Touch upon this storyComment
Editor’s be aware
This transcript has been up to date to revive passages that had been initially printed on Could 13 however then faraway from a subsequent model. The passages had been eliminated for a number of hours on Could 14 to permit The Washington Submit to conduct extra reporting about them. The Submit ought to have included a be aware indicating that elements of the transcript had been briefly eliminated. This up to date model is an identical to the one printed on Could 13; it features a full transcript of the Could 1 interview, translated and calmly edited for readability.
KYIV, Ukraine — Ukraine and President Volodymyr Zelensky have been on the heart of the world’s consideration for greater than 14 months — since Russia launched an invasion that has killed hundreds of Ukrainian civilians and subjected many extra to occupation. The strain hasn’t let up on Zelensky or his nation as Western companions now await Kyiv to make use of newly donated fashionable weaponry, together with battle tanks, in a extremely anticipated spring counteroffensive.
Washington Submit Government Editor Sally Buzbee, International Editor Douglas Jehl, Russia, Ukraine and East Europe editor David M. Herszenhorn, Ukraine bureau chief Isabelle Khurshudyan and Ukraine chief correspondent Siobhán O’Grady interviewed Zelensky for an hour on Could 1 on the presidential workplace constructing in Kyiv. They mentioned the anticipated counteroffensive, leaked U.S. intelligence paperwork that exposed delicate details about Ukraine, and whether or not he worries about how the U.S. presidential election will impression assist for his nation.
The next is a full transcript of the interview, translated and calmly edited for readability. Zelensky spoke in Ukrainian besides the place famous.
Q: Ukraine has been planning a counteroffensive for a lot of months. Are you able to inform us about any specifics? What do that you must succeed?
A: Thanks very a lot to your query. To begin with, we don’t plan a counteroffensive for months. It is a precedence problem for us, so we needed to be ready upfront with our plans. And that is the reality. Our companions perceive this as effectively. There are points in plenty of areas. The primary problem is, after all, ammunition. I say this as a precedence — not as a result of I wish to complain, however as a result of it’s a useful resource with out which a counteroffensive is unimaginable. However I wish to clearly say that with out this useful resource, the protection of the state is unimaginable. It’s not simply a problem with reference to the counteroffensive. The difficulty is to have a counteroffensive and to not lose the territories that we have now. Even though we’re stronger — I feel we’re extra motivated than Russia. However however, we have now to organize every part and be stocked with weapons and motivated individuals so as to not lose our personal individuals. Subsequently, crucial factor we want are sources for the plans which have already been made. To be trustworthy, that is additionally influenced by the climate. That is an absolute reality as a result of, let’s simply say, the bottom must be appropriate for our weapons. We don’t have such a variety of armored autos. Sure, it’s troublesome for our enemy as effectively, these climate circumstances. However they are going to be on the protection on this situation. I consider that they’ve failed of their offensive. They’ve failed, most likely partially. They’re attempting to — we see that infrequently they’re making makes an attempt to assault, however, however, they’re slowed down within the mud of their choices. Within the mud of the shortage of motivation of their army personnel. And naturally, now you see what ways they’ve chosen. They destroy locations utterly. So, they don’t have a army tactic. They realized that they will’t enlist motivated individuals, they usually began the … highly effective tactic of utilizing Wagner [fighters] as a result of their very own army personnel are incapable. And so they shoot [their own] Wagner [troops] in the event that they retreat. In order that’s how they select to function. As for any cheap operations, we don’t see their aspect partaking in them on the battlefield, in order that they adopted different ways. They might not go round us one after the other, nor may they encircle us, nor may they assault. In every single place they achieved solely partial successes, or successes for a restricted time, after which they had been pushed again once more by our troops. And so, they got here to the ways that they used initially of the conflict in some small villages. Now they don’t care whether or not it’s a small village or a giant one. [That tactic] is the entire destruction of every part, of all infrastructure, buildings, civilians, and so on. What we see in Bakhmut, when you take a look at it from the sky, you probably have some type of satellite tv for pc capabilities to take a look at these photographs, you will notice that completely every part is destroyed. … As quickly because the supply of weapons that had been agreed upon with our companions is accomplished, we shall be prepared for a counteroffensive, after all considering the modifications in climate. And the objective stays the identical — the de-occupation of our territory.
Q: Do you might have sufficient troops to launch the counteroffensive? After which to switch any potential casualties?
