294. Operation Spider's Web
50:46 Share

This episode is brought to you by Amazon Prime. From streaming to shopping, Prime helps you get more out of your passions. So whether you're a fan of true crime or prefer a nail-biting novel from time to time, with services like Prime Video, Amazon Music, and fast, free delivery, Prime makes it easy to get more out of whatever you're into or getting into. Visit Amazon.com slash Prime to learn more.

This episode is brought to you by LifeLock. Between two-factor authentication, strong passwords, and a VPN, you try to be in control of how your info is protected. But many other places also have it, and they might not be as careful. That's why LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats. If your identity is stolen, they'll fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit LifeLock.com slash podcast for 40% off. Terms apply.

Hello and welcome to Battleground with me, Saul David and Patrick Bishop. Well, what a week it's been for Ukraine and its supporters. The audacious and amazingly skillful mass drone attacks on five air bases deep inside Russia amazed the world and horrified the Kremlin.

It was a reminder, if any was needed, that Ukraine is still very much in the fight and has cards to play, contrary to the accusation levelled by President Trump and President Zelensky at that notorious White House ambush back in February. We're going to be deep diving into Operation Spider's Web as the Ukrainian intelligence service has codenamed it. And with us to discuss it, we're lucky to have our old friend Colonel Pablo Hazan.

who is currently serving in the electronic warfare command of the armed forces of Ukraine, who will be giving us his expert insights.

Now there was another operation that got Ukrainians and their friends up on their feet and cheering this week, wasn't there Saul? Not content with taking out perhaps up to a third of Russia's long-range bomber fleet. These are the aircraft used to launch the cruise missiles that have caused so much death and devastation in Ukrainian cities, the glide bombs as well. Ukraine has

has also launched an underwater attack on the Kerch Bridge, which links occupied Crimea to the Russian mainland. That came two days later. And this was the third attack on the bridge since the start of the war, remember. It's a wonderful imagery on CCTV.

at the moment when the explosives detonated beside one of the concrete support pillars. And this, of course, is a vital supply route for Russian military operations and also a hated symbol of Moscow's occupation of the peninsula. So it was long in gestation, this operation, like Spider's Web, which took 18 months to put in place, we're told.

but it wasn't as effective militarily. But nonetheless, it's actually a massive slap in the face, isn't it, Saul, for Vladimir Putin? And both these operations completely change the White House narrative that Ukraine is facing inevitable defeat and has no real choice but to accept peace terms that amount to surrender.

Yeah, like all the best special operations, Patrick, its effect is as much psychological as it is material. And yet the material was pretty impressive in both cases. On the bridge first, actually, it's interesting that, you know, if you look at the images of the bridge, traffic's flowing again, it looks like, yeah, it's done some damage, but actually the bridge is still fine. Well, engineers claim that actually serious damage has been done to the underwater underpinning of the bridge and that

this sooner or later will mean it's probably going to collapse. We'll have to keep an eye on that in the weeks and months to come. You can't imagine really, Patrick, can you, that Russian health and safety is going to close this bridge down anytime soon until it actually collapses.

But if we go back to Spider's Web for a minute, I mean, that was a pretty astonishing action. The Ukrainians themselves claim 41 bombers were hit, one third of the fleets, and they include the nuclear capable Tu-95 and Tu-22Ms, as well as their surveillance A-50 mainstay plane, the A-50, which is worth an estimated £25 million a

peace and that's used of course as a radar and command center and Russia's only believed to have had around 10 in operation and another two are said to have gone now mainstays of course are critical to coordinating Russian fighter jets and air defenses meaning that this will have severely hampered Putin's war effort none of these aircraft are still in production none of those hit that is

and are irreplaceable. Now, they'd been moved to five bases, stretching from Alenia in the Kola Peninsula, in the far north of the Arctic Circle, to Belaya in Siberia, which is an incredible 2,700 miles from Ukraine. This was done, of course, the planes were moved there to get them out of reach of the storm shadow and also attack them with another long-range Western-supplied weapons. And the 117 Ukrainian drones that did the damage were smuggled in containers on the back of lorries, which were

parked next to the bases. I mean, you couldn't really make this up, could you, Patrick? Right down to the roofs being able to be opened remotely. And then those regular FPV quadcopters, pretty basic kit, first person view quadcopters, launched with devastating effect, remote control from very short range. And this was presumably done with a live feed that was actually

actually in Ukraine, but fed into Russia. The genius of the operation was in the smuggling bit. So this is a huge intelligence failure for Russia, which exposes once again, the utter incompetence of the FSB. And surely, surely, Patrick, heads will roll. But really, in the end, the buck stops with Putin, don't you think?

