1. In Ukraine, Russia progresses little by little after death,
    
     The San Juan Daily Star.
    
     2.
    
      Center for Strategic and International Studies TRANSCRIPT,
     
      Event:
     
      “Ukraine in the balance: an update of the battlefield on the war
     
      In Ukraine "
     
   We publish these two news as annexes, which are very vinvulated to be able to make a closer idea in the war front between the Russian imperialist invader and the forces of the Ukrainian national resistance.
  
   We have underlined the 1 and 2, and we will comment more widely later.
  
   Today we publish transcription 
 Complete of the Center for Strategic and 
 International Studies “Ukraine in the Balance: A Battlefield Update 
 on the war in ukraine ”, which last Friday we publish them 
 incomplete, we also made the mistake of consigning the CSIS as a 
 Yankee Imperialism Institute, when it is from English imperialism 
 As can be seen at the UK publication, this is the kingdom 
 United. We lohico with the rush of time, because we consider that 
 It was very important that our readers conceive, in the opinion of 
 The military and security experts of Yankee imperialism, such as 
 They are Eliot Cohen, former state department advisor, Emily Harding, 
 An intelligence expert of the SCIS that was previously CIA, of the 
 US National Security Council, etc., and Mike Vickers, 
 former Undersecretary of Defense Intelligence, Operations Officer 
 of the CIA.
  
   The importance of the document is that 
 contains the discussion between these experts that represent the 
 interests of one of the factions of Yankee imperialism, that of 
 current Biden government and PD, on how the development of the 
 War from its beginning to date, the stages that according to them carry 
 Tour, until you reach the current moment of the War of positions, 
 With the different terrestrial, aerial and naval bells, where they show the successes and failures, the strengths and weak, etc. 
 From both part, the symbolic importance of the taking of Avdiivka 
 For political development in Russia, linked to the death of Levany, 
 and its limited military value. Make an interesting comparison between 1914 and 2023, where 
 They see great potential for instability and innovation on both sides 
 In this war, his appreciation of the Naval Campana of the Ukraine 
 It is important.
  
   See how Imperialists focus on their "help" 
 military to impose dependence on the Ukrainian nation, that is 
 get through the back door, while the Ukrainian nation combat 
 the invasion of the aggressive forces of Russian imperialism. I know there 
 reveals his cynicism, when he recognizes that with this "help" 
 They win are their own companies, they say:
  
   „(…) The money we spend on 
 Ukraine does not leave the United States to the defense industry of the 
 USA .. You go to US companies that send help to Ukraine. The 
 Vast majority of this stay here. ”
  
   That is double gain.
  
   The interests of the government 
 Imperialist Yankee of Biden are expressed in the opinions of these 
 experiences, among many others, when they talk about the meaning of this 
 War, etc. The statements of the representatives of all imperialist countries regarding war, in terms of "help", sending of armament and threat of being used has or seeks to have an effect on the opinion of the countries involved, in the elections and internal political development , because as reads the second annex and the news about the conversations of German ocial Mass destruction, including the military. Of its proopias conditions and possibility. Especially of the strategic balance at the level of those weapons of the Russian and Yankees imperialists.
  
   Well, above all this we will return more 
 forward. But, we reiterate in reference to the two annexes, in 
 our position on the development of contradictions in this 
 War of aggression of Russian imperialism against the nation 
 Ukraine, in which the main contradiction is oppressed nation 
 Against Russian imperialist aggression war. Than the imperialists 
 In their wars against oppressed nations they can only 
 Coquisote failures and get engaged in the quagmire. That he 
 Yankee Emprialism is the fat dog and the main enemy of the 
 Peoples of the world and Russian imperialism is the skinny dog, such as 
 Aggressive imperialism in Ukraine is the main enemy there.
  
    We publish two annexes, one is from a newspaper of 
 The USA and, the other, of a Yankee Imperialism Research Center:
   
    1. In Ukraine, Russia advances little by little after 
 Death, The San Juan Daily Star.
   
    2.
    
     Center for Strategic and International 
 Studies Transcript, event: “Ukraine in the balance: a 
 update of the battlefield on war in Ukraine "
    
    In Ukraine, Russia advances little by little after 
 death
   
    ·
   
    o
    
    The San Juan
Daily Star
   
    2 days ago
   
   §
  
    Members of a humanitarian group transport the body 
 from a Russian military near Koroviy Yar, in the Donetsk region in Ukraine, the 
 January 7, 2023. Russia has made several adjustments after a disastrous year, 
 but it still seems much more comfortable absorbing large losses of troops and 
 team, even to achieve small profits. (Nicole Tung/The New York 
 Times)
   
    Por Thomas Gibbons-Neff Y Anatoly Kur
   
     When the Russian army launched its offensive against the 
 Avdiivka City, in eastern Ukraine, the past fall, the troops 
 Ukrainians noticed a change in their tactics as column after column 
 of Russian forces were devastated by artillery fire.
    
    Russian forces divided their formations of 
 infantry in smaller units to avoid being bombarded, while 
 The number of Russian air attacks increased to demolish the defenses of the 
 city.
   
    It was one of several adjustments made by the Russians to 
 help reverse your luck after a disastrous first year. But this 
 changes were obscured by an obvious fact: the Russian army still 
 I was much more willing to absorb great losses in troops and equipment, 
 even to get small profits.
   
     Russian forces have a different pain threshold, 
 This month said a senior western official, as well as an unorthodox vision 
 of what is considered an acceptable level of military losses
    
    .
   
    Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers have 
 result injured or dead from the beginning of the Russian in large scale, 
 including tens of thousands last year in the Battle for the Eastern City 
 from Bakhmut.
    
     Another city to the south, Marinka, fell into the hands of Russia in January, 
 After intense fighting and more losses
    
    .
   
     Avdiivka was one of the most expensive. The diverse 
 Russian casual estimates that circulate among military analysts, bloggers 
 Prorruse and Ukrainian officials suggest that Moscow lost more troops 
 Taking Avdiivka that in 10 years of fighting in Afghanistan in the 1980s.
    
    But the figures of victims are difficult to 
 verify: they are inflated on the side that causes them and minimized on the side 
 that suffers them, which leaves the real cost unknown. The figure is considered 
 Officer of Soviet dead in Afghanistan, around 15,000, is very 
 underestimated.
   
    An outstanding military blogger wrote that the Russians 
 They had lost 16,000 soldiers in Avdiivka, a figure that follows for now 
 being impossible to confirm.
   
    "Despite Russia's great losses in 
 Avdiivka, they still have an advantage of personnel along the front and can 
 Continue attacks in multiple directions, "said Rob Lee, 
 principal researcher of the Foreign Policy Research Institute, with 
 Headquarters in Philadelphia.
   
