![]() Date: 2025-02-07 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00026539 | |||||||||
GEOPOLITICS
CONFLICT WITH RUSSIA NATO ‘isn’t prepared’ for war with Russia | General Sir Richard Shirreff Original article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzzhQSEj-Nw Peter Burgess COMMENTARY Peter Burgess | |||||||||
NATO ‘isn’t prepared’ for war with Russia | General Sir Richard Shirreff
April 9th 2024
772K subscribers ... 116,211 Views ... 3.1K likes
Frontline | The War in Ukraine and Global Security
Times Radio
Description
NATO ‘isn’t prepared’ for war with Russia | General Sir Richard Shirreff
General Sir Richard Shirreff, former deputy supreme allied commander Europe joins Frontline to discuss the challenges facing NATO as it celebrates it's 75th anniversary, and updates from the war in Ukraine.
📻 Listen to Times Radio - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio
📍 Subscribe to our channel -
/ @listentotimesradio
🗞 Subscribe to The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/subscribe/...
📲 Get the free Times Radio app https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio/how-...
#nato #ukraine #russia #putin
🗞 Subscribe to The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/subscribe/...
📲 Get the free Times Radio app https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio/how-...
#nato #ukraine #russia #putin
Explore the podcast
240 episodes
Frontline | The War in Ukraine and Global Security
Times Radio
Podcasts
Transcript
0:00
let's be clear if you send NATO troops
0:02
to Ukraine in a combat role that means
0:06
war between NATO and Russia and the only
0:08
way you can do that is if you're ready
0:10
for war with Russia and there is no way
0:13
that NATO is ready for war with Russia
0:15
right now hello and welcome to Frontline
0:17
for times radio I'm James Hansen and
0:20
today we're talking about the latest on
0:22
the war in Ukraine and I'm delighted to
0:24
be joined by General Sir Richard Sheriff
0:26
NATO's former deputy Supreme Allied
0:28
Commander Europe and the auth of 2017
0:31
war with Russia an urgent warning from
0:33
senior military command General Sheriff
0:36
really appreciate your time thank you so
0:37
much for joining us thank you for having
0:38
me first of all I wonder if you can just
0:40
give us your assessment of the current
0:42
state of the war well I think the
0:45
optimism of the early spring of 2023 has
0:49
given way to quite a lot of pessimism
0:53
frankly um the Russians have got the
0:55
upper hand or are getting the upper hand
0:57
they've got the Strategic initiative in
0:59
the east
1:01
uh the Russians are able to build up
1:04
capability lost capability quicker than
1:07
the ukrainians they're replacing their
1:09
ammunition they've had over a million
1:11
artillery runs 155 or heavy artillery
1:14
runs from the North Koreans and the last
1:16
uh in in in the last since August last
1:19
year last nine months or so um and
1:22
Ukraine is suffering Ukraine is finding
1:24
it very difficult to hold against the
1:26
Russians we saw the failure of the much
1:29
vaunted Ukrainian counter offensive last
1:32
summer and late spring which in my view
1:35
was over there was a huge degree of
1:37
overoptimism largely put about by
1:39
Western media uh and the reality being
1:42
of course that without air power without
1:45
the capability that the West needs to
1:47
provide to Ukraine it was never going to
1:49
succeed uh but the Russians are moving
1:52
forward set against that there have been
1:54
some remarkable Ukrainian successes I
1:57
for I would highlight for example
1:59
Ukrainian neutralizing the Black Sea
2:01
Fleet in
2:02
sevastopol uh and to do that without a
2:04
Navy has been really clever by the
2:06
ukrainians they've used drones and
2:08
longrange precision missiles um so
2:11
they've been real successes there uh and
2:13
they are fight and of course Ukrainian
2:15
hits against uh Russian energy
2:17
infrastructure as well uh but I think we
2:19
have to be pretty gloomy about the
2:21
prospects for Ukraine this year and it
2:23
all comes down to the West not providing
2:28
the capabilities that Ukraine need needs
2:30
ammunition equipment longrange Precision
2:33
missiles of course the $60 million
2:35
package in the in Washington has been
2:38
stalled by the impact of trump on the uh
2:41
American runup to the American election
2:44
and unless Ukraine gets the kit the
2:46
ammunition and the long range missiles
2:48
that it needs it is going to continue to
2:51
go backwards and that is really bad news
2:54
well let's come on to that because in
2:55
the last 24 hours we've had the UK
2:57
foreign secretary Lord Cameron visiting
2:59
Donald Trump in in Florida and of course
3:01
it is Trump who is seen as being the big