That's right. There are a few theatrical sackings or whatever. Basically, he's the boss. It's his war, as we've said so often. But also, as we've said often, Putin is a man who takes his time. And so the response from the Kremlin thus far has been pretty much to behave as if nothing has really happened. They've just returned to raining down fire on Ukrainian cities. Ballistic missile attacks followed.

the operation on June 1st. But, of course, he's bound to come under a lot of pressure from various quarters, not least from his own ultra-nationalist right. And some of the bloggers have been sounding the alarm when compared Spider's Web to Russia's Pearl Harbor moment. Well, we both know that analogy is a pretty flaky one, but it does express the degree of seriousness with which it's being seen.

And it does, of course, raise the question of how Britain will retaliate when he eventually does. He's got to do something, hasn't he? And, of course, some of the comment has been saying that this may be the moment when he decides to cross what could be a very chilling red line. And that's, of course, the use of a tactical nuke. Do you think that's a possibility?

Well, it's certainly a possibility. I don't think it's a probability, personally. It's a question, of course, we're going to put to the Colonel in a relatively short period of time. So it'll be fascinating to hear what he has to say. Patrick, as it is, is really enough to provoke Putin into lashing out in a way that will be bound to produce outrage.

a pretty robust response from NATO and effectively bring them into this war, which is something that Russia doesn't want. So no, I don't expect there to be a response even using tactical nuclear weapons. What is much more likely, of course, is that he's going to rain down more fire and storm on Ukraine. But he's doing that anyway, isn't he, Patrick?

So is that really going to make much difference? But it also, interestingly enough, creates problems, I think, for the American administration. Yeah, I got the feeling there wouldn't have been any great cheering in the White House when they heard this news, because it actually, from their perspective, puts an American-brokered

even further away than ever. Just look at it. I mean, Trump now seems to be backing a loser. And in a way, the humiliation that Putin suffered is matched by an equal humiliation for Trump. He's presented all along this conflict as a kind of unequal humiliation.

boxing match between a featherweight, i.e. Ukraine, and the heavyweights in the Kremlin. But when you look at this operation, it looks like it's the little guy who's actually landing the significant blows and showing that nimbleness and cunning can deliver a whipping to the great lumbering

dim-witted bruiser that you can characterize Russia as being. So it puts Trump in a dilemma, and he seems to be pretty nonplussed about how to respond to it. Caroline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, was asked for a reaction from Trump. She said his position hadn't changed. The president wants this war to end at the negotiating table, and he's made that clear to both leaders.

So he seems a bit baffled about what to do next. Interestingly, the White House wasn't told in advance of the operation. And there's a bit of a kind of stasis, really, or paralysis. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, is not going to be attending the upcoming NATO meeting of defense ministers in Brussels. Now, that's something that hasn't happened in three years. So does this mean they're walking away?

Or is it just because they don't really have an answer or a policy to deal with the new reality? What do you think Trump's options are, Saul? Yeah, I mean, it's fascinating, isn't it? We'd love to think, and again, this is a question we'll put to the Colonel, that Trump's finally going to lose patience with Russia, as I've been saying for the last few weeks. But there are absolutely no indications.

really strong indications that that's going to take place. So a much more likely scenario is that he gradually backs away from the so-called peace process. But I think you and I know, Patrick, don't we, that the peace process, you know, is pretty pointless at the moment. The positions are so far apart that the possibility of any kind of deal is absolutely minuscule. So the most likely scenario, in my view, is that America just

calls back. It concentrates on other things. It looks at Gaza. It looks at China. And it gradually turns its eyes away from what is going on in Ukraine, which is why, of course,

Two things are important if that takes place, that America is still open to selling arms to Ukraine. And of course, the rest of NATO, Europe more generally, keeps its support as strong as possible. But, you know, in my view, what's happened over the last few days can only strengthen Ukraine's position, both bargaining politically and also militarily. So we can all applaud it for that.

