How the US and UK’s aid package to Ukraine will destroy Putin | EXPLAINED

this is serious this is not a this is not a war of choice I mean Putin is making war in Europe and threatening everybody and unless he is seen to fail we will all be a great deal poorer and less sensitive and I think that message is now is now clear I mean different European countries have different views of what they should do about it but very few European leaders and European publics now think we shouldn't do anything about it we should leave it most Europeans now now understand that this is our problem and we've got to take on and I think that's very different to the situation of a year ago but the things that they need this week and this month are artillery shells 155 MIM 152 millim tank rounds 120 M millimet rounds for tank guns and ammunition and systems for air defense in particular they need more Patriot batteries and Patriot batteries are about a billion dollar each and of that about 400 million is the cost of the battery and up to 600 million is the cost of the different ammunition lot of ammunition that they fire so they need air defense quickly because the Russians are able to use their Air Force in a standoff mode from many miles away throwing Glide bombs into cities like hariv and along the front line which is playing Havoc with uh Ukrainian defenses so if they can neutralize that quickly that will make a big difference but then beyond that Beyond ammunition and an anti-aircraft artillery they they need more equipment of every sort so that they can reorganize themselves properly for the rest of the year the the problem that the ukrainians have first of all is uh missiles and glide bombs hitting their cities so chiv sui and particularly KV which is the second city right on the Russian border or the border with Western Russia are very vulnerable now kiv is a big city but the Russians look as if they are trying to do to that City what they did to mariole down in the South it's a bigger city and they'll find that more difficult but they're going for the power uh the um Water Supplies they're trying to actually make life intolerable in the city and they're attacking civilian areas and they're doing it in two ways one is with ballistic missiles such as the escanda missile which is is not impossible to defend against but you need good anti-aircraft systems like the Patriot to defend against an incoming ballistic missile and the other way they're doing it is with these Glide bombs called The Fab 500 Fab 500 and there's a Fab 1500 and the 500 is a 500 kilo bomb which is £1,000 the 1500 is A500 kilo bomb which is £3,000 in effect it's about a ton and a half of Warhead and these are very old bombs and the Russians have got literally thousands and thousands of these bombs but they found a way of fitting Little Wings to them and giving them a very crude um guidance system so these bombs can be dropped by aircraft at 30,000 ft up to 50 or 60 miles behind the front line and they will Glide from that height to their target and they'll hit their target with enough accuracy given that they're big bombs if they're 20 or 30 meters away from the target they'll still do a lot of damage and those Glide bombs are something that are very difficult to defend against there's no easy defense against them the only way that the ukrainians can do anything about it is to hit the aircraft before they drop them and that means that they either have to have good anti-aircraft missiles long range high altitude missiles which they are now going to get so they can Target these these aircraft when they are 30 and 40 miles away from the front line but also they need their own aircraft they need their f-16s and whatever other aircraft they may be able to get and they're not going to get them soon and but they need them to be flying in some numbers to protect the airspace above their own front lines and maybe to Chase some of these um Russian bombers these su 34s su 35s into Russia they've got to chase them way behind the front lines to keep them from dropping their Glide bombs the Glide bomb it sounds like a a rather um specific thing but it's actually a it's a weapon that's made a big big difference to Ukraine over the last few months the package is not quite too little too late but it's certainly on the uh the wrong side of the right time to arrive put it that way I mean if this package had come in October when it was first proposed then far fewer ukrainians will be dead far fewer Russians will probably be dead actually um and in fact the the ukrainians would have maintained their lines and have been able to take a breath over the winter because this package has been delayed they have lost some territory they've certainly lost an awful lot of people because of it um and they're now going to have to try to get back what they've lost in the six months it's taken for this package to be agreed however the the the fact that the package has now been agreed is very important to Ukraine I mean in these wars no one thing is a game changer but in this case this keeps Ukraine in the war for the rest of this year it means that Ukraine won't lose the war this year they won't win it this year either but they will be able to hold their own they'll be able to plan for the future and they'll be able to make it impossible for the Russians to squeeze Ukraine into a political crisis which is what they were trying to do a political crisis in Kiev that would remove zalinski and replace him with somebody who would then do a deal on the basis that the Russians would keep what they've conquered I mean this war represents the return of Industrial Age Warfare to Europe and Industrial Age Warfare is is one by the side that can produce more and deploy it onto the battlefields at the right time sounds easy to say but of course it's very hard to do and since the end of the Cold War we've run down our defense Industries so did the Russians to some extent but the Russians have now geared up into a war economy and we haven't so we're coming at this uh as it were from behind but our our our capacity is much greater than the Russian capacity if we use it properly so the whole point about Industrial Age Warfare is that you have to be prepared to Gear Up Armament production and you have to be prepared to think of ways in which you can deploy what is necessary because Industrial Age Warfare uses up lots and lots of resources and we've seen sort of ammunition usage on the on the front line in Ukraine the ukrainians were firing about 10,000 shells a day at one time a day and the Russians were firing almost 20,000 shells a day so they're getting through two and three million shells a year this is what is characteristic of Industrial Age Warfare it's not pretty we don't like it but that is where we are because of what Russia is trying to do to Ukraine and threatening to do to other European powers at some point in the future I think what the ukrainians will be able to do is to drive back some of these Russian attacks because the Russian attacks of recent months have been almost human wave attacks I mean our the British Ministry of Defense estimates that the Russians are losing 900 men a day a day and that's killed and seriously injured so 900 casualties every day along the front and they can't afford to keep doing that and they'll lose more than that when the ukrainians get more ammunition the only reason they're only losing 900 is because the ukrainians simply run out of shells to fire they're running out of even Small Arms ammunition in some places so as the ukrainians which they will by the end of this week start to get more artillery ammunition for sure then they will be able to push back these Reckless Russian attacks and I think that will be the immediate effect I think Russian casualties will increase a lot in the next two or three weeks and they they will lose a lot more of their equipment so I don't expect the ukrainians to as it were suddenly go onto the offensive but I think they will stop losing territory in most places they might still lose Shazia which will be a real problem if they do but we'll see but if they can hold on where they are now and then gradually push the Russians back then they will be able to take a breath before the summer and then have some control over the situation the problem for the ukrainians is that everything was happening Helter Skelter and they were losing control of what they were trying to do if you can establish dig in and establish as it were a a stalemate on the front you then can start to plan for what you do next and one of the most important elements of this Aid package that was agreed at the weekend in the United States is that it it now allows the ukrainians to plan for the future they couldn't plan when they were falling back throughout with with lack of ammunition now they can begin to plan for what they do in the future and of course they want to try to get it right for the end of the year and into