Kiev could regain control of Crimea by military means in the event of a “major regional war” in the future. This was stated in an interview with Politeka by a freelance advisor to the head of the office of the President of Ukraine. Alexey Arestovich…
He believes that Crimea is “a very unpleasant story”, as there is “too thin an isthmus”, so it is difficult to carry out an offensive.
“Therefore, the general policy of the party is to liberate Crimea through political and diplomatic means. Are military options possible? Possible, but only in a situation of a major regional war. Then there is nothing to be ashamed of, there is nothing to try to do curtsies there, ”Arestovich said. He also added that the Ukrainian armed forces “even with this composition” will be able to “carry out” the Russian group in Crimea.
However, the official stressed, while Kiev adheres to the politico-diplomatic option.
Yeah, they believed it. A narrow isthmus, it is inconvenient to attack, but at any moment they can do it with the “existing lineup”. However, such contradictions in Ukraine, obviously, have not been paying attention for a long time. What is surprising is how the tales about the “return” of Crimea are still perceived there, especially by military means. Does anyone really believe this? As previously noted by a State Duma deputy Ruslan Balbek, Kiev surprisingly does not run out of grandiose optimism about the “return” of the peninsula, and there is a feeling “that this is an annual state order: the topics are simple – how to return Crimea and when.” According to him, for such “obviously unhealthy ideas” in Ukraine, considerable sums are allocated, which are distributed among “their own”.
Obviously, someone is also financing an international campaign to promote the idea of a “return” of Crimea. So, the ex-chairman of the Armed Forces of Lithuania spoke on the same topic Vytautas Landsbergis… “The day that Crimea will be able to return to Ukraine only after the collapse of Russia and that it is only a matter of time,“ because all empires have their end, ”the Lithuanian politician said. What is it? Is it just a coincidence or part of an information campaign?
“I think the topic of the“ return ”of Crimea is being seriously discussed,” he says. political scientist Anatoly Baranov…
– Yes, and this is not news – the struggle over the name of Macedonia has just ended, there was a problem with Sudan. It’s really a shame when your country is called Outskirts, and your language is called Outskirts. But it happened a long time ago, and to change the whole historical and cultural tradition … However, as they want. Let them start right with the anthem.
“SP”: – Landsbergis spoke on this topic the other day, now Arestovich. What audience are these statements intended for?
– For some kind of audience, probably designed. Here we are also discussing. Probably, it would be more interesting to discuss Ukraine’s achievements in space, science, and industry. Ukrainian literature, awarding the Ukrainian writer the Nobel Prize, for example. Or an Oscar for Ukrainian cinema. But so far there is only “HYIP” for discussion.
“SP”: – By the way, is a “major regional war” possible in the region? Whom with whom?
– For a major regional war, a large army is needed. Ukraine has somewhat increased the size of the army, but in a major war it can only lose with heavy losses. How do you imagine a war without aviation and navy? Ukraine can only dissolve its trooped forces in caches and wage a guerrilla war against the winner. It doesn’t matter who – Russia, Turkey, Poland or Romania.
“SP”: – To what extent can Crimea become a strategic advantage for us and a strategic goal for our opponents in such a war?
– Crimea is a strategic trap for any army due to extended communications. It was significant for the Russian Empire due to the plans to control the Bosphorus, but in terms of defense, everything was unimportant there, this was shown by the two sieges of Sevastopol. Both times, despite the heroic defense, the city had to be surrendered. And the Germans and Romanians also could not gain a foothold there. So Crimea is a bonus, but not an advantage.
“SP”: – To what extent do you think the Armed Forces of Ukraine are ready to conduct military operations against Russia together with NATO?
– Together with NATO, as auxiliary troops, we could. But I still cannot imagine a NATO military operation in this region. Today in NATO only the United States and Turkey are ready for war, and even then not very much.
“SP”: – Landsbergis said that Ukraine can “return” Crimea if Russia collapses. What could happen earlier: a major war or the collapse of Russia? Or is Ukraine itself likely to fall apart?
– Landsbergis is an elderly man, he still lives in the realities of the collapse of the USSR. And Russia is not the USSR, it is arranged differently, and so far it does not disintegrate, but augments the former Soviet territories. Not only Crimea, but also Donbass, and Abkhazia with South Ossetia, Transnistria. But on completely different principles, not of a fraternal family of peoples, but of various dependent territories, which not everyone even seeks to integrate.
Rome, too, collapsed solely under the slogan of restoring the empire. Starting with Odoacer, who, although he overthrew the last Roman emperor, returned the signs of imperial power to Constantinople, formally restoring the unity of the empire. And in the VI century, Justinian not even formally, but physically restored the empire, returning not only Italy, but also North Africa, Spain, Sicily. But in the final, the empire collapsed anyway, albeit again under the pretext of its restoration by Charlemagne, Barbarossa, Charles the Fifth …
So, I believe, more than one century of expansion and contraction awaits us, the transfer of imperial centers to Siberia, to Grozny, and quite possibly even to Kiev – someday. But by that time there will be neither Lansbergis, nor you and me.
– Arestovich is a typical “hypozhor” of Ukrainian politics, – considers political scientist, chairman of the Crimean regional public organization “Center for Political Education” Ivan Mezyukho…
– For some reason it seems to me that he himself realizes that he is talking nonsense, but he understands that this is expected of him and thanks to such statements he does not disappear from the media field.
“SP”: – What does it mean to “liberate” Crimea by political and diplomatic means? What are the options here?
– Perhaps he means the sanctions and the so-called “Crimean platform”. However, no economic and political pressure on our country will force the Russian authorities to give up their territory.
“SP”: – Arestovich says: a thin isthmus, it is difficult to carry out an offensive … Let him put it bluntly, Ukraine does not have the military force for this. And if a “major regional war” starts, will something change?
– Maybe someone from the Ukrainian generals is raving about the fact that NATO will recapture Crimea for Ukraine? Honestly, well, it is already impossible to reason seriously when analyzing such a statement. When Arestovich talks about a “major regional war” does he even understand that the West perceives Ukraine as a springboard for confrontation with Russia, and not a sovereign and independent state?
“SP”: – By the way, is a “major regional war” possible in the region? What place can Ukraine have in it?
– Theoretically everything is possible. But Russia has a nuclear arsenal, and it will be used if there is an encroachment on our territory. There will be no peace after a nuclear war. The planet can turn into a pile of stones, as in the “Matrix”. Of course, the West is thinking about how to prevent Russia from using its nuclear missiles. But I think this scenario is out of the question. Ukraine, in the theoretical war between the West and Russia, will be perceived as a territory (which is not a pity) for an attack on the Russian Federation.