Well, now we're going to bring in our old friend, Colonel Pavlo Hazan. Pavlo serves in the General Directorate of Electronic and Cyber Warfare of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, answering directly to the Commander-in-Chief and has generously shared his insights with us many times. Welcome back to the podcast, Pavlo. Thank you very much indeed, Saul, for having me on your podcast.

Every time, it's a big pleasure to talk to you. It was a few months ago when we spoke in person, Pavlo. We came to your house, enjoyed an excellent meal, and we heard a bit of your musical talent too. A little bit of water has flown under the bridge since then. We were discussing the possibility of

a Trump presidency and what that would mean for Ukraine. We've all been pretty disappointed with the results, to say the least, as you will know if you've been listening to any of the recent episodes of the podcast. But this news has brought some really extraordinary developments for Ukraine, both the strikes on Russian strategic bombers and also the attack on the Kerch Bridge.

Both of these attacks, we can only assume, must have been a great boost for morale for Ukrainian soldiers and civilians alike. Can you tell us a little bit about the reaction in Kyiv? Yeah, both missions are very important. And the mission on the 1st of June,

It was the largest drone attack on Russia air bases during the war, employing 117 drones, then damaged 41 aircrafts. It was really notable and unprecedented. And it was the several bases, its bases in eastern Siberia,

And it was a couple of bases like Olenia, Dyagileva, Ivanova, Belaya and Tukrainka are bases, which is very deep bases.

in Russia. And some of them, it's 4,000 kilometers. And it was really very huge action, very huge operation organized by SSU of Ukraine called the Spider Web. And of course, it is very huge impact, first of all, because this is more than 30% of strategic aviation. And this is aviation which is carrying glide bombs everywhere.

missiles and other, the most guided munition, guided bombs, which caused a very huge effect, very huge distortions in Ukraine. So that is why it's actually practically, it's very important because this is one of third of Russian strategic aviation was destroyed. And then, of course, this is very important moral impact.

on Russian armed forces and on Russians, of course, that we show, Ukrainians, show that we can do such actions and we can destroy the aviation and other facilities on so long distance. And of course, this is a very unique mission.

And this is unique not only in Ukrainian practice, this is absolutely unique mission in world practice. And according to official information, this mission prepared during 18 months.

It was like a simple quadcopters, like a simple FPV drones, which have been deployed using like regular trucks with the special prepared movable roof. And yes, it is also, I believe it's also very important in the political context.

because we can show our partners, to whom we very much thanks and very much appreciate for support, they're doing, all our partners of NATO countries. And this is also, we've shown with this mission that we can do very unique, very unique activities. And we can share our experience, our expertise, how we can do that.

And this is not like a very expensive aircraft from our side. This is not a very expensive weapon, but this is very cost-effective action, very cost-effective action. And it really illustrates, doesn't it, Pavlo, the very different approach to warfighting that Russia and Ukraine are taking, because here you see, as you say, it's a cheap operation, but it's an ingenious operation. And it's all about the logistics, really, and the intelligence.

Can you say something about one aspect of the operation, which I think strikes us all very forcibly, which is the degree of local support, the degree of local intelligence you must have had in order to get these five air bases very widely stretched apart across five oblasts, five time zones, and you manage that.

somehow to sneak the launch platforms in disguised as container lorries with what appear to be kind of, you know, mobile homes on the back. It really does suggest that Russia is a very sort of insecure place in the sense that this was able to happen without the FSB apparently having the slightest suspicion that it was going on. That must really rattle, as you say, Russians, people actually in the security services, people in the military,

politicians, but also Russian people in general. Yes, of course. We destroyed very expensive equipment. This is the air jets like 2160, 295, 222M, strategic bombers and A-50 airborne.

