"The war can be for a long time." What sees the power strategy, the offensive in the south and the future of the war the main realist with the back of the living Taras Chmut

And then this figure only increased and today it exceeded UAH 4 billion. Video of the day more than 70% of donations make ordinary Ukrainians, admits the head of the Foundation Taras Chmut in an interview with HB. With their help for the army, a whole unmanned bayraktar, a number of other drones, thermal imagers and more have already been purchased. Return to the living became the first Ukrainian fund, which was licensed to purchase weapons abroad. So now his plans are to buy armored vehicles.

NV talked with the Chmut about whether Ukraine today has enough forces and weapons for a counter -offensive, which was required for victory, how the Foundation received a license for the purchase of weapons abroad and whether Ukrainians continue to actively transfer money to the army. - Let's start with the explosions that were heard on August 9 at the military airfield in the occupied Crimea.

The Pentagon stated that the United States did not provide Ukraine with weapons that could reach such a distance. What is your version: What could Ukraine hit the peninsula? - I don't have versions. They are foolish to create. For the first time, Ukraine is struck on Russian objects in the rear: both in the Russian territory and in temporarily occupied territories. It can be different equipment, different types of weapons, and it does not matter what specifically used.

- Are there missiles of Ukrainian production that could be able to survive more than 200 km? - No, no. - That is, if it was the Ukrainian side, then not with the help of Ukrainian missiles? - Where did you get it a rocket? - What can it be? - These can be different ways. Not necessarily rockets. - Western media wrote: they could do this with the help of a modification of Neptune or the Ukrainian Grima missile system. - The Ukrainian missile complex does not exist as a product.

Accordingly, there could be no thunder. And the fact that the media is served as a thunder is simply incompetence and lack of a depth of understanding of the situation with this Outk [operative-tactical missile complex]. - Recently, Ukraine has begun to receive weapons of greater range. How does this change the situation on the front? -It has a positive effect on our capabilities to impress goals in the operative-tactical depth of 50–100 km.

We can now cover the goals that, on the one hand, were mostly unattainable for us. On the other hand, the presence of modern such tools allows to treat the point-in-u [complex of the Soviet sample] and use them to work for their 120 km. - Is it already changing the course of war? Is it too early to talk about it? - It is too early to talk about the change in the course of war, but it significantly complicates the fighting for the enemy, and to some extent wins us time, resource for our army.

- What is the most in dire need of the Ukrainian army today? - armored vehicles, artillery, air defense systems, auto engineering. And then drones, communications, night optics and so on. - How much do we need such weapons to change the situation on the front? - In the conditions of a full -scale war, there is not enough. Any technique can end sooner or later, and it gives us some opportunities. Obviously, we will not get everything all over the nomenclature that we want. That is some process.

And the faster it is, on the one hand, the more opportunities. On the other hand, the greater the challenge to us, because we need to select people, cook them, they have to master it, in practice to understand how it shows itself. Because paper TTH (tactical and technical characteristics) and real TTH is a different process.

- What are the prospects for obtaining weapons that you have called the most necessary now? Armored vehicles in particular? - We get it from different countries in different quantities. But for the most part, we get either post -Soviet or similar technique, or MRAP [wheel arms with enhanced mine protection] and machines of this class. And we would still like full combat vehicles: BMPs, APPs and tanks. This is the technique that is needed for the offensive that we are talking about for a long time.

- Are we dependent only on Western weapons today? Is there anything that efficiently produces and applies Ukraine? - We are, we produce: drones, armored vehicles, armored vehicles, and radio equipment. Let's say so, the Ukrainian defense-industrial complex (defense) has suffered significantly, but in some industries it is being restored, and now new enterprises that offer new solutions are emerging and competition is growing somewhere. And this has a positive effect on the market.

Definitely, we have to make a significant rate on the domestic manufacturer, since we cannot buy 100% in the event. It is impossible. - In June, the adviser to the chairman of the Presidential Office Mikhail Podolyak stated that in order to win the war of Ukraine, such parity of heavy weapons - 1000 gaubs of 155 mm caliber, 300 RSZV, 500 tanks, 2000 units of armored vehicles, 1000 drones.

Do you agree with such an assessment of the situation? - I am not ready to comment on some figures from people who are incompetent and do not deal with equipment and weapons. - But such a number of weapons would help to break the situation? - It's just numbers from a person who is not related to the security and defense sector. And comment on them - to legitimize them in media and society.

- Okay, what are the factors then, whether the number of weapons should be that this victory, which everyone is talking about, comes? What is this recipe? - There is no linear dependence. We are fighting with a nuclear state. Imagine that we have 10 thousand tanks tomorrow, and a nuclear stroke is struck after us. Will 10 thousand tanks help us in the event of a nuclear stroke? Probably not. Therefore, there is no number as you need. It simply is not. Any help is important and needed.

