Ukrainian ex-chief of intelligence calls Putin's military successes "doubtful" Obozrevatel's interview with Mykola Malomuzh

Ukraine's strikes on military facilities on the territory of Russia could have serious legal consequences. The Kremlin could interpret this as a threat to sovereignty or as the West entering into open confrontation with Russia and mobilizing all available forces and means, including nuclear ones. For Ukraine, this step is unacceptable.

The enemy's military successes on the Ukrainian front are highly questionable. For example, the date of the capture of Severodonetsk has been postponed three times, but full control of the Ukrainian city has never been established. The Ukrainian Armed Forces are receiving large-scale military assistance from the allies, which will make it possible to launch a strategic offensive in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhya directions and create conditions to entrap the enemy.

Head of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Ukraine in 2005-2010, Army General Mykola Malomuzh made the remarks in an exclusive interview with Obozrevatel.

- The USA will provide Ukraine with multiple rocket launchers. In this connection, there is an active discussion: will they reach the Russian territory, and should Ukraine use them against targets on the enemy's side? President Zelenskyy has already stated that Ukraine does not intend to go that way. But this is a political statement. And what do military science and the history of previous wars say about it? How expedient is it to strike enemy territory?

- First of all, it is necessary to prepare for possible attacks of the enemy, for his offensive operations, including the use of intelligence data - both ours and allies'. Russia has several plans to occupy Ukraine - through economics, politics, and the military. And we need to be prepared for any of them.

In terms of military science, we must create defence systems, primarily in the Luhansk and Donetsk regions. The enemy has set itself the task of seizing first the entire Luhansk region, Severodonetsk, then Lysychansk, Bakhmut, and then the Donetsk region. The security forces have been given specific tasks.

Thus, we understand which objects are now most important for defence and protection, and we create conditions for this defence, as well as for counterattacks. The most effective system is to concentrate forces and means in the direction of the main strike and to prepare special forces that can operate from the flanks and from the rear.

The legal aspect is very important here. A real war is going on, but Russia qualifies it as a special operation. If strikes are carried out on Russian territory, it will be treated as a real war, an encroachment on Russian sovereignty. Accordingly, Russia gets legal grounds to declare war on Ukraine.

- But this is also a political decision.

- In this situation, it is not the only one. It would entail a general mobilization and concentration of forces and means, including nuclear weapons, to defeat the enemy. Most means are used even now, but in this case, it will be massive - the entire country's missile and armoured vehicles will be concentrated. And the war turns into a more complex heavy war.

Now de jure Russia is the aggressor, they attack, and we defend our country. Accordingly, we are higher in the moral sense, and this is the most important factor, it is more than 50% of the success in liberating the country. The Russians understand that their actions are wrong, that it is a violation of all principles of warfare.

But if Ukraine strikes Russia, a different concept begins to work - that there is supposedly a threat from the West. They see Ukraine as a tool of the West. This will lead to the concentration of all resources.

From my point of view, strikes on communications, warehouses, and columns on Russian territory would be very beneficial, but it is an occasion for a big war.

This is why the US is very cautious about supplying weapons to Ukraine. They provide only those means that will not hit objects on the territory of the Russian Federation, because they understand that otherwise, Russia will have an excuse to launch a global confrontation, including a nuclear one. This is stipulated by the military concepts of both the United States and Russia.

Johnson also said that Britain was ready to supply Ukraine with weapons that would not reach Russian territory.

This is not even a political issue. It is a real concrete question of a possible scenario for further military action, and the political consequences and real casualties.

- The logic here is quite clear. The question is about recent events. We see the enemy trying to take complete control of Severodonetsk. If the city is taken, what next? Which directions are important for the enemy? What is your prognosis for the Kherson region, where the counteroffensive is underway?

- I believe that we should have prepared more effectively for the actions of the enemy in the Severodonetsk direction, in the Donetsk region. There was intelligence information that Putin's goal was to seize Severodonetsk and then the Donetsk region and reach the administrative borders of the two regions.

Why so? Because there was a great dispersion of forces. Kherson, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhya, Donetsk, and Luhansk regions, it was necessary to keep forces in the area of Odesa and even in Belarus. Therefore, the enemy switched to a new tactic - to concentrate the main forces in the Luhansk and Donetsk directions, cross the river Seversky Donets, capture Lysychansk, Bakhmut, and go to Donetsk. The next stage is, of course, to the south, to break through the corridor.

But the enemy's success is questionable. They are constantly postponing deadlines. Initially, the task was set to take Severodonetsk by May 9, then May 25, and then June 1. But even today, on June 9, the city is not under Russian control. And this despite the concentration of all forces and means - missiles, armoured vehicles, and even more so the manpower. Moreover, the enemy is suffering enormous losses.

Russia has no large reserves. The mobilization that took place in different regions of the Russian Federation, both in the "DPR", "LPR", and the Crimea, gave about 40 thousand. This is very little for such a large theatre of military operations, especially since most of these are unmotivated and untrained fighters.

Our troops are now acting very correctly. In addition to the fact that we are defending in Severodonetsk, in parallel, we should have more effectively prepared in other directions and conduct not a tactical offensive, but a strategic one on Kherson, Zaporizhzhya and knock them out from there, to break through corridors to the sea and create conditions for encirclement. Then they will have no more time for Severodonetsk.

Using the latest equipment that is arriving in Ukraine these days and weeks, we will be able to strike not only to defeat the defenсes, for example, in the defenсe zones - Zaporizhzhya, Kherson - but also just to bypass them. Then there will be no need to storm Kherson, Melitopol, or other cities because once surrounded, the enemy will flee.

In this situation, we need to act very flexibly and multilaterally in order to deliver powerful blows in other areas and weaken the enemy's positions, including in Luhansk and Donetsk regions.

- How do you assess the danger of a major offensive from the north? We see the actions of Russian troops and Belarus in that direction.

- I think Lukashenko understands that the situation is very complicated and unprofitable for Russia. He is trying to manoeuvre by providing Russia with its bases and airfields. This is also a tactic to draw Ukraine's forces and resources in this direction.

But we have operational information that the Belarusian military in mass does not want to fight in Ukraine. There are a number of units in Belarus, several brigades, which are very clearly focused on the Russian special services. They can act tactically, but they will have no prospects.

If we are talking about a systemic offensive by the entire Belarus, it is unlikely, because Lukashenko is afraid of the consequences for himself - legal and political. There is also the danger of mass protests of both the Belarusian military and citizens against Lukashenko himself. This regime could fall.

Nevertheless, he demonstrates a commitment to Putin and pulls back Ukrainian troops, which cannot be used in the Donetsk, Luhansk, or southern directions.