Putin in Despair Over Failures on the Front: Interview with a British General on Massive Strikes and Mobilization

Russia is intensifying its airstrikes on Ukraine, while the Kremlin is facing mobilization challenges and mounting pressure due to the war. Against this backdrop, the question of what the U.S.’s next steps might be – and whether they can influence the security of Ukraine and Europe – has become particularly pressing.

Lord Richard Dannatt, a retired British Army general and former Chief of the General Staff, spoke in an exclusive interview with Channel 24 about the escalation of Russian airstrikes, Vladimir Putin’s mobilization challenges, and diplomatic pressure on Ukraine. He also assessed the risks of bilateral agreements between the U.S. and Russia and stated that a deal at the expense of Ukrainian territories would be unacceptable to Europe and Great Britain.

Escalation of Russia’s Air Terror and Mobilization

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated that intelligence had received information about Putin’s order to cancel all restrictions on the air campaign. Against the backdrop of strikes on bridges and Kyiv, as well as Russia’s preparations for large-scale attacks on the energy sector, the question arises: what stage is the war currently at, and how serious is the risk of further escalation?

Yes, I believe that what we have unfortunately been witnessing over the past few weeks is a significant escalation of Russia’s attacks on civilian targets, especially in the Kyiv area.

And I believe that Putin has indeed told his military commanders to throw the rules out the window and do whatever they please. To me, this is a sign of a certain desperation on his part. He knows he cannot afford to lose. He knows he must deliver some kind of victory to the Russian people and his own government in order to stay in power.

That’s why he’s carrying out these brutal attacks, inflicting great damage on Ukrainian infrastructure and killing and injuring Ukrainians. And frankly, it’s outrageous that he’s targeting civilian areas, but it’s a sign of his desperation.

That said, I believe that on the battlefield, the Ukrainian army and Ukrainian military personnel are performing exceptionally well. An operation is currently underway – I believe it’s codenamed “ "Vivaldi" ” – in which Ukrainian forces are making significant gains in certain areas, pushing back Russian troops on the ground. So, Russia is under considerable pressure, as, of course, is Ukraine.

The question of a possible mobilization in Russia remains relevant, but there is currently no confirmation of a full-scale mobilization being announced. At the same time, according to Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Vladimir Putin has deployed an additional 10,000 Russians and 8,000 to 10,000 North Korean soldiers. Does this indicate that the Kremlin is relying primarily on airstrikes against civilians rather than a large-scale ground offensive?

You’re right. In other words, he hopes to achieve strategic success through an air campaign. And, of course, the more intense the attacks, the harder it is for Ukraine’s missile and air defense systems to be effective.

Of course, we very much hope that allies such as the United Kingdom and other countries will be able to provide you with the air defense systems, ammunition, and missiles you need for your defense.

But I believe you’re right when you say that Putin is currently relying heavily on airstrikes because he’s facing manpower problems on the battlefield. They’re very wasteful with the lives of Russian soldiers. And he is afraid to sign an order for a large-scale mobilization because that would make it clear to the Russian people that a major war is underway, that things aren’t going very well, and that would increase the pressure on Putin himself.

As far as I understand, the additional forces that the Russians are drafting into the army are mostly coming from the eastern regions of Russia, where they are, so to speak, concealing information from the western part of the country and the areas around Moscow. They don’t want the extent of their losses to become public knowledge, as that would undoubtedly increase the pressure on Vladimir Putin.

Full interview with Richard Dannatt: watch the video

Negotiations, U.S. Pressure, and the Limits of a Possible Compromise

Let’s also discuss diplomatic activity on the part of the U.S. On August 31, CIA Director John Ratcliffe visited Moscow, where he reportedly urged the Russians to reach an agreement before the situation worsened. We’ve seen diplomatic efforts by Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner in both Kyiv and Moscow. What is your assessment of these developments? How close are we to any kind of agreement?

For an agreement to succeed, both sides must reach a consensus. Putin has made it quite clear that he will order a cessation of hostilities only on the condition that it is not merely a ceasefire. He is seeking a peace agreement.

I think, in his view, this will only be possible if President Zelenskyy agrees to Russia’s terms, which include ceding new territories in eastern Ukraine – something President Zelenskyy, quite rightly, will not do.

Why should he cede new territories in the Donbas provinces? Why should he deprive the Ukrainian people in those Donbas lands of their freedom simply because Russia is imposing such conditions as part of its agreement? So, what I’m saying is that we are still where we were in February 2022 when it comes to reaching an agreement.

