Security expert on US data breach: “The Russians will ask: How do they know?”

A young man with access to top secret information about Ukraine leaked US government documents this week. Can this publication influence the course of the war?
Nico Long: No, it says nothing that could change the course of the war. The information is not surprising. The Ukrainians are known to have problems replenishing ammunition. But it’s a big problem for Americans. They must be wondering why so many people have access to such information. Apparently this leak was about pomposity by a young man. It would have been even worse if it had been a targeted espionage operation.

How can such sensitive documents be made public?
The question is who has access to it and why. It would be a problem for any country if someone photographed and printed large numbers of classified documents.

>> All current developments in the live ticker

How big is the damage to the US secret service?
First of all, it’s embarrassing. But there is also a concrete damage: with some information now made public, the Russians will ask themselves: How do they know? Where are we being tapped? Where are human resources? If Russia could draw conclusions from this, it would be a real problem. The Chinese will also take a good look at this.

The US secret services are vital to Ukraine’s survival. Will Kiev and possibly other allies now be more reluctant to share information?
Ukraine benefits from receiving information from the US. I don’t get the impression that Ukraine is particularly generous in sharing its own information. It is clear to the Ukrainians that they are and will remain restrictive. Especially when it comes to the upcoming spring offensive.

The American newspapers paint a bleak picture of the prospects for this upcoming spring offensive. Are the Ukrainians’ chances really that bad?
The documents date from March and reflect the state of affairs in February. The supply of ammunition for air defense and artillery is a problem. It is well known that increasing production capacity is important. In my opinion, the training of the Ukrainians in dealing with Western weapon systems in particular still needs time. They need better education. But it is also clear that if you don’t give Ukraine what it needs, don’t be surprised if it has shortages. We must provide the Ukrainians with what they need for their offensive, such as longer-range weapons systems.

What is important for the success of Ukraine’s offensive?
To the training. Practice in combined arms combat is crucial. In addition to battle tanks, Ukraine also needs a lot of equipment that is not immediately visible. Mine clearance equipment, for example. In addition to longer-range weapons and ammunition, there is also the question of how to ensure close air support. The Ukrainians will deploy a large number of commercial drones for this purpose. And there is the issue of fighter jets. One should talk about F-16.

Speaking of F-16 jets, that means the West has to deliver.
There is no use case for these aircraft yet. But if the Ukrainians manage to break through the front line in some places, medium-level air support will be needed to liberate more areas. F-16s could help. In any case, we must create the conditions now and not repeat the mistake of the first months of the war by waiting and watching. You need to start training pilots now.

What would even be a success for the Ukrainian offensive?
It is important for Ukraine to move from a war of attrition to more mobility to exploit the strengths of Western weapon systems. Deftly make the war and then see which part of the frontline can break through.

Ukrainians are still defending Bakhmut despite huge losses. an error?
I would find it problematic if the political over-emphasis on places like Bakhmut were to eat up resources better spent on the counter-offensive.

Does that happen in Bachmut?
Difficult to judge. If the Russians don’t destroy Bakhmut, they will destroy other cities. Inflicting heavy casualties on the Russians there makes military sense. Ukraine is currently managing to hold the frontline and build up troops for the counter-offensive. The Russians are making little progress, but they have never succeeded in closing the ring around Bakhmut. And even if Bakhmut is controlled, it would not be a strategic change in the war. Even if it were to exploit Russia for propaganda purposes, don’t think that if they conquer a small town after ten months, it’s all over.

Ultimately, it could come down to the question of what happens to Crimea. Can Ukraine liberate Crimea? And should she even try?
I do not recall that we recognized the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia. For Ukraine, the reconquest is not only legitimate, but also the basis for a lasting peace. Militarily, Crimea is a relatively exposed peninsula with limited access. The greatest danger on the Russian side is not the conquest, but the closing of the supply routes by the Ukrainians. If they can do that, it will be difficult. And it will increase Russia’s willingness to talk. We should not buy into the story that something new and bad will happen if Ukraine attacks Crimea. There have already been heavy attacks on the air base there and on the Black Sea Fleet. There was no response. Russia has nothing to escalate with.