A: Thanks very a lot. Our primary tactic from the very starting of the conflict and even earlier than the conflict — it was not a tactic then, however my perspective towards individuals — is that we needs to be in charge of all of our territory however we also needs to save as many individuals as potential. In the course of the conflict, our ways haven’t modified. We perceive that conflict takes individuals from us. Sadly, it takes the courageous and, sadly, it takes the perfect. However however, we perceive that regardless of the counteroffensive — and we are going to do it — we should make sure that we reduce losses as a lot as potential. And so, after we say what we want, we want every part that permits us to guard individuals — artillery methods and long-range artillery. By the way in which, we don’t perceive what the issue is right here with long-range methods, long-distance missiles. The difficulty with our companions is that, I feel they’re afraid that we would use them on the territory of Russia. However I might all the time inform our companions, “Hear, our job is to de-occupy our territory. We don’t have any disposable shells, and we don’t have any targets like that. Now we have a precedence goal for which we’re spending the ammunition bundle we have now. And we spend it on the de-occupation of purely Ukrainian territories.” However we would wish to try this with long-range missiles and methods. So now I don’t fairly perceive, I’ll let you know frankly, why we will’t get long-range artillery. As a result of the target of long-range artillery is certainly to not apply it to Russian territory. And I consider that we are going to address this deficit. We’re engaged on this in many various areas. And I’ll let you know frankly, we’re [working] on totally different continents to get it. And naturally, in any case, by way of a full-scale conflict — and this implies [in terms of] a full-scale de-occupation of our territories, completely all of them — we want aviation. We’re at the moment dropping within the sky. We all the time say that the energy of our individuals outweighs the energy of the Russian Federation. I feel we’re additionally stronger than Russia by way of motivation. On the battlefield, on the bottom, we have now proven what we will do. However we’re completely cheap individuals. If they’ve absolute superiority within the sky, then so be it. To resolve such an issue, it’s important to be trustworthy about it. And our companions as effectively, we want to get their assist to supply us with Western-standard fighter jets, actually the F-16. There are different fighter jets, [Eurofighters] and so forth. There are totally different names. We work with all of them to acquire one thing on this space.
Q: By way of a counteroffensive, do you might have any particular expectations of what that you must accomplish? And what does your army have to point out to maintain the assist that you’ve got now and future assist?
A: Look, we’re an unbiased state. And though we have now companions, we’re those making the selections, it doesn’t matter what. [About] the place we’re going, in what route we’re transferring … and the course of our actions. However, after all, on this sequence, we rely on our companions once more for assist. We don’t wish to lose their assist. We can’t head towards a sure objective when we’re not certain that we have now sufficient weapons, sufficient coaching for officers … that we have now sufficient to perform one or one other goal. So, after all, we take into account what we will get from our companions and what we will rely on. And that’s why it’s like that. … Look, no one expects as a lot [from this counteroffensive] as we do. I’ll let you know frankly, I’m undecided that completely all of our companions consider that we’re in a position to break the Russian Federation. It’s true that our companions’ confidence in us has grown. The actual fact that there’s a huge distinction between how we began the conflict, and all of my dialogues with companions, and the way I put most strain on them to assist; the very fact that there’s a big distinction between what occurred earlier than the full-scale conflict by way of our assist and the indicators I gave to our companions and what’s taking place now — their confidence in us has grown. It has multiplied by many occasions over, so it has not grown by percentages however multiplied many occasions. I’m grateful for this, after all, to many — to our army, to our individuals who stood up and didn’t run away, and to our companions. That, in any case, that is most likely the place the energy of democracy lies, that even when individuals do probably not consider in you, there’s nonetheless a dialogue. And that’s necessary, that our companions should not closed off. This was additionally crucial since you simply can’t, you realize, simply consider. Nonetheless, we’re speaking about more-pragmatic issues right here. This isn’t about having religion in God. And that’s why it’s important to belief. And we have now been constructing all this belief by way of applicable highly effective steps in Ukraine and thru diplomacy, after all. And that’s why — I do know that there’s skepticism amongst some companions that it could be scary if Ukraine liberates completely all of its territories. However I, for instance, can reside with this skepticism. And I consider that the extra victories we have now on the battlefield, frankly, the extra individuals will consider in us, which implies we are going to get extra assist. These are my conclusions.
Q: And also you now preserve your place to not negotiate with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin?
