Translated material
“There are three options in which NATO can enter the war.” Interview with the deputy chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Defense Committee Yegor Chernev
The West reacted carefully to the incident with the fall of the rocket in Poland, but the question of the possibility of a direct conflict of NATO and Russia was again on the agenda. And the constant shelling of cities and energy facilities in Ukraine raises questions about strengthening the assistance of Ukraine from the West at least in terms of deliveries of missile defense systems.
The Deputy Chairman of the Committee of National Security, Defense and Intelligence of the Verkhovna Rada, the head of the Permanent Representative Office of Ukraine in the NATO parliamentary Assembly, Egor Chernev still believes that the main version of the incident is the fall of the Russian rather than Ukrainian missile. He shared with Farida Kurbangaleeva with his opinion about the causes of this incident, and also told how the relations of Ukraine and NATO can develop in the future.
- After the incident in Poland, you stated that Putin was challenging NATO and trying to press the west directly, threatening to draw him into a big war. Does this mean that you think the missile shelling of Poland is intentional from Russia?
- I believe that such a version has the right to exist, because today Putin suffers defeat in Ukraine, increasing control over the occupied territories, and he needs, as in the past, to raise bets. He is an avid gamer who believes that he can recoup. And I think that this is a considerable “invitation” of the Western world to the Caribbean crisis 2.0. His idea is to raise the bets so high that there is a confrontation between the two nuclear sides-NATO and Russia-in order to finally put the United States at the negotiating table, which he achieves from the very beginning of the war. And then with the United States to determine the future fate of the world - who will remain with what and what kind of redistribution should be so that the Caribbean crisis 2.0 does not take place.
- Given that the West reacts to this “invitation” very carefully, does this mean that he is not ready to play by these rules?
- As Putin persistently from the beginning of the war invites the West at the negotiating table, so the West clearly answers him “no”. We can recall this whole series of blackmails from the Russian Federation: first the food crisis, then the energy crisis [with threat] that the whole of Europe will freeze, then the crisis around the Zaporizhzhya NPP, and now there is another round with the destruction of the infrastructure of Ukraine. Putin decided to feel how [strongly] the West can answer and generally ready to answer.
On Saturday, for example, Russian fighters flew very close to NATO ships. These provocations are directed to the West, and the West traditionally does not react to this. Because firstly, he feels responsibility for possible consequences. And secondly, he does not want to give the reason for Russia (not even specifically in this case, but in general, for example, with the transfer of weapons to us)-to be accused of Russia of escalation of the conflict. This does not mean that Western countries are weak and not ready [reply], they do not want to transition of the conflict to a new level of confrontation between the Russian Federation and NATO.
Egor Chernev
FB Egor Chernev
“But Putin perceives such behavior as weakness?” How will he behave further?
- I think that he will continue by trial and mistakes to look for levers that could act to the West. You saw this fairly awkward game in a good and bad policeman on the use of nuclear weapons, when his whole retinue said that "we can", and he said-"No, well, we, we will not start a nuclear war." It was also a certain kind of “invitation”. Therefore, I think that he will continue such disturbing [the population of Ukraine] or provocative shelling - possibly with aviation. Or he will look for some kind of new type of blackmail-in this the Kremlin has tired. But the Western world does not react to this, and even more so.
- The publication Politico wrote that the West is trying to combine its position on the incident in Poland with the position of Kiev, and the American administration allegedly turned to Zelensky’s environment with an appeal to show restraint in the comments. This is true?
- It is difficult for me to comment on it, because I am not an official in the president’s office and I don’t know if there were such signals from the United States or not. But given our rather close relations, it seems to me that it would be strange - asking us to refrain, this is unlikely. Moreover, Zelensky’s position was announced publicly - clearly and understandable.
- The publication, however, states that this may be one of the first discrepancies between Kiev and Washington, that in the future such “cracks” can become more, and Moscow will try to take advantage of this. How fair are such fears?
- I do not see the potential for the destruction of our relations with such incidents, especially since the Western world - the USA, Poland and other countries - clearly stated that regardless of the rocket, the responsibility lies in the Russian Federation, which started the war. This war led to such consequences. An investigation has begun now, Ukrainian representatives have been made there. According to the results of the investigation, it will be possible to say exactly whose rocket it was. I am absolutely sure that the wedge is in our relationship - whatever the results - it will not freeze.
- You can find out your personal opinion - whose rocket was it?
-My first reaction is that it was still a Russian missile. Because if we proceed purely from logic, we understand - where do Russian missiles fly from and in which direction we knock them down. They fly to us from the north-east and south, and, accordingly, our missiles are produced towards them-and this is also the direction of the north-east and south. And it is very strange that our rocket flew to the west. This is the first oddity. Second: the version sounded that these were fragments [rockets]. But the fragments do not leave such pits. Therefore, this, most likely, is still a rocket. And plus, as a rule, all air defense missiles have a function of self -destruction in case of non -aggression on air target. And only the Russian Federation specifically uses the S-300 as [class of class] earth-earth, and not the ground, with which it will bomb us in the Zaporizhzhya, Kharkov, Kherson regions.
However, I do not exclude that it can be a Ukrainian missile, because, well, you never know, there may be malfunctions in flights, and we have seen repeatedly on examples of Russian technology, how rockets returned somewhere to the launch site. Therefore, I think that we need to wait for the results of the investigation, and even then we will understand exactly whose rocket it was still.
Patriot system in Poland
Christophe Gateau / DPA / Global Look Press
- If the international commission concludes that this rocket was Ukrainian, Kyiv will officially agree with it?
- Since it includes our representatives, they will understand the reality of what is happening, and their signatures, too, I think, will be in the report. Accordingly, this report will be agreed by all parties.
Subscribe to read the whole
Make a subscription Redefine.media to read Republic
Subscribe [you can pay for a Russian or foreign card. The subscription is extended automatically. You can unsubscribe at any time.]
Where are the money subscribers going