"The liberation of Kherson may take place in October" - General Ben Hodges

We understand that Russia has switched to the tactics of massive missile strikes. You are one of the most informed military experts in the world, so what do you think this means? How many military resources does Russia have? And how is it possible to stop the destruction of civilian targets in Ukraine now?

There are three things that must happen. Firstly, joint condemnation of Russia's actions by all world leaders. Every government, every head of government, and every international organization must condemn the Kremlin for those war crimes and make sure that the Russian forces will know that they will receive the stigma of cannibals for their war crimes.  This is the first thing. Secondly, of course, the US and other countries are now looking for additional anti-missile and anti-aircraft defense systems that can be provided to Ukraine as soon as possible. And thirdly, the best way to stop these missile strikes is to defeat the Russian troops. And the sooner Ukraine can defeat the Russian troops, the better. And of course, support for this must continue.

There is also a good moment. We shot down half of the Russian missiles. But at the same time, they still have a high number of Iranian-made drones. It is about Shahed-136. 

It seems that Iran is the only country, with the exception of Belarus, that provides assistance to Russia. The international community should put more pressure on Iran to stop supplying such systems. I think most of the drones we've seen over the past few days have been launched from airfields in Crimea, so the sooner Ukrainian forces can push the Russian forces out of Crimea, the better. The Russian military will no longer have the opportunity to use Crimea as a launching pad.

Mr. General, what can you say about the Crimean bridge?

It was certainly a major hit, whoever did it and however it was executed. I think the Ukrainian General Staff continues to do a good job without revealing everything they do, because there is no point in publicizing Ukraine's capabilities. I think the generals and the government are doing the right thing by not talking about it. Regardless of all this, it shows how vulnerable the Russian zone is, and they should, of course, be worried about it. After all, when this bridge is damaged again, or they are unable to adequately repair it, and when Ukrainian troops return Mariupol, the invading Russian troops will no longer have a land corridor to their territory, and their forces in Kherson and Crimea may find themselves in a trap.

"And a potentially great victory for Ukraine in that region will become possible in a few months due to the actual situation with this bridge."

Mr.General, in any case, Putin is now demonstrating that he is ready to follow the path of escalation. Perhaps he will move to an all-out war scenario where they will destroy all of our civilian infrastructure over the course of months. At the same time, we understand that the West is also preparing to give a response, in the event that Putin applies the scenario of a tactical nuclear war. We understand that there are no tactical nuclear wars. Putin will cross the red line, because there is only one nuclear war. But there is a premonition that he can use tactical warheads.

Firstly, it is clear that the Kremlin is aware that it is losing the war on the battlefield. Their forces are unsuccessful and they face defeat on the battlefield. The scenario of using massive missile strikes is aimed at breaking the will of the Ukrainian people. But that will never happen. Continue the conflict until the West weakens? That will never happen either.  So another direction of the Kremlin's efforts is the continuation of typical Russian tactics - the killing of innocent people. These missile attacks expose their efforts to cause cold and famine in Ukraine - to depopulate Ukrainian cities. In fact, it is not known how many more missiles the Russian forces have. Because of the sanctions, they were left without the necessary parts for them. In some positions, they have already been exhausted. This, of course, does not sound like a relief for the Ukrainians, but I do not believe that these reserves can be exactly replenished. That is, there is an end to all this, and we must hasten this end. Regarding tactical nuclear weapons.  Yes, they have thousands of these missiles, but I still find it unlikely that they would use tactical nuclear weapons, because they do not give them any advantage.

"tactical nuclear weapons will not give them an advantage on the battlefield. I think the Kremlin knows this. Our president has made it clear: if they use tactical nuclear weapons, it will be impossible for the US not to respond and not be involved."

Because China is watching, Iran is watching, North Korea is watching, so the US will be forced to respond. Now - how it can look. No one knows if it is a nuclear response. It doesn't look like this. Will it be a non-nuclear response to Russian facilities in Ukraine? Could it be a combination of conventional and unconventional steps? Whatever it is, it will be catastrophic, and the Kremlin knows about it.  As far as I'm concerned, the people around Putin know that if they have any hope for the future after this war, if they have any hope of returning to some type of normality, then they must stop Putin from using nuclear weapons.

The last thing I will say. You and your viewers know well, maybe even better than I do, that there are serious problems within the Kremlin. Ordinary people are also unhappy with Putin's war, but I don't know what courses of action these different groups see for themselves. The partial mobilization is the first manifestation of what I see as major differences of opinion in the Kremlin about where to move now.

I agree with you. President Joseph Biden has made it extremely clear that Putin will use tactical nuclear weapons. But, on the other hand, we realize that Putin is an atheist and a nihilist. Until he feels that something can be a real threat and a real threat to his power, then he does not believe in it. Our mutual acquaintance, Daniel Fried, says that Putin received signals from the US. We realize that he can use just powerful ballistic missiles without nuclear warheads and can use the nearest airfields and bridgeheads for this purpose, in particular in Belarus.