And this is a very big damage. And of course, the structure of this operation is also very interesting. This is a very high level of intelligence.

and very high level of organization and management of this action. And it was involved many people and using the infrastructure on the territory of enemy. And it's, of course, it's a very huge signal to Russians, to enemy that

that, of course, their territory is not safe. So we can do what we want and we can organize such as operations. It could be very huge response from our side on the constant attacking of Ukrainian territory.

because we are receiving glide bombs, missiles and other munitions every day. And it could be also kind of a very, very huge signal to them that we are able to do a very strong response. Pablo, you know the famous saying that defeat is an orphan, but victory has many fathers. You already suggested that many people and maybe many organizations were involved in

At some level in the planning of this, although, of course, it has to be kept within a relatively small group of people knowing the full details for operational security. Was your directorate involved in any way? Can you even hint at that? We have not been involved directly in the action. We have our tasks and duties and activities every day. We are supporting many processes and providing some special services to operators.

all of the partners in defense forces. So all the information and services we're providing also for other part of defense forces could be also useful for any missions, any actions.

So this is like a day-to-day walk of many, many parts of many units of defense forces of Ukraine. Well, that was fascinating stuff as ever from Colonel Pavlo. Do join us after the break to hear what he had to say next. Welcome back.

This has clearly been a massive humiliation for Putin, and I assume you must now be bracing yourselves for his response. What do you think that might be? And do you think it might go as far as some people have speculated, not least ourselves, as deploying for the first time a tactical missile?

nuclear weapon in this conflict? I don't know exactly, of course, and nobody knows what the Russians can do. As a reply, yesterday we had several ballistic missile attacks on Ukraine and we destroyed many ballistic missiles. I'm not talking about the other munition using closer to battlefield. If you're talking about some

stronger respond to a nuclear weapon. Of course, there is a potential threat of using a nuclear weapon because Russians have this nuclear weapon. So they can do that, potentially. And we take into account this potential risk. We do not underestimate them.

in all processes. And we have to be prepared because this is a very smart enemy. This is not just a force. This is not just a quantity of personnel and quantity of munition and weapon and equipment and so on. This is also the using high level of munition and high level of weapon, unfortunately, because

they learned a lot from civilized war. They imported a lot of different technology and different equipment. So that is why there is a potential risk, of course,

But we will use this information, what we are receiving from our intelligence and reconnaissance sources. So we also, of course, we investigate together with our partners some movements, what they have on their territory. Pavel, these missions this week, of course, have come in the midst of at least a

attempted peace negotiations. From our perspective, the two sides seem to be as far away as ever. The idea that America is somehow going to broker a peace deal when, in particular, Russia is absolutely determined not to move at all from its maximalist

aims, in which case there is clearly no possibility that Ukraine can accept them. Do you have any hope that America, the Trump administration, will grow frustrated with Putin and therefore back Ukraine in a stronger way, as we've been suggesting might happen, more in hope than expectation, I have to confess?

I believe that these missions, which are provided by SSU, the State Security Service, also another mission, which is the blasting of the bridge, the Kerch Bridge, which is an absolutely illegal build on Ukrainian territory and connecting between occupied territories of our peninsula and Russia.

And I believe that both these actions, both these missions are the very good input into the process of such as negotiation, because it's also it's not real negotiation. We understand that this is not real negotiation because there is no any background of the negotiation.

And this is like a very theoretical, very good idea of American administration about negotiation, that everybody have lived in peace. Yes, that's true. We would like to live in peace. We would like to live in rule of law and social justice. We would like that all international law work everywhere on the earth. But unfortunately, because of Russians,

It's impossible. So that is why, as we can see, Russian Federation has their very strict demands. And these strict demands absolutely break international law. And this position, their position on these negotiations, absolutely unacceptable for Ukrainian side.

We cannot see any movements. Our government is doing everything what they can do. Our Minister of Defense participated at the meeting. We proposed our position and our vision, very clear vision of the situation. But there is no any results. And I cannot see the possibilities of these results.

Because this is absolutely different positions. Because for Russia, Russia does not accept Ukraine as country. They does not accept Ukrainians as citizens on our territories. And this is the key problem. So this is absolutely different positions. They still bombing us. They striking. They doing everything to kill Ukrainian populations. And they do not stop attacking.

even before this negotiation process. Last question for me, Pavlo. Looking at it from a different perspective, this suggests to me that the war as things stand is going to go on and on. The Ukrainian will to keep fighting, its ingenuity, its skill is undented.