3:03
kind of blockage in approving this uh
3:06
renewed US military aid to Ukraine
3:08
because it would appear that that his
3:10
supporters in Congress are taking their
3:12
lead from him do you think Donald Trump
3:14
is persuadable on the issue of
3:17
Ukraine um I don't know I don't know
3:19
that it is I just simply couldn't
3:20
comment on Trump I mean he's such a uh I
3:23
think words fail me when I try and Des
3:25
you know there is there is precious
3:27
little logic there is there is a real
3:29
Iran nationality there and I think we
3:32
have to be very very concerned but the
3:35
impact of trump on the election um yes
3:39
of course negative if Trump gets in the
3:42
potential impacts on NATO will be more
3:45
than negative but the very threat of a
3:47
trump election is forcing NATO now to
3:51
think very hard about Trump proofing
3:54
itself and so the action so the work
3:56
taken put together at the uh last week's
3:58
foreign ministers Summit in NATO for
4:01
example the putting together of a 100
4:03
billion Euro package of measures to
4:06
Ukraine without Trump without America is
4:10
really good news and the impact of trump
4:13
is forcing European members of NATO and
4:16
I'd also include Canada in that uh
4:19
Canada shouldn't be exempt to think
4:21
really hard about how they can Trump
4:23
proof that their support for Ukraine but
4:26
there's another Point here it's a
4:28
strategic point NATO has provided and
4:31
America has provided the equipment to
4:35
that the decision has been to provide
4:36
the equipment needed to avoid Ukrainian
4:39
defeat as we've seen that is not going
4:42
that's not still not good enough and
4:44
it's running out of sand and it's been
4:46
done with current capability there has
4:49
been no mobilization of the military
4:51
industrial base no long-term ammunition
4:54
contracts multi-year ammunition
4:56
contracts uh uh agreed with industry and
5:00
the consequence of that is that it's not
5:01
enough the only thing that is going to
5:04
work frankly is if NATO switches its
5:06
strategy not to avoid defeat but to
5:10
achieve victory over Russia because only
5:14
victory over Russia is going to provide
5:17
Ukraine and Europe with the security it
5:20
needs and Allied to that NATO will have
5:23
at the same time to put together a very
5:26
very powerful and strong deterrent
5:28
capability around Ukraine to include
5:31
Ukraine in NATO and that is something
5:34
that is going to be with us for
5:36
generations to come or at least a
5:38
generation but General why do you think
5:40
that hasn't happened so far I'm sure
5:41
there'll be many people watching or
5:43
listening our regular Frontline viewers
5:45
who will think well the West should have
5:47
been aiming to help Ukraine defeat
5:49
Russia from the get-go it comes down to
5:52
political Vision it comes down to
5:55
political leadership and it comes down
5:57
to the moral courage of our political
6:00
leading leader leaders and all three are
6:03
in deficit that is the answer to your
6:05
question and when we talk about Trump
6:07
proofing NATO specifically what does
6:10
that look like I mean in terms of the
6:11
minimum defense spend there's been a lot
6:13
of discussion in fact Donald Trump
6:14
himself when he was president flagged
6:16
the fact that in his VI too many NATO
6:18
countries and it probably was a Fair
6:19
Point weren't actually spending enough
6:23
on defend spending there's the 2% of GDP
6:25
minimum should that rise to a baseline
6:27
of two and a half to 3% what does Trump
6:30
proofing look like in practice well
6:32
you're right Trump was right as all
6:34
along as have been many American
6:36
presidents and secretaries of State who
6:38
have highlighted the imbalance between
6:40
the American contribution to Nato and
6:43
the European Canadian contribution to
6:45
Nato so what does Trump proofing NATO
6:47
mean look like well number one it means
6:49
Trump proofing the measures to support
6:51
Ukraine and to give Ukraine the means to
6:54
achieve Victory and that's going to have
6:56
to come from European and members of
6:58
NATO and Canada
7:00
number two it means spending the money
7:03
needed to uh give us give our military
7:07
capability The Edge that it needs now
7:09
clearly and it's an arbitrary figure 2%
7:12
it was interesting listening to James
7:13
heape on the news this morning talking
7:15
about two 2.5% now and a pledge of 3% uh
7:20
in the manifestos of both major parties
7:22
for the election my own view 3% is
7:26
probably the minimum but the key thing
7:27
is output it's not input it's what do
7:30
you get for your buck and that requires
7:32
a long hard look at defense uh in the UK
7:36
it needs a particularly means a long
7:39
