news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

editor’s note:facing ukraine's offensive in kursk, russia is not the most anxious. has the russian army improved after more than two years of hard fighting? can the latest military aid received by the ukrainian army really threaten moscow? why are ukraine's two major neighbors becoming more and more anxious? in this issue of phoenix military affairs, military experts shao yongling and yu shuo are invited to interpret the increasingly complex russian-ukrainian conflict for you.

dialogue丨shao yongling and yu shuo

editor: chen jiazhong

phoenix military affairs office:from the time ukraine launched its offensive in the kursk direction to the present day, which event or piece of equipment has been the most impressive?

shao yongling:i was impressed by the ukrainian army's destruction of three bridges over the seym river. this was not just general destruction, but the bridges were completely blown up. the russian side said that the ukrainian army used himars rockets, but i personally think that their power is not enough to cause such damage.

the picture shows the "jedam" satellite-guided bomb mounted on the ukrainian mig-29

it is very likely that more powerful guided bombs such as the american "jdam" and the french "hammer" were used. although western countries claim to be unaware of this, these equipment have long been deeply involved in the russian-ukrainian conflict, otherwise it would be very difficult for the ukrainian army to fight until now.

yu shuo:recently, the ukrainian air defense system deployed in kursk has been hit by russian firepower many times. what impressed me most was that the russian "iskander" ballistic missiles and "lancet" cruise missiles could accurately hit the ukrainian air defense system launchers or radar vehicles.

the picture shows the russian military's "iskander" ballistic missile

the "iskander" ballistic missile can be launched immediately after obtaining the target position and loading the ammunition. it can be constantly corrected by inertial navigation and satellite guidance during the flight, so its strike accuracy is very high. compared with cruise missiles, which need to match the terrain before launching and load the terminal radar and satellite image information, the flight speed and reaction time of the "iskander" ballistic missile are much higher. the russian military can easily kill all 10 moving targets including the "himars" rocket launcher with the "iskander" ballistic missile, proving that the russian military's technical level in many aspects has been greatly improved.

phoenix military affairs office:in this round of kursk offensive, ukraine did not act alone, but also supported by nato, and the united states played a big role. but the united states now says that it is unaware of the ukrainian army's actions, while at the same time hinting that it will increase its military aid to ukraine. what is the significance of this move by the united states?

shao yongling:the united states may not have known about it in advance. western countries are unwilling to make trouble now. after all, no one knows what consequences ukraine's attack on russia will bring. the ukrainian army did achieve some results after entering russia, and russia was unable to drive it out of the country or eliminate it in a short time. at this time, the united states has a different mentality and believes that this action can be taken.

the us attitude towards military aid to ukraine has not changed. just after the ukrainian army launched the kursk offensive, the us announced a new batch of aid to ukraine. in fact, the two countries have long been deeply tied together and formed a community of interests. it may not be so easy for the us to get rid of the burden at any time.

phoenix military affairs office:the united states has been increasing its military aid to ukraine, and recently mentioned an important piece of equipment - the agm-158 air-launched cruise missile. if this missile is equipped to the ukrainian army, what changes will it bring to the battlefield?

the picture shows the agm-158 air-launched cruise missile

yu shuo:first of all, the most important thing is the amount of aid, at least more than the previous "storm shadow" cruise missiles. otherwise, the limited number is not enough to bring about changes, and it depends on whether the united states' own inventory is sufficient. secondly, compared with the previous use of su-24 or mig-29 to launch western ammunition, the convenience of using f-16 equipped with agm-158 is better. the agm-158 cruise missile has a range of over 500 kilometers, and the ukrainian f-16 can launch it far away from the russian air defense network to protect the safety of the aircraft. for example, it can be launched in sumy oblast to strike russian front-line airports, oil depots, ammunition depots and other targets in the direction of belgorod or bryansk.

phoenix military affairs office:britain's attitude towards ukraine's use of the storm shadow cruise missile has always been ambiguous, and it has left many key decision-making powers to the united states. what is the deep meaning behind this statement?

shao yongling:britain has always taken the lead in aiding ukraine. for example, britain was the first country to announce the provision of advanced tanks to ukraine. when zelensky visited britain, britain expressed its support for ukraine to acquire advanced fighter jets and helped train pilots for the ukrainian army. although britain did not provide fighter jets itself, it was the first to open the door. this also included the storm shadow cruise missile.

the picture shows the "storm shadow" cruise missile

if the use range of the storm shadow cruise missile is restricted too much, the ukrainian army can only passively defend and cannot destroy the russian frontline airports that threaten it, which is very disadvantageous to ukraine. i think the uk's ambiguity is superficial caution. the kursk offensive may allow the uk to give ukraine an opening and delegate deeper missile use authority to the ukrainian frontline troops.

phoenix military affairs office:compared with the uk, germany's attitude towards military aid to ukraine seems not so positive. a large number of british-made challenger 2 main battle tanks appeared on the kursk battlefield, but a certain number of leopard 2s were not seen. is it related to the german government's further tightening of its aid budget to ukraine? what impact will it have on the ukrainian army's future operations?

yu shuo:the leopard 1 or 2 main battle tanks that germany provided to ukraine were actually a complex "trade-in activity," meaning that germany purchased tanks and other armored vehicles from eastern european countries and then provided them to ukraine.

the picture shows the leopard-2 main battle tank equipped by the ukrainian army

because the german bundeswehr does not have many leopard 2s, and many of the tanks have been lost on the battlefield in eastern ukraine, the number that germany can provide in the future will definitely not be large.

phoenix military affairs office:some media have claimed that belarus has already assembled one-third of its troops on the belarus-ukraine border. will belarus eventually get itself fully involved in the russia-ukraine conflict?

shao yongling:lukashenko's recent statement has already shown that belarus will not stand down. the one who is most nervous about the ukrainian army's kursk operation is not russia, but lukashenko. maybe he thinks that ukraine's entry into russian territory will not be timely and effective. if nato enters belarusian territory, can russia provide protection in time?

in addition, belarus has limited military strength, with border guards and national defense forces totaling about 60,000 people. it seems unreasonable to deploy one-third of its troops to the mine-ridden ukrainian-belarusian border. therefore, lukashenko is constantly exaggerating the threat from ukraine and nato, in the final analysis, just to find a way out for himself.

phoenix military affairs office:poland seems to have always been a very firm and high-profile supporter of ukraine. there have been reports that a large number of ukrainians fought alongside the poles. is it possible that poland will eventually send troops to participate in the russia-ukraine conflict? is such high-profile support related to its arms purchases?

yu shuo:for poland, supporting ukraine is for the west to see. this proves that poland is the front line against russia and the backbone force, and it also shows the results of its military aid to ukraine in a high-profile manner.

by obtaining new equipment from western countries through this means, they can indirectly complete their own military upgrades. under the current circumstances, no western country dares to say that it can completely stop russia. the same is true for poland, which is not willing to truly serve as the vanguard against russia. therefore, the possibility of poland confronting russia is extremely small.

the picture shows zelensky viewing the polish aid equipment to ukraine

shao yongling:russia still wants to emphasize that this conflict is a confrontation between nato and russia, and try to downplay ukraine's role in it. so russia's claim that nato mercenaries are heavily involved is actually a characterization of the nature of the conflict, which is more conducive to domestic political mobilization.

russia is now exaggerating more about poland. in fact, i think for many russians, they don’t hate ukraine, but they may have been hating poland.