A: Look, we have now handled totally different Putins. It’s a very totally different set of traits in numerous intervals. Putin isn’t alone, Putin has an entourage. They made their respective choices. In 2019, their collective organism — the Kremlin, headed by Putin — stated that ‘sure, we are going to most likely discover a diplomatic answer.’ I very a lot needed this. In 2020 or 2021, this entire collective thoughts made up one thing else of their heads, however didn’t enter right into a dialogue with us and didn’t do every part we had agreed with them in 2019. We can’t say that Putin alone began a full-scale conflict in 2022. And it could be, to be trustworthy, simply insulting to all these individuals who have died. They’ve a big collective accountability for this. And that’s why I’m simply not prepared to speak to him. I’m not prepared to speak to this collective. Not as a result of somebody is cussed, however as a result of they’ve chosen the trail of destruction of Ukraine — a full-scale path. That’s why we will’t absolve anybody of accountability. There’s a collective right here, and it’s answerable for the conflict of aggression — a full-scale, well-thought-out conflict with a need to destroy all life. And earlier than that, they promised one thing — and never solely to Ukraine however to all leaders — that they’d not invade. That’s, we’re coping with individuals with whom, on the one hand, it’s unimaginable to make agreements as a result of they won’t execute them. There isn’t a level. And however, these identical persons are murderers and terrorists, and so you can not simply give in to their calls for. That is what occurred initially of the conflict after they gave us ultimatums. That’s all. I feel it is mindless for Ukraine to barter with this collective with the title “Putin.”
Q: You stated Ukraine can’t go additional with a counterattack earlier than it will get extra weapons. What particularly do you want? Do you want extra missiles or launchers?
A: We don’t have sufficient. We don’t have sufficient armored autos that can save our individuals who shall be pushing the entrance line ahead. And it’s very troublesome for us to go in opposition to hundreds of Russian armored autos. It’s very troublesome to go up in opposition to that with a minimal quantity, so we want the suitable quantity [of vehicles] to try this. And our companions have all of them and have had them for a very long time. And these months, which you might have talked about, of operational preparation — all these months our companions have identified all this. The second level, as I stated, is that if you take counteroffensive actions, you might have — I’ll provide the instance of Kherson. Don’t overlook, you might have de-occupied territories that also have to be defended by somebody. Life has returned [to these territories] and so have individuals, however additionally it is inside attain of sure weapons that kill individuals. That’s why we want safety, extra air protection methods. And right here we will say that we had a breakthrough with the Patriots choice. However we additionally have to do not forget that the title alone doesn’t defend individuals. There’s a corresponding variety of such methods. We’re grateful {that a} begin has been made, however we have now to guard the sky. And once more, our companions have the variety of air protection methods that we have to defend ourselves on a nationwide degree. And it’s the identical with the second a part of this problem on the safety of territories — [protection of] faculties, universities, infrastructure. For this we want long-range methods, long-distance missiles. Once more, that is the instance of Kherson, when the enemy crossed to the opposite aspect of the Dnieper River and they’re at a distance the place we will’t encroach on the goal. … They will take troops from there and transfer them to the east or to the south. And it reinforces them. Why? As a result of they know that we can’t attain them. We are able to’t attain them, and we undergo each day as a result of they do have the flexibility to focus on our individuals. That’s one other problem. And regardless of how many individuals say that this isn’t a counteroffensive however a defensive mission, no, these missions all the time go hand-in-hand. That’s all. As a result of somebody is defending, somebody is attacking. If there isn’t a one to defend, you’ll not have the sources to assault, you’ll throw sources at protection. That’s the way it all works. That’s precisely the way it works. Subsequent, aviation, as I stated. However these are huge issues, and by way of aviation by NATO requirements, like F-16s, nobody is ready for these — that is true, we are going to begin our actions earlier than this plane [is delivered]. However it could have made it a lot simpler for us. You must perceive that we are going to undoubtedly be combating Russian plane in a counteroffensive. However in any case, even with a deficit like this, we are going to assault accordingly. Talking of deficits … our companions’ 155-caliber artillery methods are wonderful. I gained’t say the precise quantity we’re speaking about, however it’s important to perceive that they break down and have to be repaired. Now we have discovered all this. Now we have constructed an important infrastructure for these renovations, however after they break down … on this interval, we have to substitute them with one thing. So, that is additionally a deficit.
Q: So, it appears like a counteroffensive is many months away.
Q: You want extra weapons, however are you able to get them inside weeks, or a month?