hard look at how to rebuild the army so
7:42
that it is a first class toppr rated
7:45
army with the Manpower the equipment the
7:48
sustainability the logistics the
7:50
training uh that is needed to provide a
7:54
a real lead in NATO and it's it's about
7:57
delivering output not just thinking in
8:00
in sort of broad brush terms of our
8:02
percentages of GDP do we need to be more
8:04
creative as well I was speaking only
8:06
last week on front line to the economist
8:07
Timothy Ash who's been very strong on
8:09
the fact that he believes now is the
8:11
time in fact he thinks we should have
8:13
done this months ago to use frozen
8:15
Russian assets to fund military aid for
8:19
Ukraine should we be looking again at
8:21
that absolutely and I I think Timothy
8:23
Gart Nash is is is absolutely on the on
8:25
the money there and and he's it's one of
8:28
very many measures that need to be
8:29
looked at and it comes down to boldness
8:32
taking risk and and and and and sticking
8:34
heads above parid and and this comes
8:37
back to my points about political
8:38
leadership and moral courage which which
8:41
frankly have been lacking I would also
8:43
go further and say we in purely in the
8:45
military sense we've got to be creative
8:47
uh we should rule nothing out to do what
8:50
needs to be done including if necessary
8:53
uh looking at a sort of Scandinavian
8:55
style limited conscription to overcome
8:58
the the problems of Army manpa all these
9:01
issues have got to be looked at nothing
9:02
should be off the table what about what
9:04
what president macron intimated a few
9:06
weeks ago about actually sending troops
9:09
from NATO countries if not to the front
9:12
line and certainly to Ukraine do you
9:14
think that is feasible at all I think
9:16
it's absolutely feasible and I think
9:18
president macr is absolutely right to be
9:20
raising these issues um I would say two
9:24
things one is uh president macron's
9:26
message would carry much greater weight
9:28
if France was doing more in terms of
9:30
supporting uh Ukraine if you look at
9:32
what Germany is providing France is way
9:35
way behind the curve in terms of the
9:37
actual material and ammunition support I
9:40
think the second point I'd make is that
9:43
the the the sending of mil of NATO
9:45
military troops to Ukraine is is in a
9:48
sense The Last Resort the way to avoid
9:51
the last resort is to provide Ukraine
9:53
with the ammunition the long range
9:55
missiles and the other capabilities it
9:56
needs so that you don't have to send uh
9:59
NATO troops to Ukraine because let's be
10:01
clear if you send NATO troops to Ukraine
10:04
in a combat role that means war between
10:07
NATO and Russia and the only way you can
10:10
do that is if you're ready for war with
10:12
Russia and there is no way that NATO is
10:15
ready for war with Russia right now I
10:17
mean that is very interesting that that
10:19
you say that that that NATO is not ready
10:22
for war with Russia because there might
10:23
be some who would argue that actually
10:25
the nature of Vladimir Putin is that you
10:28
do have to take him head on that that
10:30
appeasement of him will not work and
10:32
that the West should have been more
10:34
prepared at this point for potentially
10:36
if needs be taking Putin on head on and
10:39
I'm one of those the only way to deal
10:41
with Russia is to show strength any sign
10:44
of weakness and Russia will probe and
10:47
continue to probe and take dis take
10:49
advantage of you that has always been
10:51
the Russian way and it continues to be
10:53
the Russian way so the only way the only
10:55
solution therefore is to show strength
10:58
is to build strength is to build up our
11:00
Armed Forces uh to provide a really cast
11:03
iron deterrent capability there can be
11:06
no appeasement appeasement of of of of
11:09
uh of Putin only leads to further grabs
11:12
on his part and the only way to offset
11:14
that is through demonstrating real
11:16
strength and just to go back to this
11:18
point about the US and the military aid
11:20
that is currently being held up in
11:22
Congress do you think in a way that that
11:24
it is too easy for European NATO leaders
11:26
to focus on the issues in America
11:28
whereas as you say general you know
11:30
there is issue with the amount of
11:31
military aid that has been supp supplied
11:33
by France there's discussion as to
11:35
whether the Germans should provide
11:36
tourist missiles for example should we
11:38
be asking ourselves deeper questions as
11:41
well in Europe absolutely we should be
11:42
we should absolutely be asking you
11:45
you're asking deeper questions I mean I
11:47
hear continuously if I listen to the
11:49
Daily Telegraph Ukraine the Ukraine the
11:52