     Russia's slow advance occurs when 
 European nations take measures to reinforce support for Ukraine and strengthen 
 His own protections against a possible Russian aggression
    
    . Monday, NATO 
 exceeded the last obstacle to passing the membership of Sweden, less than a year 
 after Finland joined, an expansion of the military alliance that 
 challenges the hopes of President Vladimir Putin of Russia to fracture the 
 unity of their adversaries.
   
    President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine said the 
 Sunday that 31,000 Ukrainian soldiers had died fighting Russia. Their 
 Comments caught the attention for how rare they were; Participants in the 
 War almost never reveal casualties. But most analysts and 
 Western officials say that the number of victims is much higher.
   
     From the beginning of the invasion, Russia has been 
 willing to pay especially high cost to advance in the area of the 
 East of Ukraine known as Donbas, where Avdiivka is located
    
    . Parts of 
 This traditionally Russian -speaking region has been occupied by 
 representatives of Russia since 2014, and trying to justify the invasion of 
 Large scale, the Kremlin has falsely affirmed that he is defending his 
 Russian speakers, saying they want to be part of Russia.
   
     Some military analysts say that taking control 
 Total of the DonBass is the minimum that the Russian government needs to present the invasion 
 of Ukraine as a house victory. That may explain Moscow's will 
 of absorbing enormous losses to achieve marginal advances
    
    .
   
     Avdiivka has been strategic and symbolic for 
 Russian war propaganda
    
    Due to its proximity to Donetsk, the city more 
 Grande del DonBass, who has been under the occupation backed by Russia since 
 2014. Ensure Avdiivka would take the Ukrainian artillery of the city, 
 reducing the civilian population. Low and pressure on supply lines 
 rear.
   
    Kremlin's propensity to shoot more projectiles, 
 concentrate more people and rely on a much larger and capable air force on 
 This war allowed him to gradually change the course against the deep 
 Defenses of Ukraine in Avdiivka. The huge cost in injured and dead, they say 
 Some analysts, was only the byproduct of a strategy that he achieved in great 
 measured its objective, despite the loss of men and material, especially 
 When Western military aid and Ukrainian ammunition decreased 
 subsequently.
   
    The latest for now.
   
    A Russian military analyst close to the industry of 
 Defense, Ruslan Pukhov, wrote last week that the assault on Avdiivka was 
 part of a broader Russian strategy of pressing the Ukrainian forces to 
 throughout the entire line of the 600 mile front with attacks and probes for 
 exhaust the enemy "for a thousand cuts."
   
    "
    
     This strategy, however, is enough 
 expensive for Russian armed forces in terms of losses, which could 
 lead to the exhaustion of your forces
    
    "Pukhov wrote in a magazine 
 Russian current. "
    
     This, in turn, could give the Ukrainian part once 
 plus the initiative
    
    ”.
   
    However, most analysts are 
 issuing sobering evaluations about Ukraine's perspectives to 
 2024 If you do not receive American help. As the war enters its 
 third year, both sides struggle to find enough men to 
 Continue fighting with the same level of intensity. The much greater population 
 of Russia, around 144 million people, three times that of Ukraine, 
 It gives a significant advantage in labor.
   
    The magnitude of Russia's losses has annulled in 
 part of the impact of this arithmetic.
   
    Kremlin's decision to summon 300,000 men 
 In September 2022 (for the first time since World War II) has 
 shocked and baffled to the nation, according to the polls. Hundreds of thousands 
 of men had already fled from the country when the war began, threatening with 
 Sur Sound the image of normality cultivated by Putin.
   
    Since then, the government has tried to postpone what 
 more possible another round of mobilizations. Instead, incentives have promoted 
 financial and legal to attract the front as volunteers to convicts, 
 Debors, immigrants and other vulnerable social groups. It has also begun 
 to strictly enforce mandatory military service for young men, 
 previously Laxo, in the country.
   
    In a publication published in the application of 
 Telegram messaging on February 18, a Russian military blogger for war cited 
 An anonymous military source that claimed that since October, the Russian forces 
 They had suffered 16,000 "irreplaceable" human losses, as well as that of 300 
 armored vehicles in the assault to Avdiivka. The Ukrainian forces had 
 suffered between 5,000 and 7,000 irreplaceable human losses in battle, 
 The blogger Andrei Morozov wrote.
   
    These statements could not be verified in a form 
 independent.
   
     Center for Strategic and International Studies
TRANSCRIPT Event “Ukraine in the Balance: A Battlefield Update on the War in
Ukraine” DATE Thursday, February 22, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. ET
    
     Center for Strategic and International Studies
    
     TRANSCRIPTION
    
     Event
    
     “Ukraine in the balance: an update of the field of 
 battle
    
     In Ukraine "
    
     DATE
    
     Thursday, February 22, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. hour 
 from the east
    
     HIGHLIGHTING
    
     El Honorable Michael Vickers
    
     Former Deputy Secretary of Defense for Intelligence
    
     CSIS experts
    
     Seth Jones
    
     Senior Vice President; Harold Brown chair; and director, 
 International Security Program,
    
     CSIS
    
     Eliot A. Cohen
    
     Arleight A. Burke Strategy Chair, CSIS
    
     Emily Harding
    
     Director, Intelligence Program, National Security 
 and technology and deputy director,
    
     International Security Program, CSIS
    
    Seth G. Jones:
   
    welcome to 
 Center for Strategic and International Studies. My name is Seth Jones. Am 
 the director of the International Security Program. It has been two years since 
 The Russians invaded Ukraine.
   
     We are here for 
 discuss a range of military, intelligence, political and other issues 
 Type on invasion, the state of war.
    
    And Eliot Cohen accompanies me. 
 Eliot is the president of Arleight Burke in CSIS, former advisor of the 
 United States Department of State and author of several books. Emily 
 Harding, National Intelligence Director Security and Technology Program, 
 and deputy director of the International Institute Security Program in CSIS. 
 Also previously in the CIA, the National Security Service, thus 
 as the Select Senate Intelligence Committee. And the honorable Mike Vickers, 
 former Deputy Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, Undersecretary of Operations 
 Specials, former green beret, official CIA operations.
   
    But the most 
 Important, the author of the recently published memories, “By All Means 
 Available ”of Knopf, which was ... which is a great book. Mike, thanks for doing 
 that. And we have had - we have had a session on that as good. Let me 
 Start: if we could open the battlefield map. This is at the beginning 
 of this month. We get out of the United Kingdom Ministry of Defense, Defense 
 Intelligence. And what I wanted to do is remind everyone where we have come 
 of. So you can't see it on the map itself, but you visualize it after 
 Russian initial attacks on at least five axes did control the 
 territory, some of which we can see here. They also tried to push 
 down from Belarus and parts of Russia to take kyiv, in what 
 They failed. Járkov City, which, as you can see, is not under Russian control, 
 in which they failed. Then we saw multiple phases in which the Ukrainians 
 They could effectively resume part of this territory, here in Kharkiv, with 
 an offensive operation.
   
