Valerii Zaluzhnyi, ex-Commander-in-Chief: "World war, it's already started"

During the Ukrainska Pravda’s annual UP100 awards ceremony, two Ukrainska Pravda journalists interviewed Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Ukraine’s former Commander-in-Chief and current Ambassador to the UK, on stage.

Their conversation was brief, but in the twenty minutes that it lasted, Zaluzhnyi managed to:

– announce the beginning of World War III; 

– explain why the Russian army is incapable of achieving a major breakthrough on the front;

– outline Russia’s new military strategy;

– suggest when the most recent phase in the technological arms race might come to an end… 

…and more.

This is the transcription of the conversation. You can listen to and watch the recording (in Ukrainian) here.

"The Russians are trying to starve us out"

Last year you said in an interview with The Economist that the situation on the front had reached a stalemate, when neither side can advance because both are equally technologically advanced. Now we’re seeing that the Russian army is able to advance. What’s your assessment of what’s happening on the front?

In a recent column, I discussed the totally normal and evolutionary process, when war fuels scientific and technological progress.

This eventually leads to the fact that the side that’s pursuing an offensive loses opportunities to undertake operational tasks.

What sort of tasks? Advancing 150–200 kilometres, which is what the Soviet rulebook dictates. When robot equipment started to materialise on the battlefield, they made  it impossible for troops to move around. Not knowing how to fight the robots brought about a stalemate. We couldn’t advance on the Russians and they also couldn’t advance on us.

This is still happening today. We see that the Russians are not able to do things like advance 150–200 kilometres in a week.

According to my theory, when this technological evolutionary leap comes to an end, and [either side] is able to build up a technological stockpile, opportunities for pushing through will appear again.

I estimate that this will happen around about 2027 or after. But there’s no guarantee it will happen in 2027, given the economic and demographic situation. And there’s no guarantee anyone will be interested in war at the kind of scale where one needs to capture enemy territory.

The tactic we’re most likely to see is the one our enemy is currently pursuing in Ukraine, where they starve us out, a textbook Russian tactic, the tactic of attrition, which first and foremost targets our economy and our morale.

We are seeing that the enemy is not having any major breakthroughs on the battlefield. But they’re gradually pushing us out of our positions, at the cost of grave losses.

They are attacking our economy and civilian infrastructure. In part, they achieve this by routing their missiles in such a way that our systems which intercept them also hit civilian targets in Ukraine. They’re also pursuing an information campaign aimed at frustrating our mobilisation efforts.

They’re also pursuing cognitive methods aimed at changing the way Ukrainians perceive the war. As a result, we have issues with frontline personnel, which eventually leads to us losing our positions.

But still, as of today, the Russians aren’t able to carry out major breakthroughs and widen their front. This would take a large amount of resources, which they also no longer have.

That’s why pursuing these multi-pronged tactics aimed at starving us out leads to the situation that we are currently seeing on the front, to the ongoing mobilisation issues, and to the way that people perceive this war.

It’s a multi-pronged approach that totally fits with the starving-out strategy. We can see that they’re pursuing almost all aspects of this approach.

You work in the UK now and get to talk to your Western colleagues. Is the collective West ready to confront this war of attrition?

When talking about individual countries’ ability to confront it, first and foremost we need to reassess the risks those countries think they face.

As of today, I see no enemy that would have enough resources to carry out large-scale military operations for a sustained period of time.

I even doubt that China is prepared to carry out large-scale operations at the moment.

If we’re talking about short-term military operations, then I think European countries are prepared.

But you’re asking whether they’re prepared to confront the attrition approach.

Let’s just do the maths. Look, Ukraine’s civilian energy infrastructure facilities were hit by 1,643 Shahed drones and around 200 missiles in October.

This number will only keep growing. This month so far [i.e., by 20 November – ed.] the total number of Shaheds and missiles that targeted Ukraine’s civilian facilities has already reached around 3,000. And the month isn’t over yet.

So the number of aerial attacks is growing and air defence is limited and extremely expensive. I think this alone shows that neither the UK nor European countries are prepared.

Despite the fact that they have enough F-16 jets, which have great air defence capabilities – meanwhile, an air defence system can be completely depleted in two or three months.