A: We work not solely with the USA of America. America of America is actually a frontrunner within the supply of help. We’re very grateful for that. However we can’t depend on the USA alone and we can’t depend on the months that you simply talked about. As a result of by defending this or that space, your sources reduce. Each human and ammunition sources. That’s why nobody will wait very lengthy. We are going to begin the counteroffensive as quickly as we have now the minimal with which we will launch ahead. That’s the reason we’re working with companions — with Britain, France, Germany, Italy. We’re working with our Slovak companions, with Poland. We work with totally different nations. We work with Canada. We’re working, we have now began working with different continents. And right here I might not wish to say with which different governments outdoors the European continent, as a result of not all of them are going to be completely happy if this data is made public. We’re working. We’re doing every part we will to strengthen our military. And right here, you realize, there’s such a stability. On the one hand, the USA … is our largest chief in supplying, in serving to. I can’t complain about their assist. And however, the deficit that we have now at the moment — I’m certain that the USA may cowl it. However I additionally can’t rely solely on the USA. That’s all. For this we have now different highly effective companions, like Sweden. Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands are actually serving to us so much. And so they assist us so much with the deficit I informed you about. And let’s not overlook that we have now a menace from the ocean. And so, there are numerous methods that defend us from that route as effectively. And right here I’m grateful to them as effectively. And Finland. So principally, the world is combating for Ukraine at the moment as effectively.
Q: You’ve stated that nobody has better expectations for this counteroffensive than you. What particularly must occur so that you can take into account it successful?
A: Any de-occupied territories, I consider, is successful. I remind you as soon as once more whom we’re combating. We perceive that it’s numerous individuals and so forth. I can’t let you know which cities or cities, which borders are a big success for us and that are common — solely as a result of I don’t wish to put together Russia for the way, through which instructions and the place and after we shall be [attacking]. However we undoubtedly wish to do it. I can let you know for certain that after the counteroffensive operation, I will say fairly frankly whether or not we had been relying on such a course of or whether or not we had been relying on one thing higher — whether or not we failed at one thing. You possibly can all the time say this as a result of there isn’t a criticism in it. It’s self-criticism. We’re prepared [to say if] we fell brief. And additionally it is necessary to acknowledge this. Not solely inside the state but additionally for our companions. And to point out it, as a result of all our conversations are recorded. I imply the conferences the place we be aware that we requested for one, two, three, 4, 5 issues, and we received one, two, three. We’re grateful. However you’ll be able to see that if we had obtained 4, 5, we may most likely have achieved extra, or vice versa. We simply thank them very a lot and say that this a part of your assist gave us a better outcome than we had anticipated.
Q: On a unique subject, are you able to inform us about your response to the leaked Pentagon paperwork on the Discord server? Did Washington offer you a heads-up or did you discover out your self by way of information experiences the extent of the leaks?
A: If we’re speaking about me personally, and I want to discuss myself personally, I discovered every part from the newspapers, from the web. I learn it. I learn that some data was leaked, after which, I feel … I don’t bear in mind what the primary newspaper was, was it The Washington Submit? … I feel so, after which I discovered every part from The Washington Submit and different platforms that exist inside our nation. … I didn’t obtain data from the White Home or the Pentagon beforehand. We didn’t have that data. I personally didn’t. It’s undoubtedly a nasty scenario. Nicely, I’m explaining to you my perspective towards it. I feel it doesn’t assist. I just lately spoke to our Nordic mates, by the way in which, they usually requested me how I felt about it, and I stated there’s undoubtedly no benefit for Ukraine. This is not going to inspire our troopers. [Is there an advantage] for our inhabitants? Nicely, perhaps some are interested in this, and a few could be very . In some locations it’s a hype, someplace it’s a scandal. For us — look, something that informs our enemy upfront in a technique or one other is certainly a minus for us. I don’t see any benefits right here. After which there’s this [TV show] that we have now now, and I take into account it a [TV show]. … Folks ask me, who advantages from this? My reply may be very easy: I don’t have time to determine who advantages from this. I’m taking a look at who, except for Ukraine, doesn’t profit from it. And I consider that it’s unprofitable for us to start with. It’s unprofitable for us. I additionally consider that it isn’t helpful to the fame of the White Home, and I consider it isn’t helpful to the fame of the USA. That is my opinion. I don’t know all the interior processes. I’m telling you frankly. And I don’t know as a result of, frankly, we’re at conflict. And, sadly, even supposing that is our largest accomplice, I don’t know all of the political developments which can be occurring inside the USA. In fact, these are issues that can result in changes. You must perceive this. Not as a result of the leak is true or false, however just because it occurred. Everyone seems to be evolving in any case. Russia is adapting, Ukraine is adapting, companions are altering the way in which they’re passing on provides, taking applicable steps to defend or assault. … It’s summer season outdoors. You wish to exit, and you aren’t getting a warning. You exit, and it’s raining. In any case, it’s a shock. Some individuals like rain, and a few individuals don’t. I’m simply speaking about myself. I didn’t like this rain very a lot.