     Year 
 After we saw the Russians resume territory, even in the south, in Kherson. 
 And where we are now they are a couple of things. Recently we have seen 
 The Russians resume Avdiivka. I would say they are lit. The offensive. Have 
 Military initiative at this time. They have not recovered much territory. 
 We will talk about the details in a moment. And we have also seen a lot 
 Activity, Ukrainians point to Russian ships, infrastructure in Crimea and 
 In the Black Sea and its surroundings
    
    .
   
    So, with that 
 Brief general description, a little where we have arrived, Eliot, wanted 
 go to you first and ask how to characterize this stage of the 
 War at this time.
   
    Eliot A. Cohen:
   
     Well I think 
 We have passed through three phases
    
    .
    
     The first phase, obviously l
    
     to Russian invasion and 
 The successful Ukrainian defense
    
    . But keep in mind
   
    than during that 
 phase could reach the doors of kyiv, get a large part of the area 
 Around Kharkiv, and in fact they could take
   
    Kherson and overcome 
 The Dnieper.
   
    You saw
    
     a 
 second phase, which was a Ukrainian counteroffensive, which was really 
 notably successful. Led to them back from Kyiv. The Russians ended 
 backing down.
    
    The cleaning of the area around Kharkiv ended, some 
 minor advances in areas around Slavyansk. They resumed the city of 
 Kherson.
   
     And now you are in 
 The third phase,
    
    that it has been for some time, that
   
    It has consisted of 
 A series of attacks and counterattacks. Russian attack a
   
    Bakhmut, that 
 They finally took at a terrible price. A Ukrainian offensive. I wouldn't call it 
 A counteroffensive, that was: he achieved minor successes, but not much; l
    
     At initiative 
 Pasa again at the hands of the Russians
    
     since they have taken 
 Avdiivka, again, at terribly high costs
    
    .
   
     This is a phase 
 positional war. I think it is a mistake to talk about it as a point of death, 
 That is how some people talk about it. It is positional war that seems 
 quite familiar to military historians where the initiative changes 
 round trip, but where there is a lot of adaptation and innovation and change with the 
 initiative going and coming
    
    .
   
    And we don't know 
 How much this positional phase can last. it can last
   
    a good time.
   
    The other point that 
 I think it is important to highlight is that it is easy
   
    become obsessed with 
 the
    
     field campaign
    
    , which has different parts because it is one -
    
     We are talking about a very long front line.
    
     In parallel 
 It is carrying out an important naval campaign in which in fact, the 
 Ukrainians have had a remarkable success by doing many damage to the sea fleet 
 Black
    
    saving, of course, his flagship, but I also believe that five from 
 nine of his landing boats, effectively retreating to 
 Russians to some extent beyond the Crimean Peninsula, thus releasing the 
 Maritime routes
   
    They have been able to 
 export cereals, even further to, where
   
    The Russians have 
 transferred some of its naval bases. So that is another campaign.
   
    Hay
    
     a deep campaign of attacks in which 
 Russians are attacking Ukrainian infrastructure
    
    . They are attacking cities and 
 Ukrainian power plants and others, in addition to a kind of bombing 
 To sow terror. But with the Ukrainians who also attack Russia to a minor 
 measure, but still with real effect both in missiles of different types but 
 Also special operations forces.
   
    And then it is underway
    
     a kind of campaign 
 Information War
    
    in which both Russians and Ukrainians are 
 trying to convince the public of different types in the West, in the south 
 Global and other places, who has the advantage, in which direction this is, of 
 What is all this.
   
     I think it is very important to keep in mind that we have 
 - There are multiple
    
     campaigns running and each one is in a place 
 different
    
    .
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    So, if we can open the map again, I want 
 concentrate a little, I want to stay on this subject and ask Mike and 
 Emily, looking at the map I want to perfect here. Some of the activities 
 more recent we have seen are here in Avdiivka, that the Russians have 
 Retaking to a big cost, we are listening to victims figures, with a grain 
 of salt, from more than 15,000 to 17,000. Russian casualties, which are huge if that is 
 TRUE.
   
    The Russians also press Bakhmut. How ... mike, 
 For you first?
   
    And then Emily, I mean, what is your opinion 
 general about the important or
    
     What success has this had for the Russians? Wanna 
 Saying, some people have done a big deal about this. that the Russians are 
 Now to the offensive. They have Avdiivka resumed. But what is your meaning?
    
    The Honorable Michael G. Vickers:
   
     Well, the Russians are investigating in five 
 addresses along this line and Avdiivka, I think they were important 
 symbolic for Putin before his choice because basically, he had not taken 
 Nothing in a year from Bakhmut
    
    .
   
    You know, it has some value. But you mentioned the 
 Russian losses He
   
    The exchange relationship was probably the order 
 From five to one, more or less, you know, a fairly small garnish of 
 Ukrainians, as in other places, could contain the Russians for quite a lot 
 time until they ran out of ammunition and personal.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    Emily, how important is this Russian success, 
 at least limited?
   
    Emily Harding:
   
     It is difficult to say it was a success for someone. Yes 
 lost 17,000 soldiers - and we should mention that I had to kill one of 
 His pro-kremlin bloggers to cover up the fact that they lost 17,000 
 soldiers; That is not a success for Putin.
    
    I think what Mike says about a small garnish 
 Ukrainian that resists is absolutely true. There were some sad numbers 
 around 800 to a thousand. Ukrainian troops that could have been captured 
 When they tried to withdraw back and I think there are many criticisms really 
 unfair to the way the Ukrainians went back.
   
    I mean, unless you have been in that 
 situation, it is very difficult for me to say that, they did not execute it as well as 
 They could have done it. But I believe that Ukrainians and Europeans should 
 insist on the fact that yes, the Russians achieved Avdiivka, but what do 
 price?
   
    And look at the rest of that map. Can you pay that cost? 
 Throughout that forehead?
   
    Dr. Cohen:
   
    I think, you know, I would address this for a moment. Believe 
 that part of the Russian intention in all this is, first, to agree with 
 Mike;
   
    Putin wanted a symbolic victory of some kind 
 before the elections.
   
    Maybe we want to talk a little about how politics 
 Russian affects all this.
   
     But I think what the Russians are, what the Russians 
 They want to do now is
    
     convince everyone that the Ukrainian case does not have 
 remedy
    
    .
   