What do you think the Chinese make of this? Because until now, it sort of suited them to sit on the sidelines, make pious statements about their desire for peace, etc. But they're now partnered up with a failed state, essentially, in the shape of Russia, and one that's getting increasingly desperate or will be driven by actions like this through increasingly desperate measures, one would have thought. Have you given any consideration to what Beijing makes of all this?

Yes, it's a very interesting question because on the one hand, China is like a neutral country which is sitting and watching on the processes around the world, and especially on the Russian war in Ukraine. But on the other hand, they are an ally of Russia.

And this is very clear that we have a very big percentage of equipment that came from China. Russia is importing a lot of drones, electronic warfare equipment, different kinds of electronics from China.

And China very much, in fact, China very much supports Russia in this war. They not officially declare that they are a liar to Russia, but this is very clear that all this Chinese equipment using on Russian side

against Ukraine. And this is really a pivotal moment, I guess, for the civilized world, for Western Europe, for the USA, for Japan, for other countries.

To rethink globally this situation, because this is not just simple toys. This is not like an easy game because the Western world has a lot of different facilities on Chinese territory.

And of course, China is inside international law. Of course, China and Chinese manufacturers and Chinese government, of course, because they're all these Chinese manufacturers controlled by Chinese government, they would like to raise money. They would like to develop all these technologies and to develop these manufacturers from Western world. But at the same time, we are strengthening them very much.

So this is, again, civilized world, Western countries investing into China, in fact, are indirectly investing into support, Chinese support to Russia. This is not direct support, right?

Russia under the sanctions. But nevertheless, it's very clear indirect support because we invest in fact, we invest in technologies in China, in many directions, in many engineering fields or science and some very high level technologies. China is really trying to lead.

So they're producing a lot of different equipment. And it's another problem that Ukraine and other European countries have many Chinese electronics.

And this is, first of all, the question of security, because nobody knows how many backdoze Chinese mobiles or tablets or computers or other equipment for smart home equipment and something like this.

How many backdoors, how many special software, malware China is using for these systems? And this is also receiving a huge amount of statistics. This is big data which we, civilized world, we're sending

to China for data processing? And this is a very, very, very important question. So we need to rethink. Of course, we are democratic countries. Of course, we are for democracy, rule of law and social justice. We would like to collaborate on the free market. But nevertheless, this is a question of security of Europe and not only Europe, but other countries.

Because even some very regular technologies like mobiles or some equipment could give, in fact, very big damage to democratic systems. That's fascinating. Thank you, Pavlo. But finally, just on a slightly lighter note, tell us a little bit about how your son is getting on at the moment. Thank you very much. He is a continuous servant.

As an instructor in unmanned system forces.

dreaming about demobilizing, of course, as many civilian people mobilized during this Russian war against Ukraine. But yeah, he's okay. That's good to hear. Well, Pablo, thank you so much for your contribution. It's absolutely fascinating and it's wonderful to hear from you. We'll talk to you again soon and keep up the good work. Yeah, thank you very much indeed, Saul. Thank you very much, Patrick. Every time, big pleasure to talk to you.

Likewise. Thanks, Pavlo. Talk soon. Goodbye. Yeah, well, that was terrific stuff, wasn't it, Saul? I think our view of how significant this operation was has really been reinforced by Colonel Pavlo's remarks.

And he's right at the heart of Ukraine's military establishment, working out of the General Staff Directorate in Kiev, answerable, as I've already mentioned, only to the commander in chief. So he's right at the center of power. And although he can't reveal any operational details to us, Patrick, and it's unlikely it's true that his directorate, Electronic Warfare, was directly involved in this. He didn't need to be.

It was all in the brilliance of the logistics, as you've already pointed out. But it was fascinating to hear the sort of motion in his words at the effect this will have both militarily and politically. Other important comments he made, I think, Patrick, really revealing quite acutely the

The fact that Ukraine's armed forces are not ruling out the possibility that Russia might use tactical nuclear weapons. Indeed, they cannot do that. And yet, I think, you know, sort of reading between the lines of what he was saying, they don't think it's about to happen imminently. And they would get a pretty good idea from their own intelligence and the intelligence of their partners if such a thing were about to take place.