Yes, I know Ambassador Daniel Fried very well as an experienced and intelligent diplomat and someone who understands the Kremlin well. I am very worried about Belarus. Lukashenko is not the legitimate leader of Belarus, but he is the one in power there, and he is trying to find a balance between conditional independence and pressure from the Kremlin. His military is involved in security, he allows Russia to use Belarusian bases and airspace to conduct operations and attacks against Ukraine, but so far he has not been directly involved. The Ukrainian General Staff knows all about this and pays a lot of attention to what is happening inside Belarus. I understand that Russia is trying to open a new front to defeat Ukrainian troops after your success in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. But I think that Lukashenko finally understands that if at least one of his 10 battalion-tactical groups engages in battle against Ukrainian forces, they will be destroyed immediately. His forces and soldiers are even less prepared than the Russian ones. 

"I think Lukashenko knows this. He also knows that if he decides to do this, it will create new conditions for the Belarusian opposition inside and outside the country to rise up."

I hope that Ms. Tsikhanouskaya will be able to encourage opposition forces to put pressure on the Lukashenko regime to prevent Russian troops from operating inside Belarus. They were so brave just two years ago, so I hope they can show this courage again, as women in Iran or Ukraine are showing it now, to put pressure on Lukashenko and prevent Russian troops from using Belarus against Ukraine.

I would like to ask you now to characterize the potential course of the current autumn-winter campaign.

I am sure that the Ukrainian General Staff will continue to put pressure on the Russian troops and will not give them the opportunity to get on their feet, regroup or learn something. It is very important. Of course, it will be more difficult on the battlefield in winter due to the weather. The conditions for the soldiers will be more difficult, but for the occupying Russian forces on the defensive, the conditions will be more difficult than for the attacking Ukrainian forces. The Ukrainian troops have their people behind them, and the Russians, especially the newly arrived ones, who are insufficiently equipped, unprepared and untrained, will be forced to resist the strong attacks of the Ukrainian troops. My opinion is that the Ukrainian troops will continue to press, will continue to achieve success, but it will be a little slower and more difficult. Weather can cause complications for drones, for example. But, nevertheless, all will be under the same weather conditions, but the Ukrainian army will be more prepared and more effective on the eve of winter.

Mr. General, how do you assess the situation in the south? Will the Russian troops have enough resources to hold on to the right bank of the Dnipro, at least until the new year?

This is a good example of the Ukrainian General Staff's professionalism, methodicality, and patience. There is a large group of Russian troops there, on the right bank of the Dnipro River, and there is no need for Ukrainian troops to break through to Kherson right away. In this way, it is possible to avoid the destruction by the Russian forces of the city with thousands of innocent Ukrainians still living there. Therefore, the General Staff is working to create favorable conditions, and when these conditions arise, Kherson should be surrounded and those Russian soldiers who do not manage to escape should be captured or killed. So, I think this is a reasonable decision of the Ukrainian General Staff. I don't know how long it will take, I don't know the time frame, but I think we will see it in the next few weeks.

Russian mobilization means that the war will be long. We are talking, perhaps, not even about the scenario of half a year, perhaps everything will last even longer. If we evaluate the potential capabilities and resources of the Russian Federation, what does a long war mean for them? And taking into account all this, what will we receive?  What will a long war mean for Ukraine?  And how much more powerful can aid from the US and European countries be?

Russian mobilization at the time manifested itself in two or three moments. Firstly, they admitted that the situation for them is terrible and the further it goes, the worse it gets. Putin was forced to agree to the mobilization and admit that he cannot control everything. This is important, and it is precisely because of this, I think, that the confrontation in the Kremlin began. Secondly, from the very beginning it was clear that the Russians did not support this. Half a million conscript Russians left the country in order not to be mobilized, as they do not want to fight for the Russian army or against Ukraine. So that builds up as well.  Also, we have all seen the video in which the terrible conditions these newly mobilized people are in, with what provision. This whole system is the result of many years of corruption and incompetence. But it happened, and it is a crime that untrained soldiers would be sent to war. Putin simply disposes of their lives, littering the battlefield with bodies to continue the war. He, of course, does not care how many people may die there, but this is his method of continuing the war for so long, until people simply lose the willpower to resist and are ready to negotiate, on some of his positions. Of course, I believe that this will not happen and I know that my president has no such desire and does not put pressure on President Zelenskyy regarding negotiations.  Only Ukrainians have the right to determine this, and it is very important that we all be united on the way to the goal. This winter will be the last winter in which Russia can influence the European economy through gas. Everyone is refusing Russian gas and looking for alternative ways. So this would be the last time they could really do anything. So let's keep this in mind and stand together for the sake of a successful Ukraine that will emerge next summer.

And what about Russian General Surovikin, whom Putin appointed to command the war against Ukraine?

This new commander has a reputation for brutality and corruption. Would anyone be surprised that the Kremlin would choose a corrupt criminal and murderer as its new commander? This was predicted. Moreover, he is also very loyal, which is now the most important quality for an appointment, because Putin is worried that his generals do not support him as they did before. And the loss of trust between the General Staff and Putin is what can cause an explosion. However, no matter who becomes the new commander there, the problems of the Russian forces are so deep, so systemic that the new commander is not in a position to correct the state of affairs in a few weeks or months. Corruption, lack of coordination between air force, ground forces and navy, as well as a failed logistics system. All this is such a horror that no matter who becomes the commander, he will not be able to overcome it. So what's different about the new commander? I think he will continue with one type of brutal tactic or another. The sooner they are defeated, the better.