    Sra. Harding:
   
    Yeah.
   
    Dr. Cohen:
   
    And that ... you know, and therefore, I think what 
 They would probably do,
   
    Ultimately, what I would like to do is 
 submit this to a negotiated agreement that is not permanent, which simply 
 I would prepare them for another offensive somewhere later. So, in 
 One way, I think that is the real objective.
   
     You know, the center of gravity, to use some 
 military jargon, it is.
    
     public opinion and the opinion of political elites, 
 particularly in the United States, to persuade them that Ukraine 
 You just can't win; You know, the Russians are relentless, they have 
 resources that are essentially infinite and an infinite will to suffer. 
 Now, I don't think any of those things is true, but I think that is 
 In large part what the Russians want us to create
    
    .
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    Then, Eliot, you mentioned the front.
    
     Yeah 
 We could increase only these advance rates, so we gathered this, rates of 
 progress for selective
    
     combined weapons offensives between 1914 and 2023
    
    . 
 I mean, I think it is true that the rhythm of progress of the offensive 
 Ukrainian last year
   
    It was relatively slow. We evaluate between June 4 
 and on August 28, 2023, they got about 90 meters per day, which is 
 quite slow.
   
    They faced Russian defenses strongly 
 Fortified with mined fields. So the Russians could also bring 
 Fixed wing aircraft, helicopters and drones against tanks and armored personnel 
 Ukrainians who advance aircraft carrier and even disassembled infantry. But 
 Some people have raised the spectrum that seems: the situation is 
 It looks like World War. So how to respond to that?
   
    Dr. Cohen:
   
    Well, I would respond in several ways.
   
     I would start by saying that it is really a bad 
 Interpretation of what happened in World War I. You know, we, 
 our mental image of World War I comes from a number of 
 films in which it is only a group of snuggled types in a 
 trench
    
    ,
   
    Then they go up to the top and all are dejected by 
 machine guns.
   
    Actually, World War I was
    
     a war 
 Very interactive
    
    in which both sides are innovating all the time.
    
     It was a 
 positional war
    
    . And then what happens? And this can be a bit 
 misleading.
    
     You know, armies do not move at their average progress rate
    
    .
    
     It 
 what happens is that they are slow, slow, slow and then, boom, there is a great 
 progress and everything suddenly are going very deep
    
    .
   
    This is like German offensives in 1918. It is 
 True for many wars. Even as the first Gulf War, there are, already 
 You know, 40 days of bombing and then, suddenly, the land war opens.
   
    I think the other way in which the analogy of 
 World War I is misleading - and again, it is because people do not 
 Know the history, the reality type of tactical and operational history of the 
 World War I - is the assumption. This is simply a butcher shop and 
 There are many casualties. I don't want to minimize that - and it's absurd and there is no, you know, 
 No particular innovation.
    
     Actually, this is a war in which there is 
 A lot of innovation, in which, I would say it in this way. I think the Ukrainians 
 Innovan from the bottom up and the Russians tend to innovate from above 
 down. Russians have a very vertical command system, so they can 
 be flexible. and learn and so on.
    
    Ukrainians are a free society, so there is 
 Many guys with interesting ideas that come out and try things and experiment. 
 Both ways to do so have their advantages and disadvantages. But what 
 It is certainly not, a, it is not static; And B, it is not a conflict in which only 
 There are people hitting their heads. others without a genuine guy from 
 Innovation and improvement by any of the sides.
   
    Then it exists - and what that means, ultimately 
 instance, is that there is the potential for, you know, serious instability 
 that goes from one place to another at any time, but certainly during the 
 Next year or so. You know, we should not assume that this will remain like this 
 Forever, because it won't be so.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
   So Mike, have you seen big surprises until 
 now? Honorable.
  
   Vickers:
  
    First, allow me to agree with Eliot about 
 The deceitful parallels of the First World War. An area where I think 
 There is a bit of similarity is that
    
     It also has attributes of a war of 
 relative industrial capacity and the ability to stay 
 societies until you get the advances that Eliot spoke and the continuous 
 innovation.
    
    So the big surprises are simple. Really 
 There are two.
   
    One, how bad the Russian army has done, 
 especially at the beginning of
   
    stages but even the last year, of this war of 
 Position, Eliot spoke. AND
   
    You know, wear fight, have suffered losses 
 much older and simply, you know, I have not had a good performance from a 
 Military perspective The other side of the situation is how good 
 The Ukrainians have done. Not only in defending its territory from the 
 beginning, but then recovering it. And Járkov and Kherson, as Eliot mentioned, and 
 Some of the innovations. You know, for a military without army, sinking 
 Much of the Black Sea fleet, taking part of the fight in territory 
 Russian also last week. Drushed, you already know, seven Russian airplanes. That 
 It has been very good. I wish there would be bigger surprises. There are two in particular me 
 keep in mind. First, if the clock that the United States could not go back 
 persecuted. an incremental strategy. I think the Ukrainians would be a lot 
 better if we had been bolder from the beginning.
   
    Dr. Jones
   
    With what? Long -range rockets or?
   
    Honorable. Vickers:
   
    Long -range projectiles, a variety of defenses 
 aerial, a variety of things that could have put the things we are 
 Doing now, you know, we should have started a couple of years ago and 
 We made them more in all areas. And then him
   
    The second is the decrease in support in states 
 Joined
   
   . I wish I could tell me that so many, particularly in the 
 Republican party, now they are becoming against war and help 
 Ukrainian can be in danger. But it is not a surprise. But it is certainly 
 tragic.
  
    Dr. Jones:
   
    Well, that's a good transition for Emily. As 
 Would you value the American spare, including debates in Congress? And of 
 fact, before your answer, I just want to mention something that states 
 United has provided so far. Then we can go to the maps. Around 
 of 2 million bullets of 155 millimeters, 2,000- in addition to Stingers, Javelins and 
 Around 31 Abrams tanks. All these are DOD numbers.
   
    You see Bradley Combat vehicles, Obuses, Himars, a 
 Patriot battery, Nasam, attack. Thus we have an idea of what states 
 United has provided since the invasion began. But what has been the 
 American response more recently?
   
    Sra. Harding:
   
    Yes, if this graph is supposed to relieve my 
 frustration, it is only a work species. (Laughs.) I would call him hesitation. 
 The United States response has been hesitant. I think, without charity, I know 
 I could say that we have been to play while Rome burns. We have been 
 debating among us, exactly what a small weapons system 
 It will lead to the top or not now for two years. And I think Mike is right. 
 If we had not been hesitating early onwards, if we had really 
 provided the things we should have provided, I would have been a lot 
 better now.
   