It allows you to compensate for the losses somewhere, to increase the potential somewhere, and to win time somewhere. But this is not a panacea and there is no one weapon that will solve everything. These are synergy of different types, types, samples - from photo to aviation, from missile systems to banal trucks, from night vision devices to grenade launchers. - It is so. But without weapons, we lose a lot of people. - We do not know our losses.

We cannot know whether we are losing a lot about the enemy or not. Because we do not know and we did not carry out full -scale offensive actions to understand how possible the offensive is possible and how possible it is in terms of losses. - Many talk about the counter -offensive in the south. Do we have enough strength and weapons today to carry out it? - In my opinion, no, - in the format as it is now. Or with large losses.

On the other hand, the tactical environment in the Kherson region can contribute to the fact that the Russians will leave the Right Bank of the Kherson region, retreat on their own, as they did in the north, and will be fixed on the Dnieper line. This option is possible. - The last scenario is realistic? - It is quite so. - In what terms can it be implemented? - Again, with terms difficult history. Because it all depends on how it goes on the battlefield.

But now it is happening, we are now fire on bridges, we try some local offensive actions to cut off the enemy, using modern Western weapons, and this contributes to it. But again, a full -scale offensive requires sufficient amount of armored vehicles, artillery, aviation, which as one whole in the same system. Not to mention that it all requires qualified, competent and motivated people. - And they are enough? - You can never have everything in the war.

There is always a need for more, no matter how much you may be. Because you are running a war. - As a fund, from February 24, you had to significantly scale your help. Now you work not only for units of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, but also at all hot spots in Ukraine. How did you generally manage to handle this? Have you been preparing? - You are not in the war as you would like, but in a state as it is. Never be 100% ready for war. And we are not an exception.

Although, some preventive measures and actions were taken. What happened, it turned out as it turned out. We could not influence it. And many decisions were made in the course of developments with the output of a large part of the office to Ivano-Frankivsk, with the definition of those 7 areas of work on which we are now working, with the start of foreign economic activity and so on. - How much help was it possible to collect from February 24? - more than 4 billion UAH.

Plus cryptocurrency, which is difficult to count, because different currencies in different periods of time are converted differently. - What is the share of donations from this amount belong to ordinary Ukrainians, not business? - Most actually - 70-80%. But you do not know [exactly], because in some places you do not know who the money comes from. And a huge number of transactions are open - you can see on the site who and how much it throws.

- In the spring, volunteers said that the number of sacrifice fell. What is the situation in your fund with this? - The level of doney is tied to the country's economic condition. Accordingly, when he sits, the level of receipts sits. We are now on a certain plateau that has been going on for two to three months. We support it, this is our work. That is, we can do so that people continued to trust our money to help the Armed Forces.

- How can I support this plateau? - Proper communication, reputation, explanation why, and not otherwise, efficiency in work. - You went to the United States, after which there was information that you are going to open the office back alive. Did he start working already? - We are working on it. It is a process, it is not fast and requires certainty, and it cannot be immediately made.

- What will he focus on? - Fandering, lobbying of pro -Ukrainian position, and receiving assistance - technicians and weapons, including. And in general, after changing the perception of the West of Ukraine. - How will you change this attitude? - Proactive work in Washington. These are meetings with congressmen, senators, lobbyists, journalists with a correct target audience of the correct position and correct information.

Analytics on certain topics, joint collaboration with American analytical centers. There are many different formats, as it can be done in the section for six months - two years. - Accordingly, will you expect that Americans will sacrifice funds to the Fund's accounts? - For the American office - yes. - How do you see a portrait of an American who is ready to sacrifice for Ukraine? - I have no idea. It doesn't matter, it is a formal work that does not produce.

- Do you have an understanding by returning from the states, who is ready to give money for weapons? - Americans are simple, American business, organizations that want to help Ukraine are different. - Will raise funds abroad for you in priority, given that the incomes of the population fall? - No, absolutely no. Priority - work in Ukraine. Just scaling a new level. After the states, there may still be a European office. This is a zoom.

These are greater opportunities, it is more influence, it is just evolution, let's say so. This is normal. - You became the first Ukrainian fund to be licensed to purchase weapons abroad. How was it possible? - This is the titanic work of our lawyer Ruslana Velichko, who since March has made us, as a legal entity, to import goods of military and dual use. - What has you been able to bring to Ukraine today with this license? - There is a lot really.

In addition to the well -known Baracar TB2, these are thermal imagers, night vision devices, laser rangefinders, heat -sided, and everything. A few more transactions are now at the implementation stage. But again, the heat scene is a few transactions for different products, to different quantities. It's not about one, nor about ten. This is some kind of commodity, let's say so. - And you also signed an agreement with the manufacturer of bayrats.

What will this cooperation look like? - We implemented with them the first agreement for the purchase of the Baracar TB2 Complex - from May to July. Therefore, this agreement is closed. - How about a memorandum about cooperation? - He is about the desire of us and the willingness of Turkey to continue cooperation on the results of the first successful agreement. And on the line of Baracters, and on other prospective projects.