Q: Do the leaks and the truth that the USA was listening in in your communications tarnish your belief in Washington?
A: I’m undecided they’re listening. I imply, if we may provide you with some extra proof. Nicely, that’s one dialog and one other story. That’s what I informed you. We’re combating, we’re at conflict. Hear, I — I can’t danger our state. I can’t. Even when I needed to say one thing to somebody, one thing very heated and really private, I might most likely suppose, though I’m a pointy particular person, fairly sharp. And the place I can put strain, the place I can converse frankly, I do it. However there are excessive dangers. If it had been my conflict in opposition to Putin, and there have been two of us on the battlefield, I might inform everybody what I consider them. However right here the story is a bit totally different. We’re all accountable. And that’s it. That’s why I don’t know whose manipulation that is or whether or not it’s an accident, and stuff like that. And why ought to I? Regardless of such data leaks, I’ve to organize the state for de-occupation, not for different steps. And that is my job. Do you bear in mind how our dialog with [President Donald] Trump received out? They printed it. Nicely, to be trustworthy, I didn’t give my permission for that both.
Q: The Washington Submit has obtained paperwork that we have now not printed particulars about but. We want to ask you about some data there and in addition to provide the alternative to reply to what’s in there. One among them says that on January 31, you instructed occupying elements of Russia alongside the border for future leverage within the negotiations. Is that true?
Q: Do you suppose Ukraine has a proper to occupy elements of Russia?
A: Let’s not get into fantasies. Ukraine has each proper to guard itself. And we’re doing it. Ukraine didn’t occupy anybody, however vice versa. The conflict is in regards to the occupation of Ukraine. Ukraine should win. What steps to take with a purpose to win? That’s one other query. And don’t be offended right here, I’m not able to share. I’ll let you know actually. Nicely, when so many individuals have died and there have been mass graves and our individuals have been tortured, I’m certain that we have now to make use of any methods, any completely totally different strategies of response. As a result of we’re not rapists. So [there must be] totally different responses than the Russian Federation.
Q: The paperwork additionally say that you simply spoke with Valery Zaluzhny, head of the Ukrainian armed forces, on Feb. 28 about putting troops in Russia’s Rostov area. We all know that there have been a number of strikes on Russian territory. Is that one thing you personally ordered?
A: To begin with, I can repeat it once more. We’re combating a conflict for our territory, combating on our territory and de-occupying our territory. That’s it. All my conversations with Zaluzhny, [Oleksandr] Syrsky, [Oleksandr] Tarnavsky — I’ve plenty of generals with whom I work, with whom I discuss, and I discuss on to them, I do know all of their wants. And these are my private conversations, and nobody in our nation has given orders for offensives or strikes on Russian territory.
A: [In English] Will we talk about these paperwork?
Q: A pair extra questions.
A: [In English] Only a couple extra paperwork.
Q: The paperwork point out that HUR, your intelligence directorate, has back-channel contact with Yevgeniy Prigozhin that you simply had been conscious of, together with assembly with Yevgeniy Prigozhin and HUR officers. Is that true?
A: It is a matter of [military] intelligence. Would you like me to be convicted of state treason? And so, it’s very fascinating, if somebody is saying that you’ve got paperwork, or if somebody from our authorities is talking in regards to the actions of our intelligence, I might additionally wish to ask you a query: With which sources from Ukraine do you might have contact? Who’s speaking in regards to the actions of our intelligence? As a result of that is essentially the most extreme felony in our nation. Which Ukrainians are you speaking to?
Q: I talked to officers in authorities, however these paperwork should not from Ukraine, they’re from …
A: It doesn’t matter the place the paperwork are from. The query is with which Ukrainian official did you discuss? As a result of if they are saying one thing about our intelligence, that’s treason.If they are saying one thing a few particular offensive plan of 1 normal or one other, that is additionally treason. That’s why I requested you, which Ukrainians are you speaking to?
Q: About these particular paperwork? You’re the first particular person I’m speaking to about them.
