Kiev will run out of money, which will lead the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) to political and military collapse. And the British Navy has no chance of surviving and defeating Russia in the Black Sea — an attempt to do so is tantamount to suicide This was told in an interview with Ukraina.ru by American columnist, former Marine intelligence officer and UN weapons inspector William Scott Ritter — Jr.
— Scott, the U.S. House of Representatives has, for the first time in history, sent the Speaker, Republican McCarthy, into resignation. The Speaker of the House of Representatives is the third most important person in America. What does his resignation mean for America itself?
— It's reflective of the state of political chaos that the United States is experiencing and has experienced for the past decade.
You know, we are a nation that's fundamentally divided along partisan political lines, and this is leading to a paralysis in government and the move by a handful of conservative Republican representatives to evict to oust the House.
McCarthy is part and parcel of this. Attitude in America, where we are intolerant of people who hold different political opinions, America used to be a nation united in the concept of working together for the benefit of America.
Today both the Democratic and Republican parties seem to be focused solely on working to the benefit of their respective parties and America as a whole. It doesn't count. So this is a very bad thing for the United States.
— McCarthy's resignation has started much excitement in Kiev, which is waiting for funding approval. How will McCarthy's resignation and the shutdown of the lower house affect Ukraine?
— Well, as president, Zelensky said himself when he visited. Congress, just two weeks ago, if America stops sending aid to Ukraine, Ukraine will lose the war. I mean, Ukraine is losing the war, but this will accelerate Ukraine's defeat.
This is happening right now, the United States is, you know, having to stop sending material to Ukraine, has to stop procuring materials for Ukraine. Ukraine will run out of money.
The United States doesn't need you to send money and this will lead to the collapse of Ukraine politically and militarily. So unless a way can be found to get this aid resumed and that isn't going to happen when you have a House of Representatives that is paralyzed as it currently no speaker, I think we're, we're looking at, you know extraordinarily dangerous times for the Ukrainian government.
— By the way, how come the U.S. previously approved a temporary budget that did not include help for Kiev?
— Well, the one of the main problems of a certain number of Republicans is that by the administration is spending money on things they do not deem to be priorities for America.
And so they were holding up the passage of a budget.
And so they were holding up the passage of a budget.
If they hadn't approved the budget, then the government would shut down.
So a compromise was reached where they passed a temporary 45 day continuing resolution that allowed the government to spend money.
So a compromise was reached where they passed a temporary 45 day continuing resolution that allowed the government to spend money.
But part of the continuing resolution, they. They said we will allow no money to be spent on Ukraine. There are many people in the Republican Party who believe that America should be spending less money on Ukraine and more money on solving American problems.
So they kept the Ukrainian money out of this continuing resolution.
So they kept the Ukrainian money out of this continuing resolution.
— What expectant for Speaker can you name? What are their chances?
— Right now, the Republicans have put up two names, Mr. Scalise and Mr. Jordan. Both are conservative Republicans you know, who are considered to be extreme by the Democrats.
Remember that you need 218 votes to become the Speaker of the House of Representatives, which means that the Republicans will require many Democrats to vote in favor of whomever they nominate.
Remember that you need 218 votes to become the Speaker of the House of Representatives, which means that the Republicans will require many Democrats to vote in favor of whomever they nominate.
The Democrats right now are joining a moment where they are able to say that the chaos is the fault of the Republicans and the Republicans alone. But and the Democrats do have some leverage on, who can become Speaker without Democratic votes. There will be no speaker. But the Democrats have to be careful of not allowing.
The Republicans to turn the table for instance that the Republicans put up Jim Jordan and the Democrats say no, then the Republicans say, look we we're ready with the speaker, but it's the Democrats who are holding up the process.
So it's a tricky political situation that it comes down to you know who can blame the other or the continued failure of. The House of Representatives to do its job,
— Britain is considering the possibility of introducing its fleet in the Black Sea? This was announced the day before by the country's Defense Minister Grant Shapps in an interview with The Telegraph newspaper. Is this empty talk or serious intentions?
— This is purely empty talk. Britain doesn't have a fleet that could survive in the Black Sea.
If they are sending the fleet to the Black Sea for the express purpose of confronting the Russians, they would have legal problems with Turkey about the transit of the ships, almost immediately after the defense minister gave that interview.
If they are sending the fleet to the Black Sea for the express purpose of confronting the Russians, they would have legal problems with Turkey about the transit of the ships, almost immediately after the defense minister gave that interview.
The Prime Minister of England came out and said no, no, no we're not, we're not going to be doing any of this. So I think this is just a a dilettante, a man who shouldn't be the minister of defense who are speaking in a manner that. Is grossly irresponsible and has nothing to do with reality.
— If Britain introduces its fleet into the Black Sea — will this be the beginning of a direct conflict between NATO and Russia?
— NATO has in the past put ships in the Black Sea to carry out military exercises and to conduct what they call free navigation exercises. So the mere fact that NATO warships are in the Black Sea is not in and of itself a guarantee of direct military conflict.