It’s difficult to say whether they’re taking alternative measures and using alternative systems and equipment to figure out how to intercept air targets. Most likely, no. Now here’s another question.

Let’s take the front. In September and October, our frontline troops were hit by around 4,500 glide bombs. I’d like to draw attention to the fact that a glide bomb’s load is about 500 kilograms; for comparison, an Iskander’s warhead weighs 480 kilograms.

Does any European country today, or even the UK, have at least 5,000 Patriot missiles to intercept these glide bombs? I doubt it. They’re very expensive, and so there can’t be a lot of them, because it’s difficult to manufacture them.

In this respect then – no, they’re not ready.

Military actions are important when it comes to the strategy of attrition, but they’re not decisive.

The Russians are working on several other important fronts. First and foremost, I’m talking about psyops and the cognitive domain, in which we can really feel the effect of their work.

Europe is quite comfortable at the moment and it doesn’t want to give up this comfort. That’s why I personally believe that even if they’re prepared for this war of attrition, their preparedness is very limited.

"The war is not only fuelled by drones and robots, but more broadly by technologies"

Mr Zaluzhnyi, last year you said that Ukraine needs a technological leap to be able to win this war. What can become a real game changer in the war today?

If you look closely at the history of wars and the art of warmaking, you won’t see anything particularly revolutionary. It’s a normal evolutionary process, which at a certain point causes scientific progress to produce new weapons.

Today’s new weapons, today’s discovery of gunpowder so to speak, aren’t just unmanned systems or robots, but, more broadly speaking, technologies. Because we’re talking about external communications, different intelligence methods, a different approach to space. And of course control systems are totally different, which brings about a different doctrine of troop deployment and, therefore, a different approach to training. Production, scientific cooperation, and personnel training have all seen enormous systemic progress, which can be captured by one word: technology.

As of today, I think that artificial intelligence will likely be the most important thing in this fight. It will fight for its place.

By the way, it’s a huge issue. What was fantasy in 90s sci-fi movies is now reality.

The truth is, machines are now fighting people. It’s no longer funny, it’s the reality. That’s why today we need psychologists to do their work and figure out which areas are the ones we can’t let AI interfere with. I mean domains where humans are really different, like feelings. Otherwise we will lose our humanity.

Psychologists are the ones who have to urgently set those boundaries. Lawyers have to work to establish measures to protect the human environment from scientific and technological progress.

According to my estimates, the current phase of AI development will come to an end. We will understand what new tanks and new missiles will look like, and then for the next hundred years they will change and evolve, becoming more accurate and cheaper.

In 2027, the current technological leap will come to an end, and the sides will be able to start accumulating new weapons – both offensive and defensive.

Those weapons will be totally ruthless, and the world will face a new threat: whether to undertake a large offensive with these new weapons, or to pursue the strategy of attrition where entire nations can be destroyed remotely, their economies devastated and their people intimidated into surrender. This is likely to be the strategy that will be pursued.

So can World War III be avoided in this scenario? And how?

You won’t like my response, but I know military science and military history and I know what indicators can be used to decide whether war is happening or not.

I believe that in 2024 we are now able to state that World War III has begun.

Why 2024? 

Because in 2024 Ukraine is no longer facing Russia alone. Ukraine is facing North Korean soldiers.

Let’s be honest, Iranian Shahed drones are openly being used to kill civilians in Ukraine.

Ukraine is being attacked by missiles manufactured in North Korea, and [Russia and North Korea] are open about that. 

Chinese shells are targeting Ukraine, Chinese components are being used in Russian missiles.

I’m sorry, but I think most military people would agree with me. Congratulations – the thing we have for so long been waiting for has already started.

But I also wanted to say, God’s giving us – not just Ukraine, but the entire world – a chance to draw the right conclusions now, while we can.

All this can be brought to an end here, in Ukraine. But for some reason our partners don’t want to acknowledge that.

Of course Ukraine has many enemies now. Ukraine will use technologies to survive, but it’s unclear whether it will be able to win this battle alone.

That’s why I think that world war, welcome, it’s already started.

Roman Kravets, Roman Romaniuk, Ukrainska Pravda

Translation: Olya Loza

Editing: Susan McDonald