next year when they might be able to make a more decisive difference I think the Kremlin had assumed that the aid package wouldn't go through part of their offensive all the way around the front was based on the idea that they could they could squeeze the ukrainians and that the United States would not deliver the aid package and therefore they would create a political crisis in keev um the fact that the aid package has been agreed is not only good in military terms on the front line it's extremely important for ke's morale it's also important for the Europeans because the Europeans now have to match it they have to show that they really mean it and get in behind America which they are beginning to do Al that they're doing to to a reasonable extent but they now need to do it more and for the Kremlin this is a disastrous week because they had based their current offensive on the assumption that the aid package wouldn't go through and the fact that it's gone through also leads to other problems which the Russians will have as Kiev becomes more confident and is able to breathe a bit from the pressure that it's been under um since uh last year in effect the problems that the Russians will now have is that their their current offensive which is not very not very strong strategically but it is pressuring in all places that that will run out of steam they will have used up a lot of equipment they'll have had a lot of men killed and injured and they will get exhausted um Putin demanded that they press all the way along the front and you can only do that for so long before the troops get exhausted and if they don't achieve objectives and give themselves a chance to rest if they themselves come under pressure which may now be the case then they literally lose combat Effectiveness and that may well happen and the Russians will um are already trying to pretend that this Aid package is very dangerous it increases the the danger of a nuclear exchange and they again they use this magic word nuclear all the time every time something goes wrong for them they threaten nuclear war and the the real nuclear threat is no greater now than it was before this war started but the Russians always use the phrase because they try and frighten everybody with it and there's some evidence that they've that they have succeeded in frightening some people with it um and that's what they're doing now and so whenever they start to threaten nuclear uh Armageddon in Europe you know that they're having a bad day and that's what they've been doing since Saturday it's very interesting to um work out why Trump has changed his view a little bit on Ukraine and why he gave Mike Johnson the leeway to change his view um I don't know what the answer is but I suspect it was that Trump was looking the buildup of commentary about it because I mean he says that he can stop the war if he becomes president he'll stop the war in 24 hours and the reason he can do that is that he'd cut off all Aid and Ukraine would have to surrender I mean every war will stop within 24 hours if one side surrenders and that was his that was his solution to the war and I think in a way going into the presidential election I think he his either he or his people around him perceived that that was not going to play very well when it was subject to real scrutiny on the campaign Trail you know his supporters will believe it because they believe anything he says but the the middle ground people will actually be a bit wary of the idea that this man will stop a war by telling the side that's been um victimized the side that's been attacked simply to give up and surrender um and I think when Trump thought about it I think he realized that he needed greater Nuance in his stance and the Nuance he provided was enough to put this Aid package you know within the Realms of the possible and it goes with a few caveat there's some face saving caveats in it which were not in the original package so that um uh there's some control over the way the money is spent in Ukraine though most of it is spent in America uh there's there's some discretion for the president to pull the whole thing back if he didn't think it was being spent properly I'm sure that's not unreasonable there were some um issues in it regarding um the supply of ateka missiles the attack ground attack missiles that gives the presence some discretion but but on the other side of it it was also accompanied by a bill to seize up to8 billion dollar worth of assets that are presently Frozen and give them to Ukraine and that goes above and beyond what anybody expected because that's actually quite a big step and quite a controversial step and I was genuinely surprised to see a rep Republican measure suggesting that but there you are they've done it and so that's a that's a bonus for Ukraine although it may create some legal complications down the line you know know freezing assets is are one thing but freezing them and then seizing them is another legally complicated and it sends out a bad message to investors for the next uh number of years but we'll see how that works out the Europeans are are stepping up their support in lots of different ways the EU had a 50 billion Euro package which they thought would help to to compensate for the lack of an American package and then that 50 billion package was was accepted but has been put into installments so it won't have the same effect but it will be useful but on the other hand a lot of European countries individually now given that they if they can't use the EU framework in the way they that they had hoped they're doing things individually so the estonians have scoured the world looking for artillery shells and have come up with about 1.2 million shells that they can buy uh the Czech Republic has done the same they've come up with about 1.3 million artillery shells that they think they can buy and so there's over 200 sorry 2 million artillery shells available that would fit uh Ukrainian systems which will cost about three billion euros to buy so if the Europeans can commit that money they can pull these shells in now that won't happen immediately because it's not they're not sitting in Poland already they've got to be brought from other countries and checked and all the rest of it that will take time but the Europeans both individually and collectively in the EU are now beginning to really really get behind Ukraine and the the American decision on usaid on Saturday in a sense will Galvanize that I think um it will actually create the situation whereby the Europeans now have got to get behind the American act it challenges them to do the same and they need to be seen to do the same because I think the message has got through to European leaders most of them if not to all of their publics that this is serious this is not a this is not a war of choice I mean Putin is making war in Europe and threatening everybody and unless he is seen to fail we will all be a great deal poorer and less sensitive and I think that message is now is now clear I mean different European countries have different views of what they should do about it but very few European leaders and European public now think we shouldn't do anything about it we should leave it most Europeans now now understand that this is our problem and we've got to take it on and I think that's very different to the situation of a year ago now richy seem like actually in Poland today and it will announce A500 million pound package of military funding and equipment for Ukraine the Prime Minister will also meet with his polish counterpart Donald Tusk to discuss deepening UK Poland relations and to hold talks with the NATO Secretary General Yen stoltenberg we'll be hearing from from our political editor Kate mccan who's traveling with the Prime Minister just after 8 but first let's speak to Jerome star who's defense editor at the sun good morning to you morning as um so how does this kind of where does this stand 500 million pound package of military funding and equipment for Ukraine where does this stand in in in what's been announced before well it brings the government saying it brings the UK aid for this financial year to three billion there've been three uh consecutive annual packages of aid from the UK which has placed uh Britain around third in the rankings in terms of bilateral Aid to Ukraine after America which is in terms of military aid out in front but Germany uh has donated about 18 billion and this would bring uh the UK's total contribution since the start of the fullscale invasion to somewhere uh north of about 9.5 billion if my math is correct never my strong suit uh but so it is it is significant um and of course comes as Ukraine has ramped up its appeals for donations and for specifically for military assistance I mean it's been a constant refrain from ke since the start of the war but it's become particularly acute in recent months and that's really down to the deadlock we saw in Washington