     I would classify the debate within the United States 
 as partially of self -procession
    
    .
   
    There is a cube of that. And then partially self -centered. 
 And the autodisuasion piece is this constant to convince ourselves of 
 that if we provide the next system or additional capacity, then that will be what 
 that tilts Russia to expand the conflict. It simply has not happened. 
 Russia as interested as we are restricted to Ukraine. AND 
 the more that we allow them to continue advancing without retreating, the most will 
 press. Russia is a thug. They respond to force.
   
    The egocentric piece is this completely debate 
 counterproductive, in which there are people who say, well, why are we 
 sending all these resources to Ukraine? Why do we spend all this money on 
 Ukraine, when we really should leave it here for a fight in the 
 Peaceful? Or we should really be kept here for priorities 
 internal It is simply the wrong way to see it.
   
      First, from a numerical perspective 
 Basic, I think Angus King of Maine has a very good speech about this, the 
 money we spend in Ukraine does not leave the US 
 American defense. It goes to the US companies that send help to Ukraine. The 
 Great majority stay here
     
    .
   
    The other part is that it is not this or that. We have done 
 A great job here. In the CSIS, I know that some of our colleagues in 
 Washington have also done so that the types of weapons you need in a 
 fight in the Pacific are very different than the weapons that are needed in a 
 Fight in Ukraine. In addition, we have just seen Japan step forward and accept 
 Provide Ukraine for all kinds of help. And as they pointed out in the press this 
 Tomorrow, they share a common neighbor. Both Japan and Ukraine borders Russia. AND 
 Japan understands that this is not a Europe or a fight in the Pacific. This 
 It is a global message for a thug superpower.
   
    And that's where we also have to think about it.
   
    Dr. Cohen:
   
    Can I participate in this? This is a really table 
 interesting. So you know, order of magnitude, something like 10,000 
 Jabalinas, that makes sense. That is the anti -tank missile you need. He 
 Abrams tank number. However, or with patriot batteries, that's 
 ridiculous. I mean, and the problem is that we tell ourselves, oh, 
 Well, we have given you, you know, high -end aerial defenses, the Patriots. 
 But a battery? Thirty -one tanks? By the way, we have hundreds of 
 stored abrams tanks. These are Abrams's old model. They are not the 
 that our soldiers use. They're available. They could have gone there 
 a long time. And I think it is reflected as a failure what to think: we have not 
 managed to think with the proper urgency level. I agree with Mike and 
 Emily in that. But we have not managed to think about the correct scale.
   
    Honorable. Vickers: Escala.
   
    Dr. Cohen:
   
    And in part, it has been a long time, actually since 
 Korea, maybe. some parts of Vietnam, but we really have 
 involved in what is a war in which there is the entire 
 time. You know, I think we sometimes do a false dichotomy - and I'm afraid 
 that even some of our military thinkers address it in this way: 
 Between maneuvers and wear. Wear is not so much a strategy; is a 
 War condition You know, I think of -
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    And nobody wants to be in a wear war.
   
    Dr. Cohen:
   
    But every - but if you are in a real war - yes 
 You are in a real war, you are in a war of wear. You know, I think of, 
 Let's say, 1967, the six -day war, you know. The Israelis lost 
 approximately a quarter of its Air Force. And it is important - or yes 
 You look, say, you know, the Germans crossing France in 1940, they 
 they lost as a fifth of their tanks, and you know, even more percentages 
 High, I think. Think in your Air Force. Simply - If you are in a war 
 It would be against a war with serious opponent - and by the way, it would also happen to us 
 We are going to take
   
    great losses, and that means that you have to think 
 on the right scale. And unfortunately, I think that for our part he has 
 There will have been a systematic failure of thinking about the correct scale, with some 
 exceptions such as 155 millimeters rounds, where finally 
 We are expanding production, something that you already know about.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    Then yes. Yeah.
   
    Sra. Harding:
   
    Can I also play that with two fingers? So 
 Because I can listen to the screams from interwebs, batteries 
 Patriot, in reality I understand that due to the shortage of production in that 
 system and because I know many of our partners in the Middle East need them 
 desperately to do things like fighting the hutis, who are 
 shooting against Saudi Arabia. That is a reason, not an excuse. And here it is 
 where speech is inserted on the industrial defense basis and how not 
 We have been pointing enough to personnel who manufacture things like 
 Patriot batteries, there will be a demand for them will continue in the next two 
 years, five years, 10 years, so production increases to satisfy the 
 demand; And although we say for a second, that tomorrow the peace explodes throughout the 
 World, we will continue to comply with those contracts, so please constrain them.
   
    Honorable. Vickers:
   
    Yes. And I would add, you know, as my say 
 Old Chief Bob Gates, you know, you have to win the war you are.
   
    Sra. Harding:
   
    Yeah.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    My former boss Mike Vickers also said that. (Laughter.) 
 I want to return to a point, Emily, who did - you raised the perspective of 
 Other countries, including some of our adversaries. I think people can 
 forget or not realize that when it comes to the Russians, you know, the 
 Russians have also spent significant amounts of ammunition in this 
 War too. Then the question, in part - and that goes through drones and - 
 Where do Russians get help? And for those who want to focus or 
 They think we can focus (the United States can only focus on a theater 
 At the same time, so we should really focus on Taiwan, or even alone 
 Israel, or - and that we cannot do that, reality when you look cooperation is 
 that the Chinese have provided significant help to the Russians. And it has been in 
 All areas, not in wholesale weapons systems. But a range of 
 Technology for Russian weapons systems that includes everything from microchips 
 For weapons systems to pieces for ammunition.
   
    North Koreans have provided rockets and ammunition 
 To the Russians. The Iranians have provided the Shahed-136 and other drones. 
 Then we are seeing the Russians receiving a variety of help from 
 The Chinese, of the North Koreans and the Iranians, which makes the United States 
 retain your help at this time is surprising because we have not seen the 
 Chinese in that sense, stop providing assistance to the Russians.
   
    I also wanted to understand your opinion, Emily, about the 
 Europeans and where Europeans are when providing help to 
 Ukraine. There are also - there has also been talk that the Germans 
 They would provide Taurus, for example, which is a greater scope ammunition. which 
 It is your sense where the Europeans are and how useful they have been at the time of 
 Provide help to Ukraine? And then, you know, if you can add something else.
   
    We have heard many criticisms. About Europeans 
 by several politicians about their defense expenditure, including 2 for 
 one hundred of the gross domestic product.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    Then yes. Yes. Mrs. Harding: mmm hmm. So, 
 To complement his excellent argument about China, we should not 
 Forget to what extent China has bought cheap Russian fuel, which is 
 keep the Russian economy afloat and allow them to do all the things that are 
 doing. More than saying about that.
   
