Ukraine War: Interview with David Petraeus
Geneva David Petraeus has directly experienced numerous trouble spots around the world. He commanded the US troops in Iraq, later in Afghanistan. After 37 years in the US military, the general moved to head the US foreign intelligence service CIA in 2011, which he quickly had to leave after an affair.
Today, Petraeus advises, among others, the investment company KKR on international political and conflict issues.
Mr. Petraeus, the Czech army appears to have stalled the Russian invasion. Did the Russians learn something from this for their further course of action?
We won’t know until the expected offensive is launched in south-eastern Ukraine. Russian forces are clearly concentrated there and seem intent on significantly expanding the portion of south-east Ukraine they currently control. So far they have made only modest, very hard-fought and costly gains there. The terrain I’ve been there is more open and hilly and less forested and less urban than the terrain around Kyiv. This has helped the very determined, resourceful and capable state-backed ones to stop the Russians well in front of the city and then push them back. Especially if the areas in the south-east are dry and tracked vehicles, tanks and armored transport are able to move off the roads, the Russians could muster a significant mass of troops.
And how are the armed forces of Ukraine dying?
The Ukrainians are attempting to reposition and cover many of their forces from northern Ukraine some 450 miles to the south-east. This won’t be a walk. Also, the Ukrainians need all the necessary materials to erect massive obstacles to stop the Russian invaders. The Ukrainians can crush Russia’s units with the sophisticated anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles provided by the US, UK and other Western countries, as well as with the Ukrainian tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery pieces, mortars, drones and air support aircraft for ground forces.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be delivered by email.
What kind of heavy weapons does the Ukrainian army need to thwart Russian aggression altogether?
The Ukrainians need tanks, artillery, armored personnel carriers, Javelin anti-tank guided missiles, Stinger anti-aircraft guided missiles, multiple rocket launchers, mortars, attack helicopters, drones, and ground combat support aircraft and helicopters. Next, the Ukrainians needed engineering equipment, earthmoving equipment and materials for the erection of complex obstacles, including anti-tank mines.
Read more about the Ukraine war here:
From time to time there are reports of a certain resistance in the Russian officer corps to Putin’s war. Can you imagine a military coup to overthrow Putin and end the war?
I can imagine that, yes. But I’m not counting on that at the moment. Vladimir Putin must be among the most paranoid leaders in the world and I’m sure he has an enormous security apparatus around him, in addition to loyal subordinates who run the larger security organizations. Apart from that, however, there are upheavals in the history of Russia during conflicts such as the February Revolution and the October Revolution against the background of the First World War. We shouldn’t forget that. It is also conceivable, although perhaps not likely, that the Russian armed forces will simply lose success over time. Napoleon found that morals are as important as three to one in relation to the physical, and the Ukrainians, who are after all fighting for their survival and independence, are far more formidable when it comes to that important quality in such endeavors – the heart.
It seems that Russian soldiers are not trained to fight in accordance with international law and to spare civilians. Are war crimes an integral part of Russian military doctrine?
The US Army and Western armies have worked very hard to build a culture that adheres to the established rules of engagement, which are always based on the Geneva Conventions and the law of land warfare. We’ve made mistakes over the years, some very serious. For example, there was the mistreatment in the Abu Ghraib prison camp at the beginning of the Iraq operation in 2003. But these were exceptions, not the rule. And we’ve always investigated them, taken the appropriate legal action, tried to learn from the situations, and taken action to avoid repeating mistakes…
…and the Russians?
The Russian army appears to have cultivated a culture characterized by frequent and repeated war crimes: killing and raping innocent civilians; Killing and mistreatment of prisoners of war and detainees, destruction of civilian infrastructure, targeted attacks on civilian facilities such as the Kramatorsk train station, the Mariupol maternity hospital and so on. Such actions are barbaric, they seem to be the rule rather than the exception. In the age of ubiquitous smartphones, commercial satellite imagery and social media platforms, the unspeakable exploits of Russian troops are very clearly documented and cannot be denied or disputed. These attacks by the Russian soldiers are also very, very foolish. The acts increase Ukrainians’ hatred of Russians and contribute to the spread of strong Ukrainian nationalism and rejection of Russia. Ironically, Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine did more to stoke and encourage Ukrainian nationalism than any other development in the post-Soviet era.
Has Putin tried enough reserves to expand hostilities beyond Ukraine, i.e. to attack another country?
The last thing Putin needs is another front. In particular, a front that would draw Russia into direct confrontation with the US and other NATO forces. That would be extremely unwise and wrong, and while there would be damage on all sides, it would require the weakening of Russian forces. But one must not forget that the escalation possibilities of such a war would be enormous – and therefore a conventional war between nuclear-armed opponents must not take place.
More: “Europe strongest the war in Ukraine”