over a massive 61 billion Aid package that was held up in Congress because of opposition from uh Republicans that today is expected to pass so after five months of wrangly in America that $61 billion Aid package it's been approved by the House of Representatives it's due to get rubber stamp approval signed off by the Senate and that will mean that potentially American um weapons will start arriving in Ukraine within days now obviously anything the United Kingdom can donate will complement that but I think at the moment the real game Cher is what's been happening in America of course um in terms then of of what riak is announcing today as I said it's 500 million pounds of military funding and equipment is there anything new within that or is it what we have already supplied my understanding is it's more of what the UK has already supplied I mean the UK's Focus well the UK's uh the weapons that the UK has donated are being incredibly wide I you talked earlier or rather in the News Bulletin about the 4 million rounds of ammunition I mean most crucially what Ukraine needs uh is Heavy Artillery ammunition uh that's quite difficult to get a hold of uh it's in short supply and high demand uh clearly I suspect given the numbers uh the four million rounds that's likely to include Small Arms ammunition as well I mean bullets to keep assault rifles firing but the UK also talked about uh drones made a real focus on its support for Ukraine's uh autonomous weapons we've provided the Storm Shadow missiles before which have played a crucial role in some of Ukraine's most spectacular strikes not least against uh Russian naval assets ships submarines and they need a Navy headquarters in Sebastapol but the UK is also focused specifically on Maritime autonomous vehicles and supporting the campaign in the Black Sea now that is where Ukraine does appear to have had some of its most spectacular successes whilst the fighting on the front lines along the land conflict if you like uh has been pretty slow deadly expensive for both sides both in terms of men and munition and not a lot of land changing hands for huge amounts of lives and material the fight that's been happening in the Black Sea has been very different and that's where you have seen uh spectacularly successful attacks both on ships at Sea ships in Port there was a submarine in dry do the first time a Russian submarine had been destroyed since the end of World War II and also just within the last few days Ukraine managed to hit an air defense battery a Russian air defense battery uh in Crimea and by taking that out we would expect to see other high value assets have been left vulnerable and so worth waiting to see what happens there I mean elsewhere what Ukraine has been doing with success where it's been scoring goals if you like has been its long range strikes deep into Russian territory and this is something which has caused some anxiety in America because some of these strikes have been aimed at oil refineries and at Russia's energy infrastructure and the US concerned that that would push up prices on the global market fuel inflation uh and make life more difficult in terms of the cost of living for Americans uh but nonetheless that has been something that the Ukraine has been uh determined to pursue and something where Ukraine has been having success just very briefly um because you know some people have taken their eye off the situation in in Ukraine and you you've talked about a few um small victories for Ukraine but would you say that over the last year that anything has shifted or or has it remained the same no I think over the last year the momentum uh Ukraine's momentum has ground slowly to a halt certainly in the land domain and Russia where there have been advances on the battlefield they have been Russia so it was about a year ago it was it last May that we saw Russia finally capturing bakut the city that had been the focus of its Fury for many many many months uh and then earlier this year uh in February we saw Russia take AV divka a similar conflict or l a similar assault which saw many many lives lost in order to advance into what was effectively the shell of a devastated town but nonetheless both of these symbolic victories for Russia uh the only real movement on the battlefield over the last year has been that I mean Ukraine did have some Success With It Summer counter offensive in sort of late summer last year they managed to advance into a place called oriv in the South Central zapia District but by and large over the last 12 months the movement on the on the battlefield in the land domain uh hasn't been very fast or very far especially if you think back to the beginning of the conflict uh when there were this huge assaults counter assaults by Ukraine in harv in the Northeast and Hesson in the South where Russian forces were swept back you know scores of miles at a time and also we saw of course we can't forget the Russian retreat from their initial assault on keev but those Ukrainian victories do seem you know they feel further and further away in the past okay uh Jerome thank you for that that's Jerome starky defense editor at the sun is in Poland now where he's Shoring up the UK's commit to Ukraine in its war with Russia promising another 500 million pounds worth of funding two years on from Russia's Invasion it looks like Ukraine is on the back foot the Prime Minister says he's giving the money ahead of what could be a difficult summer for the ukrainians um William do we need to whisper this but the chances of this war coming to an end with a Russian either stalemate or Victory is that closer than ever are you worried that Ukraine are actually going to lose this war or at least going to be compelled to sue for peace well I was worried until Saturday and what happened on Saturday was very very important in world affairs that the US House of Representatives passed the $61 billion Aid bill for Ukraine and then and it's not just the money of course that matters it's what that buys because uh that covers a lot of technology and weapons that only the United States possesses um so that will make a a very quickly um make a big difference a lot of that is ready to to ship out um in the coming days so I think Ukraine now will get a new surge of support that does not mean the war is over but it means it's not easy for the Russians in that situation uh to win Russia can probably keep going at this rate the the experts say the think tanks say on defense a couple of years uh like this so sadly the Outlook is still for a long War but it's not easy for either side to just knock out the other certainly if Ukraine receives this sort of support and the support that's being announced today by the UK is also really good because it's actually very important bits of military kit like more Storm Shadow missiles um and some boat boats and Marine um Maritime artillery this sort of stuff really counts K do you think there's a danger that people care less and less in this country in America as well people say we've got all sorts of problems you know lots of talk about we need to spend two and a half% of money on defense lots of people saying we need to spend more and more in supporting Ukraine because it's our war it's our war in Europe and we need to fight it to stop Russia doing anything else do you think that mentality will continue for year after year after year or at some point point do you think there will be a ground swell as there already is in the Republican party in America where they say you know what this is not our fight this is not a good use of our money I think we're in a difficult bit of phasing right now in the sense that you know we're going to have a general election in the United Kingdom this year in in general elections make us selfish they make us focus on our own living standards our own circumstances our own experiences of of the NHS and the media encourages us to think about that and to reflect on what we'll do with that information when it comes to The Ballot Box that means what's happening in Ukraine isn't at the Forefront of our minds or indeed at the Forefront of our political debate but I I don't fear that I'm not concerned by that because there is such political consensus in the UK across Europe and now thankfully in America about why we need to defeat Putin's attempt to take over in Ukraine I think that's pretty Resolute now listening to William talk about the reality that this could be running for another two years I think we've all got it within ourselves to support this for another two years the question is that you know are the public prepared to do this indefinitely and some of that is about political education right that's about us all understanding that we live in an increasingly insecure world and defense spending is going to have to go up to respond to that we need our politicians to lead us in that debate not expect us just to fall in line yeah and two years is one thing five years