"The Russian Federation is not excluded by nuclear weapons." As Ukraine and the world have to respond to the escalation of Putin's war - interview with Kostenko

How seriously do nuclear threats perceive our partners in the United States and what is really ready to go to support Ukraine in the event of a nuclear strike, Roman Kostenko, the People's Deputy, Secretary of the Parliament Committee on National Security, Defense and Intelligence Committee, told in an interview with Radio NV. Video Day last week as a part of the parliamentary group you visited the United States.

Is it sufficient to understand the situation in which our partners find ourselves, given that the escalation that Putin President continues to exercise, is gaining momentum? Our delegation came there after the Counter -offshore of the Armed Forces in Kharkiv and these emotions went crazy.

First, we met many congressmen and senators, and when we came to anyone, we heard immediately: Ukraine, war, counter-offensive near Kharkiv, you are good! These were such live emotions, everyone was getting sick, it feels as if they were directly involved in these battles, someone there may even say "our weapons there. " They feel tangent, they really help us and very well that they support us so emotionally.

Even those congressmen and senators with whom we did not plan to meet (but met, going simply in the Capitol or Senate building), saw Ukraine's flags on our costumes, stopped and asked specifically how Ukraine, as Russia operates, welcomed with a counter -footrest. When we had already moved to specific conversations, indeed, support was felt from both Democrats and Republicans.

Even the Republicans made such theses that, they say, it is sometimes more difficult for us to explain to the constituencies in the constituencies, why we should support Ukraine. There is a little different electoral system, we have abolished the majority electoral system, and they are mostly majority, who directly cooperate with their voters. They listen to them, as it should be, and not always a congressman can vote as he wants, if he is required by voters.

[Congressmen told] that sometimes they had to explain [voters] why they should do [something] for Ukraine and assured that they would continue to do everything in order to be able to help us, to vote, [would] communicate with voters. The main thing is to give us more arguments, more victories, because we understand, it is a general war, in the name of not only Ukraine. In addition to the counter -offensive, they discussed many issues. For example, the bill on financing certain types of weapons.

In my opinion, it was a effective trip that we once again reminded the things we need and what we are fighting for, that we will not retreat and we will fully bring everything we started to contradict and return our lands. Probably the greatest fear of the world is now Putin's statements about the possible use of nuclear weapons. What do our partners say about this? Because it is a threat to the whole world.

Are they ready to continue to support Ukraine within the limits that are needed to protect our country, and possibly even more to strike an irreversible blow to the Russian authoritarian regime? We talked about Ukraine's support and hinted at [to the question] to which limits we will have this support. I reminded Congressmen of their obligations by the Budapest Memorandum.

If it was possible to manipulate the fact that it is only from nuclear weapons - now the question is, and whether you will give us protection according to this memorandum. Our partners say that yes, we will help you, we will protect. Of course, I would like these guarantees to be somehow approved. This would be a factor of restraint for Russia. Not just in words, but signed a contract or something. I think our diplomats speak about it and understand the importance of it.

I am sure that we will support us, but to what limit - will depend on how it happens when it happens and what a global schedule around it will be.

As a result of your conversations with Congressmen is still the likelihood of such a blow to be discussed? When we are dealing with the Russian Federation, as we have already understood, a normal analysis of pros and cons, as in a normal democratic country of normal people who, before doing something, always calculate what will be the pros, cons, minuses, whether we will not be The extinguisher and how our economy will work, how our policy will pursue, how we will communicate with other countries .

. . There is no rationality, so it will be excluded [a script in which] the Russian Federation, anticipating defeat, applies [nuclear weapons], we can no longer . That is, these threats are not currently discussed as when US intelligence reported that the offensive would be and they were aware of it. Do they have a deep understanding of the situation with their intentions to use nuclear weapons? - We were not provided with such information.

Remember how the intelligence leader Kirill Budanov told us that the invasion will be in a few days or in a few months? The information that Russia will strike on us, now is not, we have not been proved. It may be at any other levels, but I have not been reported as a committee secretary. Therefore, we discuss this in preventively: if Russia has such a weapon - it can use it because Russia has calibers and it uses them.

[Russia] has both tactical, operational and strategic nuclear weapons, and we must think how we act if they apply it. Since we do not have such weapons, the only way out is to look for such partners that own it, including the US; Britain, who made its application for our support, knock on France, to Turkey, which does not have its own but has the reserves of NATO nuclear weapons.

Combing them and saying that it will not use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, but about the world precedent that a country that had nuclear weapons gave it, but now cannot protect itself. And if that happens, it will be a threat to the world. For all countries that want to remain sovereign, there will be one way out - to go the way of nuclear weapons. Otherwise, no one can protect themselves. And this is another philosophy, another policy, other money for defense, in general another world.

And other threats that will stand before him. This is what we argue: if it happens and you do not respond, it will completely change the world order, and not for the better. The order, which followed with the announcement of mobilization, referred to the transition of the Russian defense-industrial complex to active saturation of the Russian front and a course for import substitution.

What should be our response, the reaction of our power and what is the reaction of Parliament to Putin's decision, which he now activates the Russian economy, putting it on military rails? What are we doing now and can do as an aggressor answer? Our mobilization was announced immediately and immediately set tasks, in particular the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, it was on the work of our defense-industrial complex according to its capabilities.

Repair of equipment, restoration, production, everything we can. This process is already established in one way or another, as far as our capabilities allow. However, the main thing for us is imports, the supply of equipment from our partners, because either the old man is failing or there are problems with the ammunition of Soviet samples. The main thing, I think, is diplomatic work and work with partners precisely to provide us and the reaction to what we tell them.

The reaction should be one: the appeal to our partners of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the President or the people defined by him, the Minister of Defense or the Main Committee to review the possibilities , keep parity. Because I am sure that Russia is not just mobilizing 300,000 soldiers to keep the territories that have already occupied. And in order to continue pressure on Ukraine, continue the offensive.

Many people think that on the borders that are, they stopped and everything, and now, there may be such frost [wars] as in the Donbass. In my opinion, this will not be the case: we do not have to allow it, and Russia does not want to stop on these boundaries. They need more, because even politically, they are losing a lot now, the goals and the goals of the operation have not achieved any, now they have announced a mobilization that they did not plan to carry out.