Q: And I can learn you what data precisely there’s about Prigozhin and the GUR. On February 13, Kyrylo Budanov, chief of Ukraine’s Major Directorate of Intelligence, knowledgeable you a few Russian plan to destabilize Moldova with two former Wagner associates. Budanov knowledgeable you that he seen the Russian scheme as a solution to incriminate Prigozhin as a result of “we have now dealings” with him. You instructed Budanov to tell Moldovan President Maia Sandu, and Budanov informed you that the GUR had knowledgeable Prigozhin that he could be labeled a traitor who has been working with Ukraine. The doc additionally says that Budanov anticipated the Russians to make use of particulars of Prigozhin’s secret talks with the GUR and conferences with GUR officers in Africa …
A: Hear, to be trustworthy, effectively, you simply learn one thing, you say one thing. I simply don’t perceive the place you get it, whom you discuss to and so forth. You discuss how I met with Budanov. This implies that you simply — how do you place it? It appears like you might have individuals who have some information or you might have some proof or you might have one thing, as a result of that’s what it appears like. You’re once more doing, I apologize, what you had been doing earlier than. You’re releasing some form of data that doesn’t assist our state to assault and doesn’t assist us to defend our state. So, I don’t fairly perceive what you’re speaking about. I don’t fairly perceive your objective. Is your objective to assist Russia? I imply, meaning we have now totally different objectives. If I’m not sitting on the identical desk with them, I don’t fairly perceive what we’re speaking about. Every of those inquiries merely demotivates Ukraine, demotivates sure companions to assist Ukraine. Nicely, a technique or one other, I simply don’t perceive your objective.
Q: Our objective is to not assist Russia.
A: Nicely, it appears totally different.
Q: Nobody gave us this data personally. These had been within the leaked paperwork, which do point out, as I stated earlier, that the USA is listening in on you.
A: And you probably have categorized paperwork, it means somebody gave them to you. When you’ve got entry to paperwork, somebody gave them to you. Immediately, on the earth of contemporary know-how, when you might have entry, it’s not essentially somebody gave it to you. You’ve entry. You are actually quoting some paperwork as originals, with out understanding the accountability for this, you’re simply speaking about some data. For me, that is incomprehensible data, however on this, in our dialogue, I wish to perceive why you’re doing this. I informed you initially of our dialog that I consider that the TV present that was launched, launched within the data discipline, helps — I don’t know who, however it helps Russia, it undoubtedly doesn’t assist Ukraine. You’re engaged in persevering with this story. And so, I ask you if it’s your selection and when you suppose that the Russian Federation must be helped in quite a lot of spheres — that they had been anticipating a Ukrainian counteroffensive in whichever route, in order that they know after we are coming, in order that they know our highly effective forces and what we’re planning, what our intelligence is doing? Nicely, if that’s the case, then.
Q: I might say that these paperwork had been leaked, not by us, they usually had been on the web in a chatroom for weeks.
A: They weren’t on the web, they had been part of one thing. We, the conventional society, couldn’t entry all of this. We couldn’t. After which, I feel, data started to come back out that we’d partially publish every part else. I feel it’s yours — or your editorial board, or whoever. I don’t wish to offend anybody, I don’t know. That’s why you’re releasing this data one after the other at the moment. You publish details about a counteroffensive in Ukraine, about this or that. I informed you that I consider that that is, find out how to put it? — somebody heard one thing someplace, somebody printed one thing someplace, however the data is compiled, and it’s totally different, and it undoubtedly doesn’t work in Ukraine’s favor. That’s all. And now you wish to take the bull by the horns. That you must substantiate or not substantiate this data, after which there shall be a sure weight to your data, as a result of the president of Ukraine reacts to it. Do you perceive? And that is what you do. You’re proper now enjoying with, I feel, issues that aren’t good for our individuals. This isn’t the primary time I’ve informed you this. I feel it’s mistaken, however however, you say, “Just a bit bit extra, it’s not over but.” Nicely, sure, it’s. There are nonetheless just a few individuals left in Ukraine. I’m not concerned about seeing this variety of individuals lower. That’s why we’re combating. [In English] I’m so sorry, I used to be not so fast, I used to be too lengthy about these paperwork. I don’t learn about this …
Q: We got here to speak to you about this. It’s clearly delicate for you and your nation.