is another 10 years is another and that's a question that only time will talk son is in Poland today he's announcing a record amount of military aid to Ukraine he's going to pledge an extra 500 million for Ukraine before he flies to Germany to discuss defense issues with the German Chancellor Olaf Schulz joining me now is Jamie Shay he's the former NATO Deputy assistant Secretary General welcome to the show Jamie thank you good afternoon good to be back with you yes you're a very well-known name you were ubiquitous a few years ago when you were uh speaking for NATO so it's good to speak to you I mean uh the 500 million pounds I've described it as a record amount of military a to Curr I mean Britain has no uh sha shame in terms of the amount of money it has given to Ukraine but obviously it's a drop in the ocean compared to the $60 billion dollar that the Americans have just pledged well yes you're right and the EU of course also voted 50 billion euros just a couple of weeks back but the UK matters uh number one the UK was one of the first to get into the game under the uh Prime ministership of Boris Johnson of course in assisting Ukraine the first to hand over tanks and the first to hand over Cruise missil so it's really played a role punching above its weight particularly in terms of support for Kev uh the second thing is is that this package contains the sort of things that ukrainians really do need desperately 1,600 uh uh missiles and air defense systems four million rounds of ammunition these may not be sort of jet aircraft or tanks but given the situation on the battlefield at the moment the the these air defense systems this ammunition if it can be supplied quickly is really going to be a shot in the arm for the ukrainians so don't ride off the UK uh it plays a very important role because it tends to lead where others follow and it's a good point Jamie isn't it actually that actually what the prime minister is announcing the the money is sort of uh there as as the sort of headline but actually he's announcing the transfer of real weapons in real time there's a big difference between doing that and perhaps what the Americans have said which is here's the money but how quickly is American material likely to get to Ukraine well it's true that in the past the suppliers from the United states have often not been Speedy uh there's always of course the bureaucracy of getting export licenses and signing off on these type of things but the other thing is often the Pentagon has had a bit of a debate about whether it should Supply Ukraine immediately from existing stocks or or whether it should go to defense industry and say look you know we need you to manufacture uh 100 Abrahams tanks for Ukraine which could take months or E even years but the the the Pentagon has been waiting a long time obviously as you well know for congress finally to get act together and to pass this 61 billion package so they they've had time to at least identify the equipment and the stocks so that they're ready to go uh as soon as the Senate hopefully today follows the House of Representatives and approves this uh package uh it would have been very negligent of them not to do this homework and be ready to go the the second piece of good news for the ukrainians is it seems that the United States is ready immediately to supply the so-called attack's longrange artillery system uh which the ukrainians have been asking for for a long time it has a range of about 160 kilometers which means that it's ideal for the ukrainians to strike at the Russian rear echelons to prevent the massing for a major spring offensive which of course is what everybody has predicted at the moment so so yes there have been some bottlenecks in the past but of course the United States is very mindful of the rather difficult I won't say desperate but difficult situation that the Ukrainian Army is now in having run out of a lot of ammunition and missiles and air defense so I assume that they've made their preparations to get these supplies flowing as quickly as possible brilliant well Jamie Shay thank you let's turn now to get the view of Lord Richard Danner crossbench pier and former head of the British army to really try and understand what this means in practice a very good afternoon uh from us hello good afternoon to you uh right could you talk us through this in terms that we are really going to understand about what a 2.5% of GDP by 2030 Comm commment actually looks like well the first thing is that it's um good news that um we've got a hardened promise from the current prime minister of raising our defense spending from about 2.2% to 2.5% by the end of the decade now that's actually still quite a long way away that's five or six years away um but um listening carefully to what he was saying uh it does seem that there are significant ific amounts of of new money uh additional money um it's difficult to actually quantify it but we're talking about between 10 and 20 billion pounds a year extra every year uh between now and and 2030 um and that is good news from the defense budget's point of view um whether 2.5% by 2030 is enough I'm afraid Still Remains as an open question and there are a number of us of which I'm one who have been arguing that actually getting to 3% would um be a more appropriate figure given the uncertainty in the world at the present moment and particularly given the continued aggression by Russia into Ukraine but um to give current prime minister his his is is due uh he has pledged more money year on year while it's needed for Ukraine that's important uh he's pledged to put our uh industry our defense industry on a war footing now the important thing about that is that hither two um particularly ammunition manufacturers have been hesitant to gear up their production lines because they haven't been confident that there would be sufficient funds coming forth from the government well the Prime Minister today has pledged that that will be the case so they can up their production of ammunition and then the third priority he pointed to as far as I can recall uh is innovation and um improving the quality of the weapons available across the three armed services so I think it's fair to say these are considerable steps in the right direction but is he going far enough is he going fast enough I'm afraid that's where the debate will be in the future yeah uh so if we can just quantify this it would be an extra 70 billion pounds on core defense spending over six years what does that actually buy I mean is it possible to give examples of what that means well um you can look right across the board at various projects um let's take the carrier strike program uh we know that we currently have not bought the number of F35 aircraft that we have pledged and always said previously that we wanted to buy to fly off our aircraft carriers to make them credible so as as soon as additional money is available then we can put an additional order in for F35 aircraft um by the same token there are something 20 new ships for the Royal Navy uh on the drawing board at the present moment um again some of these are just on the drawing board and not funded but so if there are additional funds coming forward it'll mean that some of that ship building can be accelerated now all these things of course are good for British jobs then thirdly and this of course is where I'm parochially rather more interested in the Army has got considerable equipment spending plans particularly for air defense and for field artillery um the sort of artillery that the ukrainians have been using a lot of uh in in in Ukraine in the last couple of years now only 20% of the programs that the Army wants to see funded are currently out to contract so 80% of army uplift contracts need to be funded now having talked in the last little while to want to contacts the ministry of Defense there is a concern that as ever in the ministry of Defense trying to find enough money to balance the books in the next 12 months is a big problem for them so they're going to look to see some of this early some of this money coming forward early to to balance the books for the coming year and the other thing to say which is not welcome news is there is a black hole in particular the defense equipment budget of somewhere between 15 and 20 billion pounds so if this extra money is coming forward um there's going to be a negative use of some of that and that is to fill in the black hole between aspiration and what is funded right so that's that's the result isn't it of the Cross party Public Accounts committee so that said in March that the gap between the mod budget and the cost of military capabilities might be 29 billion pounds so that is quite that's paying off the overdraft isn't it before you can actually make any new purchases yeah and before well before anybody gets sort of party political about it and I'm a crossbencher so I'm not going to um it's worth remembering that in 2010 