I was appointed at the end of April 24, so I've been in the office for one and a half years, and I've been to Ukraine four times, two times to Kiev, to once to Lviv and to Odessa on the Black Sea.
And on this last trip last week, I also went to Chenikiv, which is close to the front, about 60-century meters from the front.
And I speak everywhere, not only to the officials, but also to the soldiers, to the private sector, to people, you know, in the shops and elsewhere.
And in nowhere I have felt that they want capitulation or that they are ready to give up territories or something.
In the same time, obviously, we also are realists in various quarters and realize that to achieve a ceasefire, you need to free the front at a certain point.
On one hand, Ukrainians have their will and agency, and I don't think they will accept something that is imposed on them.
So they have to own that peace and ceasefire.
And I think the red line for them would be sort of recognizing the legitimacy of the occupied territories as being Russian.
I think that is one thing is to see the front and to say, okay, those are Russian-occupied territories.
And the other part is actually recognizing the incorporation into Russia.
I think that's a big, big sort of difference.
But again, it's Ukrainian decision.
We will support Ukrainian choices from our side.
We know they want peace.
That's for sure.
They want peace.
And they have fought really hard for it.
I mean, Russia was trying to get through this war what they couldn't achieve somehow else.
Because remember, before 2014, they tried to stop European ambitions of Ukrainians.
The whole Maidan sort of revolution started from the fact that corrupt President Yanukovych refused to sign association agreement with the EU.
That was not about membership.
It was an association agreement.
So people rose up and said, listen, this is not acceptable.
We want to have a European future.
And then Russians invaded for the first time in 2014, illegally occupying, annexing Crimea, started the war in the eastern part of Ukraine.
But they have not been able to break down Ukrainian nation's will to have a sovereign democratic state and to be a legitimate member of the EU and also NATO.
Actually, when Russians first time invaded in 2014, Ukraine didn't want to be a member of NATO.
It was officially a neutral country.
And so, you know, they have achieved the strengthening of Ukrainian sort of sovereignty, democracy, and institutions.
Which then leads me to think that for Ukraine to own that peace, it does have to be a dignified peace.
i think we hear this word but that's what it means and in the same time obviously it will have an effect on all european security because the only country that doesn't want peace what we see is russia because all the instruments of power in nato we always analyze the instruments of powers that country has It has a military instrument of power.
It has a political instrument of power, economic, you know, private sector instrument of power, religion, media, and so on and so forth.
We don't see a single instrument of power in Russia that would be oriented towards peace.
It's all about war.
How do you measure that?
That's very interesting.
Well, when you look, for example, at military instrument of power, it's actively employed to try to crush Ukrainian self-defense and not even achieving its objectives, because like this year they have occupied below 1% of Ukrainian territory.
And they have lost around 280,000 soldiers in this year alone.
Altogether 1.2 million soldiers lost and severely wounded in Russia.
But they are continuing.
There is no indication that they want to stop the bombings, nightly missile attacks, trying to advance on the front.
So very clear, military instrument of power is fully employed to continue the war.
Economic instrument of power, the same thing.
The military production is prioritized over any civilian economy.
So the civilian sector is cannibalized, prioritizing resources, prioritizing production, labor, machinery, tools, and so on and so forth.