A: [In English] It’s not delicate. If I reply you that it’s delicate, it implies that these are actual paperwork. Please, cease enjoying video games with me. I’m the president of a conflict nation, a rustic in conflict. I stated about my response to those paperwork, I stated that it’s not good for our individuals. You recognize, I’m not enjoying “Counter-Strike.” We’re making ready a counteroffensive. You recognize, these are various things — that’s why I stated the entire particulars from me you’ll hear. And naturally, we’re grateful to your work, your assist if you assist Ukraine on this conflict. You probably did a giant job. And now I’m saying about these paperwork … I don’t acknowledge it as paperwork. I didn’t see that. That’s the very first thing. I don’t know the way you’ve received it and my query was to you: “Why are you proceed doing that?” Okay. You’re free. I imply, you’ll do what you need, however I don’t wish to talk about it with particulars. As a result of I don’t learn about what I’m talking. It’s one thing with some data. And I stated that I didn’t have any contact with the White Home about these paperwork. Or not paperwork. About these papers. Or not papers. About this platform. Or a pretend platform. … I didn’t have earlier than, now, and, I don’t know, perhaps sooner or later. I simply say the identical message very publicly and really open. I stated it to you, with some journalist and to plenty of leaders. After they requested me about this, I stated it’s not good for us. What can I say? It’s not good. I don’t know if it was pretend or what a p.c — I don’t know what it’s. And I don’t know who wants it and what’s the sport. I don’t know what for. That’s it. For me, it’s not severe. It appears like someone stated, someone heard one thing …
Q: Is it truthful for the USA to impose restrictions on strikes inside Russian territory when Russia strikes civilian infrastructure in Ukraine?
A: We shouldn’t have such capabilities. We don’t have the capabilities to strike within the Russian Federation. We shouldn’t have long-range weapons to this present day.
Q: However there are common drone strikes inside Russia.
A: [In English] What Russia? On Crimea? Crimea is a territory of Ukraine. We use sea drones as you realize. And we stated about it overtly. Or with a ship, Moskva.
Q: Are you frightened that the politics within the Western nations that assist you may change in a method that would harm their assist for Ukraine? There may be rising Republican skepticism within the U.S. Congress about help for Ukraine. There’s a likelihood that Donald Trump may very well be reelected president subsequent 12 months. Are you able to discuss to us about that? How do you see that? Are you frightened about that? For assist to your nation?
A: It’s troublesome for me to say what the coverage of one other president shall be if there shall be one other president. To begin with, it’s not clear to me whether or not the conflict will proceed in a 12 months when there shall be elections in the USA of America. And I want to consider that the conflict shall be over and we could have gained by then. Secondly, and I say it once more, I don’t know. We are able to solely watch. And it’s the selection of the American individuals who the following president shall be. I want to consider that generally, as a result of the conflict is not going to simply be over, however there’ll nonetheless be one thing to be completed. Then we have now to do every part to forestall Russia from returning in just a few years with some extra steps of aggression. That’s the reason the USA is our accomplice not solely on this conflict however for a few years to come back. And that’s why I’m concerned about what the USA will do concerning Ukraine. That is actually crucial for us. And naturally, we heard some messages from former president Trump that he would finish the conflict in a short time. Then I’ve a query. Why didn’t he finish it? I might have given him a standing ovation if he had ended it then. However it didn’t work out that method, after which a full-scale conflict began. However the conflict has been occurring since 2014. All those that have been presidents since 2014, all this time they’d an opportunity to finish the conflict. However I’m not saying that they’d the capability, as a result of it’s troublesome, it’s simply troublesome to finish it, as a result of it’s Russia. And that’s all. As a result of with all due respect, there should be a basis to fulfill any problem. Then there’s the story that at the moment there are different challenges and plenty of Republicans and Democrats come to us who assist us very, very strongly. And there are skeptics — what can I say, we perceive. Look, I feel that everybody … not everybody totally understands the implications of what’s taking place. Not everybody understands who President Putin is. And a few individuals, I feel, simply don’t care what occurs to Ukraine. Sadly, I’ve to say, they don’t care. They’re solely concerned about what is going to occur to them and their enterprise or one thing else as a result of that is a person selection for everybody.
Q: Mr. President, Ukraine has not printed its army casualties rely over the course of the conflict. What do you acquire from hiding this quantity? Ought to the world not know the price of this conflict to Ukraine by understanding the numbers?
A: That is only a normal choice. A normal choice from our army. All this shall be [made public] after we finish the conflict. We all know the losses. We worth each particular person, and this is without doubt one of the issues that, after all, shall be totally accessible to the entire world. I feel, to be trustworthy, it’s to start with necessary for the family and mates of these individuals who misplaced their family members, after which, I feel, for everybody else. However, however, that is the choice [that has been made]. The truth that the quantity is many occasions lower than that of Russians is known by everybody on the earth. And you probably have the related paperwork, perhaps you’ll be able to inform us how many individuals have died, what number of had been wounded and what their names are?