I was also struck by his take on China, the fact that it's so integrated into the security of our own countries of the West in general. And it really was a quite alarming picture he painted of how vulnerable we've made ourselves.

Yeah, and confirming, Patrick, the fact that China is supplying enormous amount of support kit, not weapons per se, but the sort of electronics and electronic warfare capability that is hugely enhancing Russia's capability on the battlefield, all of which that sort of information should be incredibly alarming to America, if not the rest of the Western world. And it's the sort of thing that really needs to finally hammer home to the Trump administration that

China is supporting Russia, and both of them need to be sent a pretty strong signal that enough is enough.

Well, I won't be holding my breath personally, Saul, but you never know. You never know. Going to move on to the questions now. The first one comes from Luke McAllen, who says, I have some thoughts and questions for you. He says, Russia's current military strategy in Ukraine is a methodical approach that allows it to seize and hold territory, making it increasingly difficult for Ukraine to reclaim it without unsustainable losses.

Now, Luke McCullen gives us some interesting analysis about how he sees the war standing at the moment with these different strategies, which we've mentioned earlier, and comes up with a few ideas of his own about how the stasis might be ended. But at the very end, he asks a pertinent question. He says, ending on a note of optimism, one rarely sees the pivotal political moments. Russia is an exemplar of that. I'm reminded all the time

that the SARS regime ended with a riot and protest by freezing hungry women queuing for bread in St. Petersburg. Well, we've all been looking out for signs like that, haven't we? There's a new book out, actually, which a bunch of boys in The Times reviewed the other day about the Prigozhin mutiny. So the question really is, you know, is there ever going to be a moment when various interested parties decide enough is enough and turn

on Putin. And in his review, this book was by an American journalist, and it deals very much with a precautionary as perhaps a harbinger of what has come. And Boyes suggests that there may be something in that. And he refers back to, or rather the author refers back to the

effect of the so-called Afghansi, the Soviet troops who'd fought in the long Afghan war. When they got back into civilian society, they formed the basis for a lot of the criminality that then followed the collapse of communism. They were at the core, indeed, of the Prigozhin Wagner group, people who had failed to really get back into civilian society and having lived this violent life for so long, turned it to criminal ends. And of course,

The number of people who've been through the military in Russia is now enormous. So when the war does come to an end, as Roger points out, they're going to pose a huge political problem for Putin. So this may be an ingredient in his downfall. Rather, actually, as the disgruntled, embittered Russian troops who'd been fighting on the Eastern Front in the First World War added hugely to the disruption that brought down the SAAB.

Okay, moving on. Questions inevitably about Operation Spiderweb. And this one's from Paul from Toronto. He's a big fan of the pod. He describes the operation quite rightly as astounding and shows an extraordinary amount of imagination and ingenuity. He also goes on to say that we know from Ukraine that the operatives are back

home and safe. But the fact remains, says Paul, they would have needed help in some form from local sources. Do you think they were helped by local Russian sympathizers, dedicated Ukrainian operatives? In your minds, who could these people be? And also, what will this do to Russian internal security? Certainly heads would have to roll. Well, in the latter first. I mean, I think that's already happening, isn't it, Patrick? I saw somewhere, I don't know if this was accurate, that the head of the air or the

A senior general in the Air Force has already fallen out of a window somewhere. Did he jump or was he pushed? Other heads will almost certainly roll over this. The question of local assistance, almost without question, they have got very good intelligence. I mean, I think, you know, that was the point you put to the colonel, wasn't it, Patrick? And he seemed to agree that the intelligence was astounding for this operation. They would, of course, have had satellite imagery, which would have identified, I suppose, to a certain level where the planes were.

But nevertheless, you would have needed locals to identify the places they were going to stop the trucks. You would have needed all kinds of local intelligence, I would suggest, Patrick. Is that Russian? Probably. Are these anti-regime figures? Almost certainly. You know, we'll have to wait until the end of the war to find out more. But almost certainly there would have been some locals assisting in this, I would have thought.