when David Cameron's government came in there was around a 40 billion um black hole in the defense budget so this isn't new this is over aspiration over ambition in the ministry of Defense not matching the amount of funding that's available um it's a perennial problem and it does need to be gripped Lord danet thank you very much indeed for your time we appreciate that this afternoon that is Lord Richard danet crossbench pi as he said former head of the British army well then we you soon an act play to lift UK defense spending to 2 and a half% of national earnings GDP by the end of the decade arguing the increase is necessary because the world is in its most dangerous State since the end of the Cold War the PM made the announcement at a joint press conference in wara with Yen Stenberg the Secretary General of NATO in a world that's the most dangerous it's been since the end of the Cold War we cannot and must not be complacent as Churchill said in 1934 to urge the preparation of Defense is not to insert the imminence of War on the contrary if war was imminent preparations for defense would be too late I believe we must do more to defend our country our interests and our values so today I'm announcing the biggest strengthening of Our National Defense for a generation we will increase defense spending to a new Baseline of 2 and a half% of GDP by 2030 that starts today and Rises steadily in each and every year over the next 6 years we'll invest an additional 75 billion in our defense and it will be fully funded with no increase in borrowing or debt well Wishy Sun act set out what the package would include now we will have three immediate priorities for this new investment first we will put the UK's own defense industry on a war fiting one of the central lessons of the war in Ukraine is that we need deeper stock Pils of mun I and for industry to be able to replenish them more quickly so today we're giving 10 10 billion p in munition support to give industry long-term funding certainty backed by long-term contracts so that they can produce more be ready to Surge capacity and to move to always on production when required from surface to missiles made in Bolton to anti-tank weapons in Belfast we will replenish our stock bars all while supporting British jobs right across the union Rishi sunak also announced a further 500 million pound to support Ukraine the Secretary General of NATO Yan Stenberg prays what he call Britain's cast iron commitment to supporting Ukraine and once again the UK is leading by example just as you did in 2014 after the illegal annexation of CA when you were one of the first allies to provide training and Military Support to Ukraine and after the full scale invasion in 2022 you stepped up significantly training thousands of Ukrainian soldiers and providing billions of pounds of military assistance and today your announcement of additional support including more ammunition air defense and deep Precision strike abilities shows once again the British people's commitment to Ukraine I welcome your cost iron commitment to continue these levels of support Ukraine for as long as needed this Jan stoltenberg the uh the naso Secretary General now let's welcome to the show first of all James heape the conservative MP and a former Armed Forces Minister welcome to you James good evening John how are you I'm well thank you for joining us so this extra two and a half uh percent by 2030 is that a significant announcement and is it enough James yes I mean it's to both of you your questions yes it's a significant announcement um just I me put it in perspective um if the Prime Minister had done something different if he had said I've got 75 billion pounds worth of announcement uh and I'm going to do 40 billion on hospitals 20 billion on schools 15 billion on roads or the whole 75 billion on tax cuts that would be incredible news and and instead he's chosen to put 75 billion on defense that's the first time in my lifetime that a prime minister would have chosen that priority in an election year I think it's the right decision it reflects the geopolitical uh reality of the world around us and that the first priority of government is the defense and security of the realm but you know the the sort of scale of it is seismic now you people will argue that it should be more it should come faster I I think that that is churlish on a daylight today when the scale of the announc is what it is and what this money will do is mean that our Armed Forces as they currently are will be lethal more sustainable more resilient and that that therefore strengthens our conventional deterrence and ultimately makes it less likely that our adversaries will try and take us on right now some of our our listeners James who pay attention to defense issues might remember Boris Johnson the former prime minister speaking at the NATO Summit in Madrid in June 2022 just have a listen back we need to invest for the long term in vital capabilities like future combat air while simultaneously adapting to a more dangerous and more competitive world and the logical conclusion of the Investments on which uh we propose to Embark uh of these decisions is that we'll reach 2.5% of GDP on defense by the end of the decade so that's the the former prime minister and uh that was Boris Johnson and setting out the priorities on the urgency and the need for this for this SP why some may wonder why has it taken Richie sunak two years to to restate that policy now well I think the Prime Minister would say that he inherited a financial situation in which he didn't feel he was able to make that commitment and In fairness when I was um you seeing who I might support in the the the the the two leadership elections that have happened since uh Boris Johnson made that speech in Madrid um rishy was very clear that he did not feel able to match the 2.5 commitment that Boris and Liz had both previously made right um and and I you know huge credit to him that he has a both achieved the fiscal conditions he feels he needs to achieve but B that he as a consequence of you know he's in the hot seat he's in these G7 G20 Summits all the time think about the meetings he's had over the last couple of weeks reflecting on the threat um to uh from Iran um and he's he's come to the obvious conclusion but at enormous you but with an enormous political choice to go back to that point I made upfront John about all the things he could have spent 75 billion pounds on in a Manifesto as a promise for the next Parliament yes and instead it's gone on defense and security I think he he deserves a lot of credit yeah well I don't doubt the validity of the of the of the of the the spending commitment or the need for it we discuss it on this program almost every every day but I guess an election coming that will won't be insignificant in the calculation will it no no but but look I mean all political strategists over the last sort of six seven general elections would have told you that the only thing that really matters is an auction over a commitment to the NHS um or maybe the sort of you know pension spending whatever else there are there are more immediately politically advanced agous things that you could announce that sort of money to spend on yes um now I think I think that a that reflects the Prime Minister being in the hot seat and reacting to the world around him and the threat that he can see to the UK interest and the fact that as he set out in his speech you know you need to give industry the Quee to start scaling you can't just be switched on like that so this is the right time to make the commitment um but I also think that the British public are increasingly aware of the challenge to our national security and so I think that the sort of political importance of defense is increasing yeah no I I've been you know accepting if You' like for the purpose of our conversation the importance of this spending and the importance of National Defense at a really difficult at a difficult time but also you know the the fiscal questions do need to be addressed I mean while the Prime Minister makes this makes this pledge you're also or the Prime Minister and his senior ministers are also promising to abolish National Insurance that's a cost of 46 billion pounds and if there's going to be a pre-election b budget there'll be more tax giveaways there too I mean how could it be possible to promise all of those things well I'm going to uh indulge in the luxury of no longer being the government spokesperson and not it's a legitimate question James no John I'm I'm I'm not but I'm simply don't know the answer and I'd be speculating uh if I did my understanding from the conversation I had with the Prime Minister and the defense secretary uh earlier today is that uh he has taken the decision to uh spend uh the proceeds of quite a big cross White Hall efficiency Drive uh on this um and that that has consequences for other parties who might have had their eye on that money