- Do you have intentions to continue to buy the barkraters? - I do not know. As of now, no, but there are certain systems and products we need, which Turkish manufacturer can sell us. - You have previously told you that you plan to buy armored vehicles. How does it look like in practice? -There are manufacturers, there are mediators-suppliers-Ukrainian, foreign. You are looking for or looking for you, finding points of interest, checking.

Then a huge negotiation process: price, delivery, logistics, permits for sale in your country, your company, permits for transit in certain countries through which military goods [will go]. This is a large piece of work that needs to be done, which is absolutely invisible to the average user. Again, everything related to military or dual use, if you work officially as we are, is a huge and absolutely difficult job. And sometimes very ungrateful.

- Russia tries to prevent you from signing transactions? - We are not. But I know that Russia is also working in this market quite actively and some other Ukrainian agreements have purchased or disrupted. - Example? - The armored vehicles were also disrupted. - Previously, your fund specialized in protective ammunition, thermal imagers, etc. Now what part of what you buy is weapons? - It is very difficult to say. We continue to carry thermal imagers.

Just if it could be a hunting Pulsar, it can now be a military thermal imager, and it already goes as a military product. This difference is important because it is a military device designed to fight. And then - a hunting thermal imaginary. - Have they been less effective? - Looking what criteria to look. Somewhere they are enough, but not somewhere. Somewhere they have a smaller resource, somewhere worse characteristics, somewhere they are not so resistant to external factors.

Somewhere they are not suitable for use in the arms of the army. - Are you not purchasing a protective ammunition? - No, we are coming to some residual agreements of spring, and the problem as such ended mostly. The state has picked up this issue, and in general, there is no sharp request for armor and helmets. The need can be found in the army, it is not 100% provided. But this is no longer a critical need as it was spring. This is no longer the niche we are ready to do.

- You often criticize power, including opposition. What are your relationships with the President's office and the government against this? - No. I have no relationship with them (laughs). - Who do you communicate with power with? - with the General Staff, the Ministry of Defense, with individual deputies, the Main Intelligence Directorate, the Ministry of Veterans. And for the most part everything.

- In what format does this happen and what requests do you hear? - The General Staff and the Armed Forces are our main, so to speak, client. That is, we work in their interests. Accordingly, we closely coordinate and communicate everything we do: their needs, our capabilities, and so on. With deputies - solving some individual issues where they can contribute. And all. - The longer the Great War lasts, the more conflicts arise against the background of politics.

From recent - the situation with General Marchenko, who allegedly disclosed information [regarding the Armed Forces]. What is your look at this? - I heard nothing about it. I don't read Facebook. -Okay, and in general there is a problem in the leakage of information by the highest military-political leadership? - There is a problem that a lot of people in this country say whether they communicate about what they do not have to communicate.

And many problems create this - these are deputies, advisers, assistants, and someone else, including in some places, representatives of the third sector. Therefore, our position in this is a little different: we are talking a lot about the war, but much more carefully and more careful, mostly postfactum.

- How does this communication harm harm? - This slows down the receipt of Western help, somewhere it creates artificial distrust of the state, somewhere it distorts focusing attention from the important one to the secondary, somewhere it is simply incompetence, which is issued for competence and so on. - Analyzing the last six months of the war: the strategy that Ukraine is moving, do you consider the right one? - Is there a strategy? - And she is gone? - I do not know.

Did you see her? - You are more competent in war. - I didn't see it. Maybe she is somewhere, I didn't see it. - After how events develop, you do not see it? - Let's just say, we are faster in the response position to events and challenges that appear from the 24th. Здебільшого їх задає фронт, безпосередньо поле бою впливає на те, як буде далі відбуватися майбутнє цієї країни.

Тому ми вкладаємося у поле бою.

Чим ефективніші будуть Збройні сили на полі бою, тим більше можливостей, більше часу, більше ресурсу, більше потенціалу буде в країни, як держави, для відстоювання своєї позиції в цьому геополітичному протистоянні з Росією, — і, фактично, Заходу з Росією.

— Що сьогодні, на ваш погляд, українці в більшості ще не розуміють про війну, але їм варто про це знати? — Що це може бути дуже надовго. — Ви бачите загальну температуру по палаті, що люди цього не розуміють? — Так, і що все не закінчилось, і все не зупинилось.

Загроза з півночі не зникла, загроза з півдня не зникла, наступ на сході росіян відбувається. Можливо, не так успішно, як їм хотілося б, але відбувається. — В чому проблема того, що немає цього розуміння? — Я не знаю.

— Недостатня комунікація з боку влади, ЗМІ? — Я не знаю, але перед владою стоять складні завдання. З одного боку, вся країна не може жити у стані війни постійному. Має працювати економіка, люди мають жити.