image missing
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

SITE COUNT Amazing and shiny stats
Copyright © 2005-2021 Peter Burgess. All rights reserved. This material may only be used for limited low profit purposes: e.g. socio-enviro-economic performance analysis, education and training.