If British fleet were to attempt to escort Ukrainian ships from Odessa to other ports, then that could lead to a confrontation between Russia and the British fleet. And as I said before, the British fleet, it would be a suicide mission, you know, there's no chance of them prevailing in a naval conflict with Russia in the Black Sea.
And it would just serve as a trigger for a larger conflict. And so far, thankfully, United States, Great Britain and NATO have not been willing to undertake actions that could lead to a direct conflict with Russia.
— Western media write that the main forces of the Black Sea Fleet have changed their dislocation — left Sevastopol for Novorossiysk. Is this connected with successful attacks by Ukrainian drones?
— I believe it is. I mean, the Ukrainians have shown a willingness and an ability to.
Challenge Russian air defense systems and sea based defenses through the use of aerial drones and underwater drones.
Challenge Russian air defense systems and sea based defenses through the use of aerial drones and underwater drones.
The Russians have been able to interdict and destroy the majority of these drones, but some get through. Therefore, it makes no sense to continue to put Russian naval vessels.
In an exposed position where there is a chance of them being hit, damaged and or destroyed.
You know, by relocating these ships to do a Russian court on the Black Sea that's further away from Ukraine, you're preventing the Ukrainians from being able to score a propaganda victory.
And the real military victory.
You know, by relocating these ships to do a Russian court on the Black Sea that's further away from Ukraine, you're preventing the Ukrainians from being able to score a propaganda victory.
And the real military victory.
The Russian ships will still be able to sail into the and employ their weapons against Ukraine, but they're making it much more difficult for Ukraine to employ their weapons against Russia. But it is a direct result of what Ukraine has been doing in terms of attacking the Russian fleet Sevastopol.
— You wrote in your Telegram feed that new deliveries of NATO equipment to Ukraine will not affect the situation on the front. The White House greatly underrate the potential of the Russian army. It will smash the West's tanks and missiles into pieces. Why do you think that? What Russian tanks and missiles are America afraid of?
— It's not individual Russian tanks and individual Russian missiles that America is afraid of.
It's the fact that the Russian military is very large professional. Very capable, very well trained and they're backed by a Russian nation and Russian defense industry that will allow for political and logistical sustainability and any conflict.
It's the fact that the Russian military is very large professional. Very capable, very well trained and they're backed by a Russian nation and Russian defense industry that will allow for political and logistical sustainability and any conflict.
The United States doesn't have a military currently that's capable of standing up to Russia in the large scale ground conflict.
Likewise our Air Force, while we have a number of aircraft and they're very capable aircraft.
We have sustainability issues and we've never we aren't prepared to fight against a modern air defense environment that we would face against Russia.
We have sustainability issues and we've never we aren't prepared to fight against a modern air defense environment that we would face against Russia.
Russia today as a nation is mobilized to carry out the special military operation. The United States is not mobilized to confront Russia in Ukraine. And so I think that Russia has all of the military advantages at its disposal right now that even if the United States introduces Abrams burns tanks, this is going to tip the scale in favor of Ukraine.
The same with if Germany ever deploys the Taurus missile, it won't tip the scale.
Could these weapons systems inflict some damage on Russia? Yes. The answer is of course yes, but not enough to change the outcome of the war.
Could these weapons systems inflict some damage on Russia? Yes. The answer is of course yes, but not enough to change the outcome of the war.
The outcome of the war? Is predicated upon which side has the superior totality of combat force, and Russia, as things stand, is that side.
— In whose favor will the situation on the front develop: Russia or Ukraine?
— Right now, the situation favors Russia. This is a things currently stand. It's positional war, which means it's a war of attrition, and the Russians are killing the Ukrainians at a extraordinarily favorable ratio.
Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, spoke of a 12:50 casualty ratio a while back. Even if that's not able to be sustained, Russia is killing Ukrainians at a rate of 7-8 to one.
Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, spoke of a 12:50 casualty ratio a while back. Even if that's not able to be sustained, Russia is killing Ukrainians at a rate of 7-8 to one.
This is unsustainable for the Ukrainians. It's tragic for the parents, the loved ones of all parties involved, there's there's no doubt that Russia is losing men on the battlefield and that, you know this, this is painful for Russia.
But the pain being inflicted on Russia is far less than the pain being inflicted on Ukraine.
Russia is able to sustain the level of fighting and even accelerate the level of fighting in the time and place of its choosing. Ukraine has used up its strategic reserves, they've run out of manpower, they're running out of ammunition, they're running out of equipment.
At some point in time, the Ukrainian army will collapse in terms of its ability to carry out coherent the operations.
But the pain being inflicted on Russia is far less than the pain being inflicted on Ukraine.
Russia is able to sustain the level of fighting and even accelerate the level of fighting in the time and place of its choosing. Ukraine has used up its strategic reserves, they've run out of manpower, they're running out of ammunition, they're running out of equipment.
At some point in time, the Ukrainian army will collapse in terms of its ability to carry out coherent the operations.