13.06.2025

The level of threat to the southern region of Ukraine, in particular the Odessa region, can be reduced by resolving the issue of the unrecognized Transnistrian People’s Republic and the operational group of troops of the aggressor country of the russian federation, based on the territory of this enclave. The destruction of the russian military group on the territory of Moldova will not be a difficult task for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Moreover, it is a legitimate military goal of Ukraine. There are certain conditions under which such an operation would be appropriate and useful.

The Moldovan leadership may turn to Ukraine with a request to “cleanse” Transnistria from the Russian military presence. At the same time, the Ukrainian side should have certain benefits from this. For example, Chisinau could pay for the operation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with weapons or allow Ukrainian defenders to take away the military depots of the occupying country on the territory of the Polish People’s Republic. At the same time, it is necessary to understand that due to the fact that Transnistria is cut off from Russia, any support for it from the Kremlin looks very problematic.

This opinion was expressed in an exclusive interview with OBOZ.UA by war veteran, public activist, and lawyer Oleg Simoroz .

– President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated that the city of Odessa is a target for the aggressor country Russia. According to the head of state, after the capture of Odessa, the enemy plans to reach the border with Moldova and Romania. How do you assess the enemy’s resources to achieve this goal? After all, let’s remember that since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, the occupation army has not been able to capture a single regional center.

– Regarding the fact that the enemy did not capture a single regional center, there is a very simple connection here: it is connected with the courage and heroism of our Ukrainian military and the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Because such intentions existed both for Kherson and for Mykolaiv, Zaporizhia, Kharkiv, Kyiv, Sumy, Chernihiv, etc. And it was exclusively the actions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine that prevented these intentions and made such actions of the Russians unsuccessful.

As for the words of the first person of the state about Odessa and Odessa region, about access to the borders with Moldova and Romania, first of all, they have a political informational part. Such an intention of the enemy can be confirmed by the fact that Russia has been saying this for 12 years in a row. They call Odessa a Russian city, constantly declare their desire to capture it.

If you look at the map of the fighting, it becomes clear that this is probably the most illusory part of what they can achieve. If you look at the entire line of combat, including Belarus, Odesa has an advantageous landscape and geographical position. It is separated by both the sea and the estuaries near Ochakov. And this turns it into a kind of fortress. Without the capture of Kherson and Mykolaiv, the Russians will not be able to seriously think about capturing Odessa.

The capture of Kherson and Mykolaiv seems unlikely. Currently, the Russians are on the right bank of the Dnieper, where they retreated as a result of our counteroffensive actions. The Dnieper River is a powerful deterrent. Therefore, it is quite difficult for them to even talk about Kherson.

Odesa can be considered by the Russians exclusively at the expense of land. Over the years of full-scale war, we have already realized that the Russians do not have a modern fleet in the Black Sea. The distances from the sea area, from the coast of Crimea to Odessa are small, so their large ships are ineffective here. We, having virtually no fleet, have closed this issue with surface and air drones. Plus, there is also mining at sea. Russian parity in the Black Sea is not felt, the enemy has no initiative here.

So, there is a lot to talk about. In Russia, they are still talking about the capture of Lviv – after so many defeats, after so many losses.

I think the president’s statement is also a response to the Western press, which referred to possible actions by our Forces in Transnistria.

– According to the latest estimates, the Russian group in Transnistria currently numbers about 1,500 military personnel. There was information that Russia intends to increase it to 10,000. If this really happens, how will it affect the danger that we are currently assessing?

– Of course, this will have a negative impact on us. But they don’t have the resources for this. They are cut off from Russia, they don’t have the opportunity to really replenish these troops. But globally, the issue of the People’s Republic of Poland needs to be resolved, because there are troops there.

My subjective position: the level of threat that exists in this region, in the Odessa region and beyond, must be reduced. For us, there may be various options. When either Moldova officially addresses us with this request, or when we feel that the Russian group in Transnistria poses a threat to our territorial integrity. And this is logical, because we are at war with Russia. So, this is an absolutely legitimate goal. If the Moldovan side cannot restore order there or has no intention of doing so. But now we are talking about a terrorist country – Russia – which is attacking our country.

But here we must take into account the pragmatic benefit. In principle, this operation should not be problematic for us. The number of our brigades is enough to completely destroy this group. But we will not be the guards of this territory for Moldova. We need a benefit: either Moldova turns to us and pays us for it, preferably with weapons, or we go in and take all the warehouses. But the question is whether it will be possible to take these warehouses intact. There are two interests in this, both of which have an economic and military purpose.

Because simply destroying the Russians in this territory is supposedly interesting, but we currently do not have the resources to conduct such an operation without receiving some benefit.

If the Russians escalate in Transnistria, it will end badly for them. But in general, the story of increasing the contingent in the PNR looks ridiculous. After four years of full-scale war, Transnistria remains a cut-off region. They don’t even have the opportunity to send detainees to Russia, because they use Moldova’s infrastructure. And Moldova expresses its support for us in the war with Russia.

– The last question is precisely about the support of Ukraine from the allies. US Defense Secretary Hegseth stated that the US intends to reduce its budget for the purchase of weapons for Ukraine in 2026. According to him, a “peaceful settlement through negotiations” supposedly meets the best interests of Ukraine, Russia, and the US. If US aid is indeed significantly reduced, how bad news will it be for us? Perhaps by that time we can expect even greater development of the domestic military-industrial complex and the activation of European partners? What are your assessments?

– This statement is expected and predicted, given the position that the White House has generally taken. He made this statement at a Senate hearing, so it is of a fairly high level.

But we had to prepare for this. This is what I keep saying. It all depends on our defense-industrial complex. The US will not fight for Ukraine. If we want to win, it will not be a victory for our allies and the US. When government officials and the political elite of Ukraine say that our defense industry is 33% loaded for the fourth year of a full-scale war, this indicates that the process is moving in the wrong direction. This is a critically low figure that will not allow us to exist normally in the conditions of a major war and resist the enemy.

In the tax system, we do not see an increase in taxes for the richest segments of the population – we see the opposite trend: an increase in the tax burden on the working class, on workers, on small entrepreneurs. We have not yet nationalized strategic enterprises. We are not looking for mechanisms to fill the budget. We still cannot confiscate the property of the entire pro-Russian gang in Ukraine. We are not pushing for a sanctions policy.

In conclusion, I will say that we need to change. Ukraine cannot exist as it has for the past three years. The defense-industrial complex must be 100% full, work in three shifts, 24/7. This is about a country at war. The government must pursue a policy that meets the conditions of martial law.

https://war.obozrevatel.com/ukr/zsu-legko-znischat-ugrupuvannya-rf-u-pridnistrovi-oleg-simoroz-nazvav-dvi-vigodi.htm