 4: on his side because he has more artillery. Russia has
Speaker 4: been able to produce more artillery than Europe and the
Speaker 4: US combined. Second element in terms of time, which he
Speaker 4: will see is in his favor is that Russia has
Speaker 4: way more people. Russia broadly speaking, has been able to
Speaker 4: replace the number of losses it has had on the battlefield.
Speaker 4: And then put in seas what's happening in America, And
Speaker 4: he said, I'm going to wait and see how this
Speaker 4: plays out.
Speaker 1: Dasha. We've talked a lot about where we are now,
Speaker 1: We've talked quite a bit about where we might be
Speaker 1: in a year from now. But in the next couple
Speaker 1: of months, what should people look for when it comes
Speaker 1: to the conflict itself.
Speaker 2: Ukraine promised to continue its advances as much as possible
Speaker 2: during wintertime. Ukraine is expecting to get those F sixteen
Speaker 2: earplanes as soon as early twenty twenty four. F sixteen
Speaker 2: is another milestone for Ukraine. However, again that's what Ukrainians
Speaker 2: are very much concerned now, what will happen with the
Speaker 2: energy infrastructure. According to Ukraine's intelligence plus a guest, so
Speaker 2: we have the same from the Western intelligence. Russia still
Speaker 2: manages to produce around one hundred missiles a month, and
Speaker 2: Russia has not attacked Ukraine with many missiles for a
Speaker 2: long time, so it means that it should have quite
Speaker 2: a decent number in stockpiles as of now. Ukrainians are
Speaker 2: very much concerned that as soon as the temperature will
Speaker 2: plunge around to minus ten or something like that, when
Speaker 2: it would be really cold, then Russia would launch those
Speaker 2: two hundred missiles at once. That it will allow Russia
Speaker 2: to overwhelm Ukraine's ear defense system, which is for example
Speaker 2: in Kiev, thanks to our Western partners, is pretty solid.
Speaker 4: I do think. Also it's worth mentioning that there are
Speaker 4: lots of unknown variables that could also change dynamics, because,
Speaker 4: for example, we've said several times lots of the challenges
Speaker 4: are about political will. The flip side of political will
Speaker 4: is that politicians change their current positions. We've seen countries
Speaker 4: say we will not send tanks, we will not send
Speaker 4: this weapon, we will not do this, and then they do.
Speaker 4: On Russia itself, there are unknowns. We saw when Pregosion
Speaker 4: did his rampage towards Moscow ultimately unsuccessful, but not many
Speaker 4: people had predicted that. And the bottom line is when
Speaker 4: you are spending so much economic resource fundamentally on one thing,
Speaker 4: which is war, you cannot do that forever. Russia is
Speaker 4: highly dependent for components on China. Eighty percent of EU
Speaker 4: sanctions evasion is now taking place through China. Little tweaks
Speaker 4: in China's attitude towards that could have an impact on
Speaker 4: Russia's ability to keep making the drones, the missiles, artillery,
Speaker 4: because Russia depends on other countries helping it to get
Speaker 4: around sanctions to be able to produce those weapons.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Dasha, thank you, Alberto, thank you, thank you.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to us here at the Big Take.
Speaker 1: It's a daily podcast from Bloomberg and I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: For more shows from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
Speaker 1: Boomberg CarPlay, or wherever you listen. And we'd love to
Speaker 1: hear from you. Email us questions or comments to Big
Speaker 1: Take at Bloomberg dot net. The supervising producer of the
Speaker 1: Big Take is Vicky Virglina. Federica Romanello is our producer.
Speaker 1: Raphael mcili is our engineer. Original music by Leo Sidron.
Speaker 1: I'm Roslind Matheson. We'll be back next week with another
Speaker 1: Big Take. Have a good weekend.