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, when you think about it, that point you just made, Saul, very simple but absolutely vital local intelligence, like where can I park up a big articulated lorry and not attract attention from the local cops, at the very least. So that sort of stuff, you only get that from people who live...

in the area and know it well or in a position to go and scout out locations so yeah fantastically sort of deep penetration if you like and of course you see this in many ukrainian intelligence operations just think of all those high-level officers who've been assassinated there was one just the other day in of a guy who was called zaua guttiev and he was killed in a grenade blast in stavropol

which is a Russian city long away from where Tseva is meant to have committed his crimes. That was, of course, the city of Mariupol, actually decorated for having played a significant role in the activities there, which killed tens of thousands of civilians and men who died. No one quite knows how many during the Russian bombing of Mariupol in the spring of 2022. So, you know, often these assassinations are direct acts of vengeance for...

for Russian war crimes. The perpetrators are publicly and very effectively brought to justice. So that operation and all the similar operations also clearly relied on a high degree of local knowledge.

Moving on to a question from Charlie Seracold, and it is, do you think Trump's approach to Russia would change if Putin was out of the picture? It's a very good question, isn't it, Patrick? Because it really goes to the heart of Trump's so-called relationship with Putin. This is a man I can do business with. I mean, we're reminded of Chamberlain in the 1930s, aren't we, with his infamous comment about Hitler, and it's not that.

apes it, actually. And it is, you know, quite relevant, actually. But would it change if Putin, a man he thinks he can do business with, is out of the picture and some other faceless, nameless Russian bureaucrat was there instead? I suspect it might, actually. I mean, I think what's interesting about Trump is that one of the keys to being a good salesman, and I'm not saying he is, but I think he thinks he is, is

some kind of personal rapport with the guy you're selling to, or at least you want to do a deal with. And he has convinced himself he's got that with Putin. So if you get someone else in play, he's got a star from scratch, hasn't he? And maybe he'll be able to see the wood for the trees in that scenario. I mean, I might be being optimistic here, Patrick. Any thoughts on that yourself? Well, yeah, but his so-called personal diplomacy approach

is pretty erratic and illogical, isn't it? So, you know, Putin has done everything one would have thought to disabuse him of the idea that he's a sound negotiating partner, whereas Zelensky has shown willing at every turn. Yet he still seems to feel a high degree of affection for Putin, whereas Zelensky just seems to irritate him.

So it would largely depend on who comes after Putin. We have no idea at all who that might be. But my advice to him would be in dealing with Trump, just be as obsequious and as flattering as you can possibly manage, because flattery will get you everywhere with Donald Trump. Now, our old friend Keith from Galway. He's a regular contributor. Nice to hear from you again, Keith.

He says, as accomplished historians, thank you very much, can you tell me if there is any one person in history that has been more responsible for the displacement of so many people globally than Putin? Okay, simple answer to that, isn't it, Saul?

The simplest answer of all, I suppose, is someone like Genghis Khan who kind of swayed through Asia and Central Europe. But on a slightly more serious note, I mean, in the 20th century, you can't look further than Hitler and Stalin, can you? I mean, not their intentions, of course, but unintended consequences of their two rules, in particular Hitler at Second World War, a massive movement of displaced people across Europe. Read my old friend Keith Lowe's book, Savage Continent. You'll get a sense of the uproar

the utter chaos in Europe and the bloodletting that continued long after the fighting had ceased. So I think Hitler's got to be up there in the number one position, probably closely followed by Stalin. Yeah, I'd agree with that. It was like dropping an enormous boulder into a pond, wasn't it? The Second World War in terms of population movement. So you've got these enormous waves of people moving one direction and back in the other. And the kind of eddies and whirls of this going on,

for years, as you say, after the war. So in terms of population displacement, I think Hitler is the champion. Moving on to Gareth. He's in London. Love the podcast. I've been listening from the start and really appreciate your commitment to cover the war from a position which is both accurate and sympathetic to the right side. Slava Ukraine, says Gareth. And that's exactly been our intention, hasn't it, Patrick? And we should reiterate that a podcast is not objective news journalism.

Patrick's former job is very much comment. And we make no bones about trying to get the story as accurate as we can, but also giving our own opinion, a bit like an op-ed, I suppose you would say in a newspaper, Patrick. But moving on to Gau's question, this week, I realized how little I understand how the war is faring on the ground beyond the diplomatic maneuvers. And I have noticed how widely different even pro-Ukrainian sources are.