latest podcast put out daily I'm not a
11:55
Daily Telegraph reader but I have to say
11:56
it's a very good provides a very good
11:58
update on what's going on you will hear
12:00
our prime minister Rishi
12:02
sunak talking about give Ukraine the
12:04
means to do the job and they'll achieve
12:06
it Slava Ukraine well it's all talk um
12:09
Britain did a really good job at the
12:11
start but Britain has run out of
12:14
ammunition run out of guns run out of
12:16
Tanks we can send and is unable to
12:19
provide the equipment and if two years
12:22
ago Britain the British government the
12:25
mod had let a series of multi-year
12:28
ammunition contracts
12:30
stretching out five if not 10 years had
12:33
invested in more equipment had invested
12:35
in ammunition had invested in defense it
12:37
would be able to do more so it's it's
12:40
the sort of you know it comes back to
12:43
this talk talk talk sounds great but
12:45
actually where's the beef and I suppose
12:47
that the problem that politicians always
12:49
have is the politics of it all and the
12:51
economics of it all and the sheer cost
12:53
of providing Ukraine with the military
12:55
support it needs I mean you know
12:57
discussing by how much defense spending
12:59
should increase should the UK make a
13:01
commitment for 2 and a half% should it
13:02
rise to 3% and should both major parties
13:05
in the UK put that in their Manifesto
13:07
for the upcoming general election the
13:09
difficulty is in the UK and around the
13:11
world there are enormous spending
13:12
pressures on all areas of government and
13:15
politically a synic might say there are
13:17
no votes in defense do you think there
13:19
is the political will to actually
13:20
communicate to the public the need to
13:23
have defense spending increases on the
13:26
level required of course there are
13:28
spending pressures but put it I'd put it
13:30
this way this war in Ukraine is not just
13:33
a war against Ukraine it's a war against
13:37
Ukraine it's a war against the west and
13:39
it's a war against Ukraine joining the
13:41
West this is a war if you ask any
13:43
Russian he'll think this is a war
13:45
against
13:46
NATO and if we don't provide Ukraine
13:49
with the means to achieve Victory be
13:52
under no Illusions Putin will continue
13:57
the movement we are in we have in Europe
14:00
on our eastern border an angry
14:03
revanchist Russia determined to rebuild
14:06
a Russian Empire determined to swallow
14:09
up Ukraine and once it's swallowed up
14:11
Ukraine it will move on it'll move on to
14:14
mova it'll move on to finish finish off
14:16
the occupa The Invasion uh finish off
14:19
off off the work it started in Georgia
14:20
in 2008 and it is quite likely to move
14:24
on to one of the Baltic states if not
14:26
all of them all of whom were part of the
14:29
Soviet Empire and indeed part of the
14:31
sist Empire so they think of the Baltic
14:33
states Russians think of it as theirs if
14:36
that happens that is war with NATO that
14:40
is every that is war that is Britain
14:42
engaged in an existential fight with
14:45
Russia how much more effective how much
14:48
more cost effective to increase defense
14:50
spending now yes of course it'll impact
14:53
on infrastructure and transport and and
14:55
and and education and and the NHS but
14:59
but I can tell you unless we do this we
15:01
Face the prospect of a total catastrophe
15:04
and that is why we have to dig deep now
15:07
and that is why our political leaders
15:09
need to explain to British people the
15:12
British electorate what the stakes are
15:14
because they're very very high General
15:16
we just go back to the situation on the
15:17
front line in Ukraine at the moment it
15:19
was interesting that General buinov
15:21
Ukraine's General bov did an interview
15:22
with German television I think recently
15:25
in which he said that he anticipates a
15:27
fresh Russian offensive in the late
15:29
spring early summer as things stand
15:32
given what we've been discussing about
15:33
the need for more supplies for Ukraine
15:36
how do you think they will cope with
15:38
that how do you think Ukraine will will
15:40
stand up to that offensive well with
15:42
difficulty unless they're given more
15:44
exactly is what we've been talking
15:45
earlier exactly as I said at the start
15:46
of the discussion unless that Ukraine is
15:49
given the capability to withstand that
15:51
the ammunition the long range position
15:54
missiles the the and and the military
15:56
equipment just that they need uh they
15:59
will find it very very difficult and if
16:01
that happens if there is a Russian
16:03
counter offensive in the spring late
16:05
summer unless Ukraine is given the
16:07
capabilities I would anticipate