Q: Do you not suppose it could assist the reason for scaling up the ammunition you’re saying you want if individuals understood the extent to which Ukrainians are dying on the battlefield?
A: Hear, our intelligence businesses are working — Ukrainian, with the USA, with Britain, with different companions. Everyone seems to be working, everybody understands one another’s respective steps. And everybody understands roughly how many individuals we have now misplaced. That’s why everybody is aware of every part that’s out there, what is required to get the required weapons. Everybody is aware of it.
Q: The struggle is clearly persevering with in Bakhmut. Has it been well worth the variety of troopers who died and received wounded there to proceed combating?
A: It’s an unequivocal choice of the complete army and the political management. All people understands that Bakhmut is the one factor that the Russian president and Prigozhin can promote to their dismantled military and to their society. They want Bakhmut solely to say: “Right here, the operation is ours. You see, we’re doing every part proper. Let’s proceed. You see that this can be a nice victory.” As a result of 99 p.c of the Russian Federation doesn’t even perceive what Bakhmut is, has by no means been there and has by no means seen it. And since they consider their TV, not their eyes. And that’s it. Subsequently, this may open up the likelihood for Russia to go additional, and it’ll go additional and accumulate forces — go additional to Donbas, then towards Dnipro and so forth. That’s all. And that’s why at the moment Bakhmut is a degree that actually holds. It actually retains numerous Russian troops occupied and prevents them from breaking by way of our nation in numerous instructions. That’s the reason all of our army believes that this can be a crucial level and that numerous enemy troops are destroyed there — 10 occasions extra [than our losses]. They don’t spare them, they abandon them, however our troops destroy them. That’s the reason that is such an necessary second on this conflict.
Q: You latterly spoke by cellphone to Chinese language chief Xi Jinping. Did he offer you any ensures that China wouldn’t provide deadly army help to Russia?
A: It is best to [already] have the reply to this query. We didn’t discuss any ensures — it was our first dialog because the conflict began. For me, it is vitally necessary that China respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine in accordance with our 1991 administrative borders, together with the island of Crimea. All of this is essential to me. In response to all this, I heard that China respects the territorial integrity of Ukraine. The second facet that we raised on my aspect was the deportation of kids. Nobody will help us. It’s true that over 19,000 kids have been taken away, and we have now not discovered a format for returning them. We are able to solely use some type of corridors to drag Ukrainians out of there, however it is vitally, very, very troublesome. So, after we discuss find out how to interact China, it’s very troublesome, and all of us perceive why, however however, we talked about this facet with the Chinese language chief in order that he may affect the event of the scenario in order that kids may return. I can’t discover an method to this course of by way of the United Nations or different establishments sadly. For now. However we’re combating. The third query is that I want to have, you realize, the chance to confer with paperwork from the previous. And we had, for higher or worse — everybody has a unique perspective to this doc, however for us, it’s an official doc, and for the world, I feel, it’s, too. It’s the Budapest Memorandum, the place China is without doubt one of the guarantors. And there, we had been assured security and territorial integrity on the situation of the renunciation of nuclear weapons. … First, at the moment we shouldn’t have territorial integrity. And the guarantors of the Budapest Memorandum, let’s simply say, are all concerned on this conflict to various levels. We actually need them to assist us. And the second problem at the moment is the seize of the nuclear energy plant in Zaporizhzhia. That is additionally a nuclear weapon, as a result of there are dangers because of the seize of six nuclear models, and so I talked to him that we should respect our Budapest Memorandum, everybody who was concerned on this in any case. Now we have to place strain on the truth that there are nuclear dangers. And China must put strain on Russia to de-occupy our nuclear energy plant. Mainly, these factors, as I informed the Chinese language chief, are the factors of our method for peace. And I might very very similar to to see China’s presence, amongst different states, all through these factors. For us, the extra nations are current in our peace method, the safer it’s for us.
Q: Will there be parliamentary elections within the fall?
A: If we have now martial regulation, we can’t have elections. The structure prohibits any elections throughout martial regulation. If there isn’t a martial regulation, then there shall be. Nicely, the regulation says that in accordance with the structure of Ukraine, after martial regulation ends, I feel, in 90 days, elections are held. It’s one thing like that. I don’t bear in mind truly.
Anastacia Galouchka contributed to this report.