for other things particularly if those parties go on to match this commitment on defense which is why which is why I do wonder if this is also as other challenges are being other policy announcements in the last recent days have been challenges to the to the labor party now the clip we heard there there's a thing there there is a thing there John of course there is um but I I would prefer to not make the partisan point I would actually make it I i' I'd turn the issue around if K starma and his team were to yes it would cost them a number of other policies because they would have to spend that money on this instead but the message it sends to Putin of complete political consensus within the UK on defense spending is enormously powerful and in itself contributes to the deterrent effect of of increased defense capabilities so I I I don't I'll I'll let other colleagues try and make more nakedly political points I actually hope that labor will see the Strategic Advantage not politically but for the UK internationally in matching the commitment um because I think that sends a real message to allies and adversaries alike right what a spending commitment can have Merit in its own rights and be a political stroke those two things are not are not mutually exclusive I mean the bris Johnson promise we heard there back in 2022 that was just a few weeks before he was evicted from number 10 Downing Street would it be too cynical to say that this is also a self-defense policy for Rishi sunak himself as well as for Britain and the West well I I would choose to view it more charitably uh you can apply whatever analysis you want I I think that he's seen the situation that's around us I think he's seen the real danger uh of the NATO Summit in Washington in July followed the week after by the Republican uh convention and the need for European allies to turn up in Washington with a new tune to dance to um and I think what you saw it was it was significant that Yen stoltenberg was on the podium with Rishi in Poland today yeah because I think a bit like that um Summit AT Celtic Manor in 2010 where Cameron and Obama um uh achieve the the the 2% Baseline I think that there's a big opportunity for sunak um Biden stoltenberg to try to make 2.5 the new Baseline come the Washington Summit and that would confound an awful lot of the criticism of European NATO allies um that you're likely to hear from the Republican convention otherwise all right good to get your thoughts James thank you James he the former Defense Republican Senator Ron Johnson who joins us now um hello to you um Senator can we ask whether you'll vote this bill through I'll be voting no and it's not that I don't have a great deal of Sympathy for the freedom loving people of Ukraine who've been invaded by a war criminal Vladimir Putin or the people of Israel who endured a a horrible Slaughter brutal Slaughter in the hands of Hamas or the people of Taiwan who are being threatened by China uh the problem is this is money we don't have have uh this isn't exactly coming from us taxpayers right now this is a borrowed money this is plundering our children's future and we're not recognizing the reality particular particularly in Ukraine where Vladimir Putin will not lose this war and the other reality is there's very little push from my constituents to provide funding to help other countries secure their borders when we haven't first secured ours and that was our first bottom line is we were looking to Force President Biden to use the authority has to secure our own border which is a clear and presentent danger to America before we go ahead and spend hundred billion dollars of of money that we don't have that further mortgages our children future so again there's there's a host of reasons but in the end I'm not going to support this package now many people might accuse you of being America First on that point of view if you use a catchphrase uh that's been long associated with the Republican Party particularly under Donald Trump there is a border security bill um uh at the moment though it was uh voted down at the weekend but there is a border security Bill there proposed ready to deal with issues on a domestic front as you say with the problems concerning your own border security no it it was an awful bill again president Trump had the authority in law to secure the Border he did so President Biden used that exact same Authority and he opened up the Border uh the bill that was negotiated was only negotiated to provide democrats for political cover it cified you know four to 5,000 immigrants per day come to this country illegally it would have actually weakened a president that was serious about securing a border it would have weakened that President's Authority so it was an awful bill it fell on its own awfulness and again I know Democrats are using as political cover but uh that was not the solution the solution was some kind of enforcement mechanism to force President Biden to use the authority he has secure the border and might not add I think most Nations should consider their own citizens and their own Nation first in considering any policy that's that's the role of a Nation there's nothing wrong with that uh if America is strong the world is a more safe and prosperous Place unfortunately under President Biden just about every action he has taken the open borders massive deficit spending waren fossil fuel the embarrassing and dangerous surrender in Afghanistan has weakened America emboldened the the the West adversaries people like like Putin people like President XI the Ayatollah Kim Jong-un uh so we have to first start how do we strengthen America and another hundred billion dollars in death suspending does not strengthen America I think many people might say and look um this bill um will go through uh it does have Republican backing largely not from yourself obviously but many will say well it's a pretty embarrassing look that you're continuing uh to go against your party and to not Advocate the smooth sailing through of this bill it is it is a bad look to go out on a limb like this many of your fellow sen uh senators and colleagues share your concerns uh but they can see where this is going and to refuse Aid to Ukraine and indeed the other countries involved is a bad look so where is this going I you know I hear Senator Schumer coming out of the White House saying this is simple if Ukraine gets $60 billion they win if they don't they lose how are they going to win Russia has 4 four times the population the average age of Ukrainian soldiers is 43 years Russia can produce four and a half times the number of 155 millimeter shells which is being used in this bloody stalemate my concern because I am highly concerned about the people of Ukraine I don't want to use the people of Ukraine as Canon fodder in a proxy war between the west and Russia and I think that's exactly what this war has devolved into a proxy war it does sound like I don't want to see more ukrainians die I don't want to see Russian conscripts die I don't want to see more of Ukraine destroy because it'll have to be rebuilt so again where is this going it's going nowhere the $60 billion will will go into a hole and it will you know in the end when that's all gone there will be no change there will be no change we'll still be in this bloody stalemate so why spend another $60 billion it sounds like you're handing this war to Russia that that you're saying you know that because we're at a stalemate the only solution is to not further this war anymore which would mean considering large parts of Ukraine Vladimir Putin where else do you wanted to go where is the strategy to end this war tell me how Vladimir Putin loses this war without literally risking a nuclear exchange it's just not possible why why didn't or why did the West pretty well blow up the peace negotiations in Istanbul uh short weeks after this War Began what was all that about so there there are many questions I I I realize you know our military industrial complex I realize the narrative in the media is all about you know we've got to be steadfast but you know the only guarantee we gave Ukraine and I take these things seriously is if they were invaded we would take that Invasion to the security Council that's it we have far exceeded our commitment to Ukraine far exceeded it and again I'm highly concerned about Ukrainian people so I don't want to see more of them die and I don't want I don't want to see more of Ukraine destroyed but they desperately want to situation others aren't yeah I mean the Ukrainian people will say that they don't want to concede any of their land that if you were to put a full stop on that war right now it would involve Russia taking um additional territory it would involve Ukraine having to sign over land that they've called their own to Russia there is the other point as well actually that the $61 billion that the money allocated specifically for Ukraine in the aid package um