On one hand, the Kiev independence is reporting a dangerous situation emerging for Ukraine in Donetsk. And on the other, it's reporting by the Washington Post that Russia's military edge is disappearing. What is your assessment? Well, good point. But I think the first thing interesting enough to say here, Patrick, is Ukraine

You know, newspapers need to find news stories, don't they? And they don't tend to be middle of the road stories because those don't work so well. So you're either saying Ukraine is about to be defeated or Ukraine is about to be victorious. And, you know, and obviously turn that on its head for Russia. So I think that's just the natural way of things. You can always fit the evidence to support your thesis to a certain extent.

What do we really think? Well, we certainly don't think Ukraine is losing the war. It's losing territory, but it's certainly not losing the war at this point. Any thoughts yourself, Patrick? Yeah, first, I'd like to say it's all that, you know, for all that we're not propagandists, are we? If there's something that is to Ukraine's discredit that is relevant, then we will report and we will comment accordingly.

on it. But there's no doubt at all, as you say, about which side we're on. And your point about newspapers is very well made. It's not really, it sounds a bit more kind of sinister than it actually is. It's basically, you know, news. It's all in that word news. It's got to be new. You can't keep saying the same thing day in, day out. And for it to be new, you have to

actually cut away a certain amount of context. So it's like the new development is not going to say, okay, well, it seems quite dramatic, but it's not actually all that dramatic because this, that and the other. But to sum up, I think you're absolutely right. From what we've seen in the past week, Ukraine's resolve is absolutely dimmed and its capacity, its ingenuity, its skill,

its ability to deliver is actually growing, one could say. So there are two wars being fought here, aren't there? This was something I was saying to the Colonel. You've got, you know, it is kind of David and Goliath, and David is doing pretty well at the moment. So yes, on the actual front, things may look pretty bleak, but this is a war that's being fought in lots of different dimensions.

And I would say just at the moment, Ukraine appears to have the edge, not just in military terms, but as you were saying, in diplomatic and political propaganda terms.

And finally, we've got one here from James because he mentions our old friend Mark McKinnon, who we of course saw when we were in Ukraine in January, Patrick, and he's been on the podcast a number of times. And it's an absolutely fascinating story, if slightly grim. It's been quite nice to do an upbeat podcast for a change, actually, Patrick. And I very much feel, you know, energised by the news we've been giving out today. But this story is pretty grim, but it also deserves to see the light of day. And that's fairly typical for Mark. He was one of the best foreign correspondents ever.

operating today anywhere in the Western world, I would suggest. But in any case, the story is about the modern day gulags, Russia's modern day gulags for Ukrainian children. And basically what they've done is, which we mentioned many times before, and certainly the Ukrainian government is saying this is one of the sine qua non of any peace deal, which is the return of these

up to 20,000 effectively kidnapped Ukrainian children. But what's alarming about Mark's article is how they're being brainwashed in these military camps to hate Ukraine and ultimately to fight against Ukraine. That's really the kind of ultimate revenge, isn't it, on Ukrainian children to actually turn them against their motherland.

It's an extraordinary story because a Canadian funded effort, hence Mark's interest in this, is tracking the movements of Ukrainian children who were taken during wartime. And amazingly, Patrick is able to do this because the Russians are stupid enough to let them have their mobile phones, which are showing their location and not only showing their location, but showing a lot of data, too, about the sort of propaganda efforts

is being attempted with them, of course, the sort of sites that they're looking at and the articles they're interested in. So they're getting an awful lot of information through this. And it's important that articles like Mark are meaning that this is coming to a global audience. Yeah, astonishing story and a reminder that the old Soviet era

the idea that the state, the thinking of its people, whether they be kidnapped children from Ukraine or its own population, is completely undiminished, isn't it? There was never an enlightenment post-communism, and it doesn't look like there's going to be one now. Okay, that's it for us for this week. Do join us on Wednesday for Battleground 45, and again on Friday, where events in Ukraine are bound to provide a fascinating episode. Goodbye. Goodbye.