    But when it comes to Europeans, you know, I passed 
 The first year of this war reassuring European allies that 
 The United States is in this for the long term, which Biden has said that we are 
 In this in the long term.
   
    The Russians are an old enemy. We understand that this goes 
 to be important not only for the security of Ukraine but also for the 
 Europe's security. Yes, there is talk of extremes about people, you know, that 
 They talk about their support to Ukraine. But those are the ends of the bell curve. 
 They were in this long term. And then, after a year passed, some of 
 Those bell curved voices at the end obtained a little stronger and a 
 Little more central and then I found myself saying it will be fine. It's going to be OK. 
 People like to add political points. But they will recover.
   
    Now I find myself in the situation of having to look 
 To Europeans in the face and say: I really don't know what will happen to the current 
 Help package. I still have hope that the camera enters reason and 
 approves it because it is of vital importance for security in many ways.
   
    It can be good for Ukraine and also for states 
 United at the same time.
   
    But I think Europeans are really starting to 
 Get difficult questions about themselves: how do you see security 
 European without the presence of the United States? as?
   
    The unfortunate comments of former president Trump 
 The other day about
   
    I think NATO really shook them in a way 
 which is difficult to ignore and are starting to look at things from production 
 of defense until the end and through, you know, communications with each other.
   
    We are seeing a silent defense production in 
 Some places and a loud defense. production in others. They are so far 
 To be able to do it, right? You know, direct NATO without the United States, but 
 Some very difficult questions are being raised.
   
    And finally I want to point out that some of our 
 colleagues here at the CSIS have done a really good job in NATO and 
 We are working on a project now on whether the 2 percent threshold is 
 really relevant, if there are other ways to measure what should be 
 Really the contributions of NATO and if the 2 percent question is 
 Just a false track.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    Yes, frankly, I think it's mainly a track 
 false. I think the subject, at the end of the day - and I have also written about this - is 
 To what extent and how Europeans and high -level war are useful, for 
 example. So that it takes it to aerial capacities, land capacities, 
 Naval capacities, including anti -submarine war. That takes you out of the problem 
 of the percentage. And much more to the capabilities to perform operations.
   
    Dr. Cohen:
   
    Let me not agree with that. I think that, 
 On the one hand, it is important to be able to measure in a way, you know, more 
 Reasonable and militarily relevant operational contributions.
   
    A figure of 2 percent of GDP, which is too much 
 low; I mean, I would say it is shooting at 3 (percent) or -
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    The United States is closer to ... is in the range 
 3 percent, right?
   
    Dr. Cohen:
   
    Is politically significant and is a message 
 For the public involved and for the governments involved we expect 
 that they put important resources against their own defense and not put excuses and 
 Saying, well, we are hosts your forces, that is also a contribution.
   
    You can't ... I don't think we can ignore your 
 Psychological dimension. I wanted to add, if I am allowed, two more things. One is 
 American production. It is absolutely fundamental because we have the greatest 
 Military industry and despite my previous scathing criticisms, we can 
 Expand things and get them on top. But it is also fundamental because 
 We provide leadership and central focus type for this. These are two 
 - There are two types of industrial coalition competitors here. You mentioned 
 one, Russia - Iran, China in the background with components and things, Korea del 
 North.
   
    With us are the Europeans, obviously, with states 
 Joined. But, you know, South Koreans play a role and 
 Japanese play a role and the United States is critical for that. So, 
 Yes ... you know, and the South Koreans sell us 155 (- millimeters) so that later 
 we can give ours to the Ukrainians; Indeed part of the game. 
 We have to be in ESO center.
   
    Now, I think it's important because ... I mean, 
 I think we are tending to be quite critical, and appropriately, 
 With our own government. Actually, the Russians are found in a way 
 different in a world of pain.
   
    They are ... you know, they are in a state of mobilization. 
 It is not clear that
   
    have really been able to increase military production of 
 a tremendously significant way. They still fight with production 
 of advanced pieces. of military team. You know, for example, they have had this 
 ARMATA T-14. tank they have been talking about for years. It's supposed to be 
 incredible. system. They have had problems implementing it. Have had 
 problems get it to occur. Your fossil fuel income has 
 gone decreasing. Yes, the Chinese buy that oil. The Chinese are good 
 merchants. And then they understand that. Oil is cheap and they ... 
 You know, they don't have the same pipelines and things. how that.
   
    So I think, you know, the Russians - the same fact 
 that North Koreans have to depend for 152 millimeter projectiles, 
 They have as a caliber 30 percentage of failure, he tells you something about their 
 Military industry So, you know, we should remind ourselves 
 That if we, if the United States is in the center, we propose it and 
 We keep the feet of our European allies to the fire, we can easily 
 overcome these types both in quantity and quality, safe, but I would say 
 that even in quantitative terms. But there must be a lot of energy 
 policy placed. And unfortunately I don't see that.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    So, returning to its European point, yes, it is 
 important to spend more on the Ministry of Defense. That 2 percent threshold 
 In a certain sense, it simply highlights that. But at the end of the day, I think 
 It is also important how they are spending their money. So if we can 
 to achieve this. I'm going to go with Mike in a second with a question. But if 
 We could show the image here. I just want people to see here. 
 This is one of the Iranian drones, the Shahed. 136. This was shot down in kyiv, 
 And now he is in possession of Ukrainians. You can also see here what it is 
 of an Iranian drone. And here this Iranian flag is on the side. So this us 
 Give an idea of some of the other countries that have been providing assistance 
 To the Russians.
   
    What takes me, Mike, to the Russians. That is, your 
 Russian military evaluation. You already talked a little about this, but what do you have? Good 
 made, in your sense? Where has you fought? And are we seeing some? Evolution 
 of the Russian concept of operations? They used more air than had in the past 
 in the offensive of Avdiivka. What does that mean?
   
    Honorable. Vickers:
   
    So where the Russians have done the best 
 They can really be in this position where they have had an advantage of 
 Artillery and an advantage. And then those two things - and, in addition, 
 The nine months, essentially, they were given to dig, prepare, put fields 
 Mined and other things that made the Ukrainian summer offensive of the year 
 past was very problematic. That, and the lack of aerial power of the Ukrainians. 
 You know, we essentially ask the Ukrainians to fight a war from a 
 so that the US army or the western military never 
 They would do. And you know, you just can't win that way. That is, it is 
 military negligence.
   