will go a long way it is an incredible amount of money it will make a huge difference and many will argue the reason why the wars reached a stalemate at the moment is because that money hasn't been committed so no one knows where they stand Ukraine are having to ration all of their um uh weapons um and you know bullets Etc shells having to ration all of that because they've simply not known whether more money will arrive and another thing that's happened Senator Johnson is you committing that money has meant that today Rishi sunako prime minister has made a huge new commitment to to Ukraine and the war effort he's off to Germany tomorrow other Western leaders are set to do that as well by you passing this bill it puts confidence in the Western Alliance behind Ukraine and it makes other countries step up in their spending too and that escalates a much better chance for Ukraine it's not just about UK it's it's the us giving that confidence to other nations so it's just the West throwing more money at a bloody stalemate how do you break out that stalemate you know they had their counter offensive uh last summer unfortunately it failed uh I don't see success this summer either again unless we are willing to risk a nuclear exchange with Russia again Vladimir Putin won't lose this war it's existential to Vladimir Putin he has theer nuclear weapons if it really got got to that point I don't doubt that he would actually use them is that what we want to put push Russia to do I don't think this war ever should have occurred I don't I think we could have dissuaded Vladimir Putin from invading but we wouldn't do what we should have done basically declared that we will not offer NATO membership to Ukraine that was the red line now we have NATO Secretary General saying that absolutely Ukraine will become part of NATO that's not going to help end the war so again I see no strategy for ending this War I see no strategy for winning this war all I see is a strategy of spending money that we don't have mortgaging our children's future uh once that money's gone we'll be pretty much in the exact same position as we were prior to spending it this there's again there's no strategy for Success here I'll put my argument back to you that the reason why it's reached stalemate is because funding has dried up and that's happened over the last six to nine months I mean I just disagree with that premise okay and to be clear you fear that by way Europe is combined as as large as the United States if this is in Europe's backyard if they're that concerned about it they could step up the plate they could provide that funding if that was really if that's really the reason why this is a stalemate you know Europe could have prevent that as well but again they're going to sit back and wait for the Americans to come to the rescue and spend $60 billion uh that again will not turn the tide of this war so to be clear your concern Senator Johnson is that if more money is thrown at Ukraine 61 billion do from the US and several other billion dollars from other Western Nations that that will agitate Vladimir Putin to the point where you feel that a nuclear attack by Russia on Ukraine is inevitable I think that when all said and done and this money is spent will'll pretty much be in the exact same position uh we will continue to be fighting a proxy war using ukrainians as cannon fodder in that proxy war more ukrainians die more Russian conscripts die take no joy in that and more Ukraine gets destroyed that'll have to be rebuilt in the future so the only way this war ends is in a negotiate settlement so we should have some kind of strategy to prompt Putin to enter negotiations uh telling him up front that Ukraine will become part of NATO is not a way to bring Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table and again Vladimir Putin's an evil war criminal you know I Harbor no no fond feelings for the guy I mean he's an awful human being I'm not going to like that settlement but every day that goes by the settlement gets worse because more people die and more Ukraine gets destroyed that's the sad reality the offer reality situation and to not recognize that reality is just again just going to cost more people's lives and spend tens of billions more dollars that in the end will be wasted do you think this will change if Donald Trump secures a second term as president I think he certainly would be dedicated to trying to end the war which this President is not dedicated to doing well look thank you so much for speaking to us today hugely appreciated the Republican Senator Ron Johnson thank you have a good day the prime minister's pledged to increase UK spending on defense to 2.5% of GDP by 2030 was a companied by his announcement of a further 500 million pound of British Military Support for Ukraine including 400 Vehicles 1,600 Munitions and 4 million rounds of ammunition and it comes as the US Senate is expected to approve a $60 billion doll package of military aid for Ukraine which was approved by the House of Representatives at the weekend after months of delay will some Republicans oppose the deal earlier on times radio Republican Senator Ron Johnson said the US should secure its own borders first I'll be voting no and it's not that I don't have a great deal of Sympathy for the freedom loving people of Ukraine who've been invaded by a war criminal of Vladimir Putin or the people of Israel who endured a a horrible Slaughter brutal Slaughter in the hands of Hamas or the people of Taiwan who are being threatened by China the problem is this is money we don't have uh this isn't exactly coming from us taxpayers right now this is a borrowed money this is plundering our children's future and we're not recognizing the reality particularly in Ukraine where Vladimir Putin will not lose this war and the other reality is there's very little push for my constituents to provide funding to help other countries secure their borders when we haven't first secured ours and that was our first bottom line well how much difference will the latest package of us Aid make to Ukraine's efforts to prevent Russian forces gaining more of its territory Daniel freed is a former US assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs and a former US ambassador to Poland um good evening to you Daniel good evening thanks for having me well really good to have you with us um it looks as though the Senate uh will um approve this latest package of aid for for Ukraine um something that president zalinski has been saying his forces desperately need um the House of Representatives of course did vote it through finally at the weekend um how significant a move do you think this will be well giving no further assistance would have been a catastrophe for the ukrainians and all of our problems in Europe and the United States could be would be worse if Ukraine lost and that was the danger now the assistance gives the ukrainians a fighting chance so to speak for relative success much depends on how fast the the US can provide Ukraine with the arms and what kind of arms in particular are we the Americans going to give the ukrainians the longer range attack of missiles which would enable them to put more of uh Russian milary structure and bases inside Ukraine especially at at risk so it is possible that the ukrainians with the extra assistance from the US and Europe can can blunt Russian land offenses this fighting season and can degrade the Russian position generally by hitting them behind the lines if they do that the Russians may suffer casualties uh Putin's desire for a win this year here will be blunted frustrated and Things by the time of the NATO as early as the NATO Summit in Washington better for Ukraine so I'm not saying Ukraine will win with the assistance but they have a reasonable chance and the uh Biden Administration people I speak to are operating on on this we have to be forward leaning we and the Europeans help the ukrainians make the most of this new opportunity we're having a little bit of um difficulty with your line um we'll stick with it for a moment and see if it uh stabilizes um President Biden as I understand it has given assurances that the US will send supplies as quickly as possible but I mean in the past uh it has taken quite some time to actually get supplies from the point where they're agreed uh in um the US political system to actually getting them delivered and I mean Russian forces have been gaining Ukrainian territory haven't they you're right that ukrainians have been on the defensive they've been losing ground the administration a Administration people oh we seem to be um losing Daniel freed um we are just going to see if we can uh get a u better connection so that we can hear what Daniel is saying um because uh the US Senate is now uh expected uh perhaps even later tonight to approve that big package of Aid um there is money for Israel there is uh some money for Taiwan and there is that $60 billion doar