There are things that President Putin wants. There are things that President Zelenskyy will not give up, and their positions remain irreconcilable.

And I believe that the Americans continue to have difficulty bringing the parties together to reach an agreement because these positions remain irreconcilable. That is why the war continues. That is why Putin is trying to bring Ukraine to its knees through his air campaign. Meanwhile, on the battlefield, the Ukrainian military is quite effectively launching counterattacks and holding back the ongoing Russian offensive.

Strikes on Russian Oil Refineries and Pressure on Zelensky

How are Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil refineries affecting Russia’s oil industry, and should Ukraine halt this campaign under pressure from Donald Trump due to rising diesel prices in the U.S.?

There is no doubt that Ukraine’s attacks on Russian oil supplies and refining capacity have had an impact. There have been very credible reports, including from a BBC correspondent based in Russia, of very long lines for gasoline and diesel at gas stations in Russia. And this, of course, conveys to the average Russian the message that the war is ongoing and things aren’t going so well.

President Trump is now saying that the lack of refining capacity in Russia is affecting global fuel prices, and to a certain extent he is right, but he must also remember that his war against Iran has led to a reduction in the volume of oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz. And there are also the Houthis, who have been striking oil shipments passing through the Red Sea.

So there are many factors at play here, and the war in Ukraine and the lack of Russian refining capacity are just two of them. Consequently, President Trump has many problems he needs to solve, and he cannot place the blame entirely – or at all – on President Zelenskyy’s shoulders.

Meanwhile, the U.S. government has officially invited Russian President Vladimir Putin to attend the G20 summit in Miami this December. President Zelenskyy responded to this, stating that he is ready to meet with Vladimir Putin and President Trump at the G20 in Miami. Do you personally support this diplomatic invitation for Vladimir Putin to attend the G20, and can you imagine a scenario in which Putin would meet personally with President Zelenskyy?

I think it’s unbelievable – or even outrageous – that there’s even the slightest possibility of President Putin attending G20 summit. After all, there’s an international arrest warrant out for him. It’s one thing that he traveled to Alaska for a one-on-one meeting with President Trump last year. But I believe that traveling to an international conference while an international arrest warrant is out for him is utterly outrageous and unthinkable, and it must not happen.

Credit is due to President Zelenskyy; he has stated that he is ready to discuss ending the war. But it is quite clear that he is not prepared to cede any more Ukrainian territory than the Russians have already seized. And I consider this a perfectly reasonable position.

So, it all comes down to increasing the pressure on Putin and Putin’s growing desperation, combined with the pressure that President Trump himself is currently facing. So, they are all looking for a way to end this war, but this should not and cannot happen at the expense of Ukraine, more Ukrainian lives, and more Ukrainian territory. That is not the answer.

If Russia fails to capture the rest of Donbas, will Vladimir Putin be able to end the war and reach an agreement without achieving this key military objective?

Part of the problem is that military commanders are not being honest with Putin about how the campaign is actually going on the ground. The fact is that the Ukrainian army has developed its capabilities, has made tremendous progress, and is now pushing the enemy back into a belt of fortified positions. But this is not being reported honestly and truthfully to President Putin.

So he still believes that if he continues to apply pressure on the front lines, he will be able to capture the remaining part of Donbas. All the reports I’ve seen indicate that the Ukrainian army isn’t just fighting the Russians – it’s, to some extent, outmatching them. But this harsh truth is not being reported truthfully and honestly to President Putin. So he thinks he is winning, but in reality, on the battlefield, he is more likely retreating.

"Lukoil," Business Deals with Russia, and the Ethical Limits of Negotiations

Should the U.S. enter into business deals with Russia before the war in Ukraine ends, particularly regarding Lukoil’s international assets?

This is the problem we all have to deal with. President Trump, at heart, is not really a politician or a statesman. He is more of a businessman, and he would like to make deals. He loves making deals. Consequently, his envoys – who communicate openly or through backchannel channels with Russian representatives – are looking for deals that will benefit America, deals that will somewhat ease the pressure on Russia.

But, of course, the loser in this situation will be Ukraine. And European countries like mine, as well as others such as France, Germany, and Poland – we all support you, and we cannot agree to a bilateral deal between the U.S. and Putin at Ukraine’s expense. This is unacceptable, and I know my government will not allow it.

In your view, is it ethical to discuss a multibillion-dollar deal during negotiations regarding the war in Ukraine, when official diplomatic talks about a possible ceasefire are underway? Can we discuss both issues together, in a single round of negotiations? Lukoil, Ukraine, a ceasefire.