16:10
potentially significant amounts of
16:12
Ukrainian land being being captured
16:14
Again by Russia that's very interesting
16:15
because actually what we've seen in
16:16
recent months yes Russia have made some
16:19
small incremental advances for example
16:20
capturing AF Diva but actually we
16:23
haven't seen any significant
16:24
breakthroughs but you think that could
16:26
that could change in the coming months
16:27
if we're not careful I wouldn't really
16:29
out I think the ukrainians will hold
16:31
extremely effectively what I'm saying is
16:33
I think potentially there could be more
16:36
land recaptured by Russia whether
16:39
there's a major breakthrough or not
16:40
depends entirely again comes back to my
16:42
point earlier about giving Ukraine the
16:44
means to defend itself but more than
16:46
that the means to ultimately defeat
16:49
Russia and we're a long way short of
16:51
that I mentioned General bov a moments
16:53
ago of course we have seen some changes
16:54
in the Ukrainian military leadership in
16:56
recent months General ution has been
16:57
replaced by by RI have you noted any
17:01
change in Ukraine's operational strategy
17:04
since that that transition um I think
17:06
it's difficult to from from from the you
17:08
know from this this distance to to
17:10
comment on that but what I would say is
17:12
it's entirely understandable to replace
17:14
a a senior General uh who has carried
17:18
the burden of of the defense of Ukraine
17:21
and and and achieved extraordinary
17:23
successes uh in the early early months
17:25
of the war two years on I mean people
17:28
get TI and and and and maybe fresh
17:30
thinking is needed but what you've got
17:32
to be so careful about is
17:35
widespread movement and removal of
17:39
personnel which disturbs the balance
17:42
disturbs the teamwork disturbs the
17:44
dynamic of headquarters and can cause a
17:47
degree OFA confusion rather than uh
17:50
where you need to you need to manage it
17:52
any any man part changes carefully and
17:54
whilst Ukraine is in this difficult
17:56
position of waiting for fresh West
17:59
military aid what realistically is their
18:02
best strategy I mean they have had
18:04
success as you mentioned general you
18:05
know it's been phenomenally successful
18:06
in terms of um eliminating much of the
18:09
Black Sea Fleet around sasap pole also
18:12
we've seen some of their attacks on
18:13
Russian energy infrastructure Ukrainian
18:15
drone strikes um on Russian oil
18:17
refineries are reportedly now forcing
18:20
Russia to import gas from Kazakhstan so
18:22
they have had some really significant
18:24
success what do you think is their best
18:27
strategy for the coming months given we
18:30
have this impass with Western military
18:31
aid I think if and again I wouldn't
18:34
second guess the Ukrainian command but
18:36
if if I think if I was in that position
18:38
I would be I would be scking looking
18:40
looking to hold on to dig deep literally
18:44
dig deep uh build defensive capabilities
18:47
build defensive
18:49
fortifications strengthen my defense in
18:52
order to allow me to build up capability
18:56
to train uh with new equipment new
18:59
capability to bring new equipment into
19:01
service and to build up with a view to
19:04
launching offensives further Downstream
19:06
but the absolute priority is to hold and
19:09
general Sheriff just to go back to
19:12
Donald Trump and and what effect he may
19:14
have on NATO and I appreciate a bit like
19:16
it's almost impossible to read the mind
19:17
of Vladimir Putin it's almost impossible
19:19
to read the mind of Donald Trump but do
19:20
you think he would withdraw America from
19:24
NATO it's something that has been
19:25
speculated on he did an interview
19:27
recently in which he appear appear to
19:29
deny that but do you think we should be
19:31
making preparations for potentially the
19:33
US withdrawing from NATO where Trump to
19:35
be reelected I think you have to think
19:36
of assume the worst case and be be be
19:39
pleased if the worst case doesn't come
19:41
about um I mean the reality of an
19:43
American withdrawal from NATO yes
19:46
America the NATO the alliance may be
19:48
able to Future proof itself in the ways
19:50
we've discussed earlier but the bottom
19:52
line is this that the alliance would
19:54
find it the European members of NATO and
19:57
Canada would find it really really
20:01
impossible difficult if not impossible
20:03
to fully replace all the capabilities
20:05
that America brings to the NATO
20:07
party so what so so start preparing
20:11
start thinking about it start putting
20:12
together it comes back to defense
20:14
spending and and building multi-year
20:16
contracts and building up your military