of military support for Ukraine uh and I should say that we're also hearing um that the Prime Minister Rishi sunak uh who was in Poland earlier um is is going to be in Germany he's arrived there tonight and uh he's going to be talking about uh UK the UK and Germany opening a new chapter in defense Partnerships um we've got Daniel freed back um Daniel um the question is I mean how quickly can that Military Support get through because the president zalinski has been warning that Russia is gaining ground you're absolutely right the Administration has had time to prepare and it would be inexcusable if following the vote the weapons didn't move quickly but I am assured by people in the administration that they are prepared they are ready to move the weapons quickly which needs to happen the faster the better you're absolutely right and we've had um the British prime minister rishy sunac uh today announcing an increase in Britain's defense spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2030 he's also announced a further package of British Aid to Ukraine and it comes at a time when um as we were hearing from a defense expert earlier in the program it does look as though Europe is actually beginning to spend more to support Ukraine now and about time Europe's assumptions that peace peace with Russia could be taken for Grant gred and that the Americans would be there to clean up uh if that assumption was wrong have been shattered I think Germany has had two generations worth of assumptions about Russia gone the French uh French president macron has shifted from endlessly reaching out to Russia to recognizing the Russian threat and it turns out that the Polish and Baltic positions about Russia have been proven right uh it's about time that Europe that Europe stepped up this is absolutely essential regardless of who wins the US elections we need a stronger Europe we need a stronger Britain because our adversaries are in Earnest Putin is an aggressive dictator along shall we say 20th century lines I don't know that President she of China will follow the same path with respect to Taiwan but we have to be ready uh it would be nice to say that um the military balance of power is a consideration that belongs to the 20th century but it belongs to the 21st it's our issue right now and how much do you think that that increase in defense spending amongst uh European nations um particularly uh European NATO members is a recognition of the Russian threat and how much of it is is just frankly a concern concern that Donald Trump could return to the White House and that they can't rely on us um spending on NATO to to help to protect them I think it's the combination I think the Russian threat is now real to Europeans who dismissed it until uh until very recently I think that the shock of Donald Trump's pronouncements about NATO has made forced a lot of the Europeans to wake up and realize that military power is not is neither a luxury nor an anachronism it is needed that the European project and the Free World Order if I can put it that way are are not self- sustaining automatically we have to mean it we have to put our backs into it and an increase in military spending is important I think the polls have gone up to 4% of their GDP and they're going to go even higher I think the West European countries need to increase their spending as well uh if we're going to get through this and we can in very good shape if we put our backs to it yeah because uh as you say Poland is is getting up close to 4% um uh Britain uh now made that commitment to get to 2.5% by 2050 but many other NATO countries are still quite some way behind that aren't they well the trends are moving in the right direction uh the polls the Baltic countries are are there Germany needs to spend more I know they've got economic problems because they're their industry was based on cheap energy from Russia and that's no longer there uh the French need to put more into their military but the trends are moving in the right direction and this is not because of American um American lecturing it's because the threat from Putin appears real to Europeans and because worries about the United States have grown whatever happens in our elections and I I personally hope Biden wins we need a stronger Europe and a militarily strong UK as you say we are still some months off the US election election it's going to be a close fought thing given what Donald Trump has said uh about his commitment to Nato he made those comments um perhaps slightly flippantly saying well um any NATO member who if they're not spending enough on their own defense I don't see why um we should rush to help them which of course um would undermine one of the basic principles of the NATO alliance um a and given what he has said about Russia and Ukraine and the past um if president Trump did return to the White House what do you think his approach to the war in Ukraine would be that's a key question and I think it is possible that despite all his awful comments which are based on what I consider to be an awful set of strategic assumptions that recall the America first movement um of 1940 and 41 which was by the way indifferent to European security and British struggles against Hitler I think despite this there is a chance that Trump could shift his views uh he some of the people around him have hinted that Trump would be prepared to take credit for the increases in European military spending and then claim that he saved NATO I'm not saying Europeans have to like that but they might find in their interest if Trump is elected to accept it uh it is also interesting to me that last week just before the House of Representatives broke with the hard isolationist right and voted the assistance for Ukraine Trump in the middle of a tweet acknowledged that Ukraine's survival and strength his his word survival and strength was an American interest that was the first time I think he's ever said that I don't think he was saying that because he had had a shift in strategic orientation but because he saw the way the debate in Congress was going and if that's true that means that let's say political opportunism might Trump so to speak uh Donald Trump's strategic instincts now I don't know this to be true but it is it at least worth considering and I'm glad that the British prime minister and the Polish president have spent uh have met with Trump I think this sort of thing C can be useful and just finally of course we're talking about that uh increase in Britain's uh defense spending about the new package of aid from the United States um other European allies also um sending more money to Ukraine um but of course um Russia is absolutely pouring money into its Defense Forces I think it's 7.8% um it has um vast numbers of con conscripts and an economy very much geared up to ever increasing defense spending how great do you think are the risks at the moment that we could be reaching a turning point in the Ukraine War uh with Russia facing the real prospect that it that it could win I think without the American Aid Russia stood a very good chance of winning the war and that would have been a a catastrophe and it would have opened the way to yet more catastrophes I think now the the battle in Ukraine is open I think the ukrainians have a much greater chance of success and if reasonable best case scenario for Ukraine if the ukrainians managed to blunt Russian land offensives this summer and strike deeper into Russian and Russian held territory Putin's War may turn against him and in that case uh well Russian history over the past 150 years shows that when Russia starts aggressives aggressive Wars and loses political change can follow I would not assume that Putin's position is great if he's if he loses if Russia R does not succeed in its War Russia's position Putin's position could become difficult and the notion that Russia never loses a war or just because Putin is committed to this war means he automatically will win is ahistoric it doesn't matter how committed he is he might lose we have to think not just what Putin is going to do to us but what we're going to help the ukrainians do to him Daniel freed uh former US assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian affairs also a former US ambassador to Poland um really good to speak to you tonight um thank you so much for joining us thanks for having me

Channel: Times Radio

Views: 393,146

Keywords: ukraine, putin, ukraine war, vladimir putin, russia ukraine war, russia ukraine, us aid to ukraine, ukraine russia, putin ukraine, ukraine russia news, russia vs ukraine, ukraine aid, ukraine russia war, russia war ukraine, russia ukraine news, ukraine military aid, russia ukraine war news, war in ukraine, russia vs ukraine war update, russia ukraine conflict, ukraine vs russia, ukraine news, ukraine aid vote, ukraine aid bill, russian ukraine war

Id: CX93GB3bvFI

Length: 75min 54sec (4554 seconds)

Published: Sat Apr 27 2024