    So that's where they have done better. They have done what 
 worse they have been able to in the integrated field of combined weapons operations, 
 Aeroterres operations. And this is something we have seen with the Russian Army 
 In the Russian-Georgian war. They thought they had plans to fix these 
 Things, you know, of the lessons learned. They have not really done a good 
 job. And you know, if everything seems to have worsened as the scale has 
 increased. I mean, his great advantage at this time is really in the 
 resources. And it may be more fragile than people think.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    So, if we could open the slide, only 
 To emphasize what Mike noticed. Can
   
    Look, this is ... this was last year. But we can 
 See some of the Russian positions of positions. The trenches that raised 
 Here, the dragon's teeth. These are multiple rows of dragon teeth. 
 You can't see it here because it is buried, but the mined fields, the 
 Anti -tanks that have used, the mortar locations and locations 
 of weapons they have had. They had time during last year's offensive 
 To strengthen some of these defenses. measures. What about Russian air?
   
    Honorable. Vickers:
   
    Yes, Russian air, you know, it has been based 
 mainly in unmanned aerial missiles and vehicles 
 Strategic against populated centers. You know, and it certainly had some success 
 in that. In terms of aerial power on the battlefield, during the offensive 
 Ukrainian used attack helicopters reasonably well to limit 
 Ukrainian penetrations. Fixed wing aircraft have not done much. You 
 You know played a role in Avdiivka towards the end, when the Ukrainian army 
 I was withdrawing under pressure -
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    And I didn't have many Earth-Aire missiles.
   
    Honorable. Vickers:
   
    And had no earth-Aire missiles. But 
 mainly it stayed behind the lines and planning pumps that 
 They can enter and achieve objectives. And then it has not been a great player. 
 You know, Russian doctrine integrates air with armies in the field, doing 
 to the upper army. A little different from our approach.
   
    I would also add that, you know, its operational advantages 
 are
   
    One thing. What the Russians really tell for 
 winning the war is
   
    essentially knocking out the allies of Ukraine. 
 Basically cutting international support. You know, Eliot talked about this and Emily 
 He talked about political problems in Congress. But you know, that's his 
 theory. of the victory, is that if the aid is cut, they will have a chance 
 better.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    Well, because they also receive help. So he 
 Balance of power changes dramatically.
   
    Honorable. Vickers:
   
    Yes, they also receive help. The balance of 
 Power changes, exactly.
   
    Sra. Harding:
   
    This is one of those self -complicated prophecies of 
 those that spoke at the beginning. What is the message that Russians want 
 Let's absorb? that Ukraine cannot win, so we should withdraw the support. 
 And that idea that this is going to be totally self -fulfilled, which once we accept 
 The Russian policy of line then we go back, which makes it true, I think that 
 It is what we have to protect at all costs.
   
    Honorable. Vickers:
   
    I think Lenin called them useful idiots.
   
    Dr. Cohen:
   
    Well, and in a way it is already happening. Wanna 
 Say, even put aside Tucker Carlson, you know, you look at Senator Vance 
 Ohio. I mean, that's ... is saying what Russians would like 
 to say. that there is no way that Ukrainians can win, so 
 Let's be realistic and stop helping them.
   
    Dr. Jones:
   
    Well, Emily, the Russians have also been active in 
 Many other areas. We have seen Navalny face death. We have seen 
 to a Ukrainian deserter probably killed in Spain. What else do you have? 
 I mean, what are you doing with what the Russians are doing now in various 
 fields?
   
    Sra. Harding:
   
   I mean, they get paid in a way that 
 It seems quite surprising. What is clear: Navalny did not fall dead because 
 own will in a Russian prison. I know in my bones as sure as 
 I'm sitting here, and I didn't even have to do it. Be on the floor with him. 
 We will discover it at some point in the future that was in fact killed, and it was 
 Killed at a certain time for a certain reason. The fact that Putin 
 It has allowed it just before Munich the conference is quite interesting. 
 That came out almost at the same time that some news arose about some 
 New Russian capabilities potentially being in space, I think it is very 
 interesting.
   
   And it is a quite bold message that we are in the 
 second anniversary of this war and its number one political critic, feels that 
 You can eliminate with little or no repair. And I think Europeans are 
 Analyzing that message. In a way, does anyone know enough 
 naive to think that Navalny was going out of prison and becoming the 
 Future leader of Russia? No, Putin was never going to allow that to happen. But 
 the fact that he did it in the way he did. I think it was a message 
 Very scary for Europeans. And I wish we also arrived 
 over there.
   
   Honorable. Vickers:
   
   And the moment 
 It is: not only did not die for natural causes, hence they will not release the body 
 until they have disinfected enough, but also the moment is not 
 accidental. Is designed to be right on our face, let's say: we can 
 Hcer this and what are you going to do about it?
   
   Sra. Harding:
   
   What we do about it? What are we doing 
 about?
   
   Dr. Jones:
   
   So, 
 While you look at the year 2024, Emily, indications and warnings, what 
 We should look for an idea of how things are going?
   
   Sra. Harding:
   
   Yes. So it's 
 When I take away my indignant politician and put my hat of 
 Impartial analyst, or at least I do my best to do it. If you see 
 The linear analysis of where this conflict is directed, we must think that Russia 
 He will try to take advantage of his advantage in men and possibly power of 
 fire, although we have an intense debate about who will have the advantage in 
 firepower. But they continue to throw metal and people in the problem.
   
   You have to think that Ukraine will be trapped in this 
 defensive position for at least next year, while trying to discover 
 Some fundamental things and a reassessment of the strategy. So, 
 Looking, you know, what are you doing? To gather the labor you need to face 
 To the Russians? What do you do with mandatory military service or not? What do you do to 
 Try to obtain this hodgepodge of different materials they have and 
 combine it in an effective and coherent combat force. But that's really 
 Inherent to, we are sitting almost still while we try to solve this and 
 Wait for any type of Russian offense like the one we saw in Avdiivka.
   
   So what would that evaluation change? Those who 
 The evaluations of the Ukrainian side would change, I think they are much more 
 Probable that the big ones, changes on the Russian side. So I'll review them 
 first.
   
   The first option is that the United States approves the 
 Help package; Europeans do not use that as an opportunity to say 
 "UF" and go back to what they have been. In doing so, they also advance 
 with a huge amount of help; that Ukraine continues to carry the fight to 
 Russians We were talking about surprises before. One of my surprises is the little 
 that the Russian population has really felt the impact of this conflict. If that 
 Change, if we find a way to make the Russian population understand the 
 Costs of this conflict. to them in their places of origin. And then, if Ukraine 
 Find a way of choosing subaters differently. I mean, me 
 give in to military analysts in the room, who would know exactly 
 how it would be seen, but they find ways to focus on a particular area and 
 achieve progress there, could see that changing that scenario I proposed to 
 2024.
   