I believe you have rightly raised this ethical question, and I do not consider it ethically or morally correct to hold such discussions about deals without a cessation of hostilities. So first there must be a ceasefire, and then, during a period of calm, we can discuss what should or should not happen. But we are not at that stage yet.

And if I understand correctly what is coming out of Moscow, they do not want a ceasefire. They want a peace agreement, and this agreement, in their view, must include Ukraine’s willingness to cede more territory.

And as I’ve noted several times during our conversation, I don’t believe President Zelenskyy will agree to that. And I don’t think it’s right to cede even more Ukrainian territory or subject more Ukrainian people to Russian rule.

Ukraine is a sovereign country. It is already outrageous that a certain part of your territory has been seized. And it is not up to you, nor to the Ukrainian government, to decide whether to be willing to give up more land and more people. So, I’m afraid we’ve reached a stalemate.

But, as we’ve already discussed, this isn’t a complete dead end, because you’ve made significant progress in undermining the Russian economy. You’re making significant progress in fighting Russian forces on the battlefield. The problem that needs to be resolved as quickly as possible is the need for Ukraine to be better able to defend itself against Russian air and missile strikes, especially this winter. And this is where we all need to help you as much as possible.

The Russian Threat to Europe, the UK, and NATO

Let’s also consider the Russian threat to Europe and NATO. There have been reports of a possible limited attack by Russia on the Baltic states and Europe. How likely is this? There have also been direct threats from Russia against the British government.

The threat of such attacks exists, as does evidence of preparations for them. It is a fact that, from the UK’s perspective, the Russians are constantly surveying the cables that connect us to continental Europe and the cables that connect us to the United States. These infrastructure assets are vital to the United Kingdom’s survival and its ability to function properly.

Therefore, these threats from Russia against the Baltic states and against countries such as the United Kingdom are very real and very serious.

And that is precisely why Western countries are increasing defense spending to ensure that we are better prepared to deter further aggression. There is an internal problem in the United Kingdom: the government in London, the government in Westminster, is increasing defense spending too slowly.

This is an internal matter that we must resolve, but we must take Russia’s threats seriously, because Vladimir Putin’s greatest ambition is to sow discord in the West, destroy NATO’s unity, and undermine Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, under which an attack on one member is considered an attack on all.

He would like to destroy the unity of the West, and his method would be to carry out small-scale attacks to see whether America would come to Lithuania’s aid or whether Britain would come to Estonia’s aid. These are all the questions he would like to raise, and the tests he would like to put us through.

How secure are the United Kingdom’s military bases, given the recent incident near the Royal Air Force Fairford Air Base? We’ve also heard reports that the U.S. has withdrawn all its bombers from the Royal Air Force Fairford airbase.

Yes, that did indeed happen. The American strategic bombers have returned to the United States. On the one hand, one could say that they are not currently being used in the war against Iran. So, rather than leaving very expensive aircraft in a vulnerable position, it is better for the Americans to bring them back home to U.S. territory, where they can better protect their own air force.

This doesn’t mean that the situation in the United Kingdom is dangerous. British security agencies are monitoring many threats to our security. They foil many plots. And what was happening around Fairford Air Base in recent weeks – this is an example of a plot uncovered by our intelligence services.

So, I think the Americans decided to move their planes to reduce the risks. That’s normal, but it doesn’t mean that Britain is in danger or that terrorists can roam the country freely. Our security services are monitoring such plots very closely and are taking steps to stop them when necessary.

It’s also interesting that just a few weeks ago, Russian officials threatened the United Kingdom with an unspecified drone threat – one originating not directly from Russia, but possibly from other locations within the UK itself. Is Britain prepared to counter such threats within its own borders, within the country?

If Russia has decided to make threats, that is their business. I believe it is important for the United Kingdom to take all possible measures to protect itself. You’ve probably heard the discussion today about how the Conservative Party – which, as you know, is not the ruling party – is announcing its plans to improve missile defense in the United Kingdom. And, frankly, this is necessary.

The United Kingdom does not have the same level of missile defense as, for example, Israel. There is a need to protect our critical infrastructure much more effectively. We haven’t done this before because, since the end of the Cold War, there have been no threats to our critical national infrastructure.

But just as your country is under attack right now, people here realize that we must better protect our critical infrastructure and urgently take steps to do so. But this costs money, which must be found, and that is proving to be difficult.

This interview has been condensed, corrected, and edited for the audience’s better understanding.