Russia has nuclear weapons, so they could very well escalate with them.
You have to be careful not to turn it into a manslaughter argument. That any resistance would be futile because Russia has nuclear weapons. That is not the case, the West’s nuclear deterrent is working. Russia uses this as an element of psychological warfare. You have to see it: the use of a tactical nuclear weapon would by no means be a victory over Ukraine, but Russia would have to suffer serious consequences. We shouldn’t be afraid.

How important is China for the further course of the war? What will happen if Beijing supports Putin even more?
Recent visits and talks have shown that China is reluctant to openly support Russia, but does provide covert support. The Chinese cannot supply anything in the short term, which will have a decisive influence on the war. But they do have things that the Russians could use for weapons production, for example. But there is currently no danger that China will intervene decisively in the war. China is not an ally of Moscow, but pursues its own interests. Beijing will want to be involved in, for example, the reconstruction of Ukraine after the war.

A gruesome video surfaced this week of Russian soldiers chopping off the head of a living Ukrainian…
… The only advice I can give anyone is not to watch these videos. They have a traumatic effect, also for many in Ukraine. The Russian war crimes, the inhumanity of the Russians are made visible to the whole world. You know that from the Wagner group. But the video is a new dimension of absolutely inhuman cruelty.

What triggers such videos in Russia, as well as in the Ukrainian army?
The Russians will fail to intimidate the Ukrainians. Rather, it will increase their determination. The Russians practice dehumanization. It starts with Putin when he says that there are actually no Ukrainians, they are all Nazis anyway. Unfortunately, neither in Germany nor in Switzerland have I seen Russians who differ from them.

Especially in Germany, but also in Switzerland, there are repeated calls for peace negotiations. You are strictly against it at the moment. Why?
There is a misunderstanding that many people cultivate: when there is a war, two people fight and then the cry follows: you have to come to an agreement now, you have to solve this peacefully. But that is not what is happening in Ukraine. Russia has invaded Ukraine, Ukraine is defending itself. For them, it’s about existence. It amazes me how generously people demand that Ukrainians give up parts of their land and subject themselves to torture and rape. Strategically, Putin is counting on us having forces that push the Ukrainians to do something. Almost daily, Moscow declares that it is ready to negotiate if all demands are met, including, for example, the utterly nonsensical demand for denazification. The people who call for negotiations under these circumstances cling to their vision of the world, which does not correspond to reality – to the detriment of the Ukrainians.

Is it possible to negotiate peace with Putin?
If you are strong enough, yes. We only know Putin since yesterday. He does not sit at the table out of good will. You can negotiate if you force him into your own strength. Putin wages war until he realizes he can go no further. You have to show Putin your limits. We should not hope for his insight.

Can Switzerland play a role in any negotiations?
In Switzerland, there is a very particular discussion about arms and ammunition deliveries, which Switzerland should discuss internally. But she has a tradition when it comes to the locations of such conversations.

Switzerland should immediately arrest Putin because of the international arrest warrant.
Questions about the specific negotiation situation cannot be answered at this time. But it will certainly not be possible to conduct the negotiations in Russia or Belarus.

So Putin’s arrest warrant was a mistake?
It is good that the warrant has been issued, so the responsibility is clear. It’s about international law. The arrest warrant is necessary.

What could a Russia without Putin look like?
I discourage anyone from saying that with Putin gone, things will only get worse. There is a lot of potential for positive development in Russia. After two decades of building a totalitarian system with many fleeing the country or imprisoned, I can understand someone keeping their heads down. But there are many who have a different view of Russia, as the protests after the last parliamentary elections and also at the beginning of the war showed. (aargauerzeitung.ch)