   On the Russian side, these are much more likely issues 
 And high impact, could there be roller troops riots? We saw what 
 Unpleasant with the Wagner group. You know, could something like this happen again 
 On a smaller scale along the Russian front lines? Is there one 
 possibility? That at some point in 2025 there will be a fall in the 
 Russian production of ammunition? I think that would change the rules of the game to 
 the conflict if it were really true and if China had not come to 
 save them. And then the real black swan is that something arises from the murder 
 from Navalny, that really becomes some kind of internal disturbance 
 Within Russia that attracts Putin's attention to return to internal problems 
 Russians more than continue the war in Ukraine. You know, the fighter for the 
 Freedom in me really expects that to happen, but I don't see many 
 indications that this can be the way. We go
   
   Dr. Jones:
   
   So, 
 Eliot, I know you have written about it, if we can find photography. of the 
 New Commander in Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. what are your options 
 As we look at the course of 2024? I mean, some of this is 
 You will clearly defend the Russian forces, but what are your 
 options? in staying in the fight?
   
   Dr. Cohen:
   
    Well I think 
 You are probably thinking of some very mundane things. Things like: how 
 Can I simply sustain strength? How can I rotate tired troops? 
 You know, how ... how do I train not only the new troops but also to the 
 new troops as individuals? - Do you know, the Ukrainians have not been so 
 intense as we would be in individual troops training, but in 
 reality what is probably even the most important thing at this time is 
 vitally important. But upper level training of units of 
 Battalions/brigades, training of older states, I think there is much of that. 
 They are thinking clearly: they have created this new command for aerial systems 
 Not beed, get such things to stand up. And I think they 
 - You know, they want to deliberately - the reason why they have clung to 
 Avdiivka because it has some political meaning for them. But I think, as in 
 Bakhmut, who decided that the Russians really bleed, because 
 I think they understand (not everyone in the West do it: that resources 
 Russia are not infinite and that if the Army Dustusia is suffering losses 
 Very large, even among young officers and others. ignition: they will have 
 problems to perform any type of maneuver important operation only 
 because they will not have the officers who can carry out…. Then I think 
 There is that. I think absorbing the new technology that
   
    get. Those are going to be their concerns to 
 2024, in addition to processing
   
    Other campaigns we have talked about.
   
    I mean, you know, that naval campaign has been 
 Extremely successful and I think they will want to continue with it. The attack campaign 
 deep, too. And then I suspect that 
 They will be thinking a lot about what will happen in 2025, and he will be thinking a lot 
 in this. About it. So I suspect that this is a year in which they will be in 
 great extent in the positional struggle, trying to prepare for what could 
 be the year of the decision, 2025
   
   .
   
    But it is war, so things will happen 
 Unexpected
   
   .
   
    They may face a maneuvering war
   
   (or movements?) That 
 They expected or did not want at a given time. Well, it will depend on what happens 
 Also on the Russian side.
  
   Honorable. Vickers:
  
   And we can help you by approving this aid bill.
  
   Dr. Cohen:
  
   Absolutely.
  
   Honorable. Vickers:
  
    But also, instead of simply considering giving 
 Attack or long range weapons to Ukrainians, such as the missile system 
 Army tactics and German Taurus of our two governments, giving them to 
 they. And then, you know, it is possible that the Kerch bridge does not remain in 
 foot for a long time
   
   .
  
   Dr. Cohen:
  
   And that really ... 
 You know, just to emphasize that point, you know, when we have given the 
 Ukrainian weapons of greater reach like the Himars or even ... we gave them, how are you 
 20 Atacms? They know how to use those things very effectively against 
 vulnerable areas in the Russian rear: its logistics nodes, command and 
 Control, barracks, things like that. And when that is done, the 
 Russian ability to continue these offensives in places like Avdiivka.
   
    Therefore, it is a capacity of critical importance. And if we eliminate the 
 Kerch bridge, they will have other ways to take things to Crimea, but it is a lot 
 more difficult. And that is what we should be doing
   
   .
  
   Dr. Jones:
  
   I frequently remember the television program 
 American “Macgyver
   
    ”By observing how Ukrainians have been 
 Innovatives in how they have even used harpoons in the rear of trucks
   
   , 
 For example; the way they have used some of their - and if we could show 
 This here - some of its FPV,
   
    drones, or tied different types of 
 improvised explosive devices, throwing themselves on Russian soldiers. They have 
 been quite innovative
   
   . So, the last question for Mike and Emily is: 
 Could you give us an idea, particularly to the American audience, of what 
 What is at stake here? I mean, if you even look at a red team, if you look 
 A Russian victory here, a Russian success, even a significant advance in the 
 Battlefield, what would be the implications? And in more terms 
 general, how important this is for the United States and how they should 
 Think of Americans about it?
  
   Honorable. Vickers:
  
    Well, I think the first thing is the advanced defense of 
 Europe. You know, we can talk about democracy, and this is the whitest war and 
 black that can be found in moral terms. But it is also important 
 For the defense of Europe, and Europe is still very important for states 
 United in its long -term competition with China and Russia
   
   . And you know, 
 there would be more threats to Europe if Russia won, and could also carry some 
 time. And we would also have, you know, maybe a weakening of the 
 European resolution, followed by a weakening of the US resolution. 
 You know, as Eliot said, we tend to lead these things. And it is very important 
 Let us do it. And then I think it is also a global problem. It is not just a 
 European issue Then send messages to the evils everywhere. But, now 
 You know,
   
    China is watching this closely, as to what happens there. 
 And then their calculations on Taiwan will be affected by the result of 
 This war
   
   .
  
   Sra. Harding:
  
   Yes, I would love to try to draw a straight line from what 
 That is happening in Ukraine until, you know, someone's wallet in 
 Kansas
   
    . It is a little long trip, but be patient. If you think about the 
 way in which the United States operates on the world stage, we have deliveries 
 Just in time on Walmart shelves. We have supply chains that 
 They cover everyone. And all these things are possible because the United States and 
 His allies have attached to a world system that tries to respect the State 
 of law and that has predictable economic consequences for certain things that 
 They happen
   
   . What Putin has done with his invasion of Ukraine that is to say: I don't 
 None of that imports. I want the world system to be reaped in the way that 
 I like it. I want to show that the UN makes no sense, that the United States 
 It is weak, that American democracy is not as good as it seems. AND 
 I want the United States to fight internally, alone, against yourself, instead 
 to use its vast global power to guarantee a safer world and 
 prosperous. The Chinese saw that and said: we like that idea. What we want 
 It is a world that is safe for Chinese companies. We want to manage 
 The world as we believe should be managed. We don't care about freedoms 
 personal We do not care democracy. What matters to us is to make money 
 For us and for our business. So we also agree with 
 That as a plan. Let's see how we can alter this global system in our favor. 
 To do