20:17
industrial complex and
20:19
capabilities um would it go all the way
20:23
well it might uh but even if Trump does
20:27
I think I think there's a high chance
20:28
that even if he doesn't pull America out
20:30
of the alliance America would become a
20:33
sort of sleeping partner in the alliance
20:36
still in the alliance but not exerting
20:38
the uh providing the full the full Suite
20:42
of American capability still able to
20:44
influence things there and that's
20:46
obviously something we would hope for so
20:47
even if he doesn't withdraw America from
20:49
NATO completely he may well well first
20:52
of all just cease US military at Ukraine
20:54
but potentially even push for immediate
20:56
peace talks with with with Russia he he
21:00
said he'd end the war in 24 hours and he
21:03
said he would encourage Russia to attack
21:05
any NATO member that doesn't meet the
21:08
spending uh requirements I mean wild
21:11
wild deeply irresponsible talk and let's
21:14
be clear ending the war in 24 hours
21:17
would mean nothing more than another
21:18
Munich
21:19
1938 Putin would rebuild regain retrain
21:24
at regenerate and have another go at
21:27
finishing the work he started uh in 2014
21:30
I just wonder on the issue of trump I
21:31
mean we started this conversation by
21:33
talking about David Cameron former UK
21:34
prime minister now foreign secretary his
21:36
visit to see him in Florida in the last
21:38
24 hours it's interesting that another
21:40
former UK prime minister Boris Johnson
21:42
who has been a great friend of Ukraine
21:44
and under him of course you know there
21:46
was a a huge amount of UK military a
21:48
provided to Ukraine he has appeared to
21:50
endorse Trump for re-election this
21:52
November which to me seems to be
21:55
completely at odds with his pledged
21:57
support for Ukraine can you make any
21:59
sense of that
22:01
no not at all it is a it is a very
22:05
curious situation um just finally
22:07
General and we really appreciate your
22:08
time on front line um I wonder where you
22:11
see Russia's alliances a lot has been
22:14
made of of them receiving Iranian Mage
22:15
to head drones it's interesting also
22:17
that the Russian foreign minister Ser
22:19
lavro has been meeting with Chinese
22:21
officials amid warnings that China is
22:22
increasingly helping Russia's defense
22:25
industrial base where do you see Russia
22:27
and its Alliance is at the
22:30
moment well I think Russia I mean it's
22:34
getting material support from North
22:35
Korea it's getting support from Iran and
22:38
you mentioned the allegations of of
22:39
indirect support from China which I'm
22:41
sure is absolutely the
22:42
case I I think the wider issue with
22:46
Russia is the reality that much of the
22:49
global South is sympathetic to Russia I
22:52
mean subsaharan African countries for
22:54
example will remember the part
22:56
particularly if you go to countries like
22:57
Zimbabwe they'll remember the part that
23:00
the Soviet Union played in their
23:01
anticolonial struggles so there will be
23:03
a natural sympathy for Russia Russia's
23:05
pretty closely aligned to South Africa
23:08
and other countries like that so and and
23:10
the West has really got to focus on
23:12
winning the Strategic or the battle of
23:14
the Strategic narrative uh and persuade
23:17
and you know another country India
23:19
India's India has in India at the start
23:22
of the of the war oh s on the in the
23:25
invasion in February 2022 was getting
23:27
10% of its oil from Russia since then
23:30
it's now something like 40% of its oil
23:32
imports come from Russia so in a very
23:34
real sense India is bankrolling uh Bank
23:38
rolling Russian defense cap offensive
23:40
offensive military capability uh and
23:43
there are too many countries around the
23:44
world sitting on the fence and watching
23:47
the genocidal activities of Russia
23:49
without calling Russia out and is there
23:51
more we can do to turn the screw on
23:54
Nations like India who we have you know
23:55
relatively good strong relations with is
23:57
there any more we can do to help
23:59
disincentivize them from from doing that
24:02
well I think you better ask a diplomat
24:03
rather than a soldier on that question
24:05
but I I mean I go my point is the the
24:09
battle of the Strategic narrative has
24:11
yet to be uh really won by the west by
24:15
the UK and I think a huge amount of UK
24:17
influence could go towards towards
24:19
winning that narrative in concert of
24:21
course with our other allies and Friends
24:23
General Richard Sheriff really
24:25
appreciate your time thank you so much
24:26
for joining us today on front line
Follow along using the transcript.
Show transcript
|