30.04.2025

The aggressor country Russia unilaterally declared a three-day ceasefire on the occasion of ” Victory Day ” from May 8 to 11, but did so in its usual manner. It was more like an ultimatum. How should Ukraine respond? Declare its own ceasefire, say from May 1 to 3, and observe how the occupation army will adhere to it. If not, this will give grounds to consider itself free from any obligations. In this case, Ukrainian drones will be able to take part in the parade on Red Square in Moscow on May 9.

The Ukrainian Defense Forces will have enough ammunition and weapons at least until the fall of this year. At the same time, the good news is that even in the absence of support from US President Donald Trump , military aid from this country may still continue. It is also worth noting that the share of weapons produced by the Ukrainian military-industrial complex is constantly growing – as is the share of aid from European partners. When the US share reaches 10%, Washington’s ultimatums can no longer be ignored.

This opinion was expressed in an exclusive interview with OBOZ.UA by Oleksiy Getman , a veteran of the Russian-Ukrainian war and a reserve major of the Armed Forces of Ukraine .

– Despite the statements of the Kremlin media, the Armed Forces of Ukraine continue to hold certain positions in the Kursk region, and they are also present in the Belgorod region. How do you assess the military necessity of the presence of Ukrainian troops in these territories?

– The military necessity for the presence of our troops on the territory of the Russian Federation was, is and will remain. Firstly, one of the goals is the creation of a buffer zone. Secondly, it is an attempt to bind relatively large forces of Russian forces in these regions. The thing is that we do not need to maintain positional defense there, that is, build fortifications and be on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd line there, as, for example, near Pokrovsk. We can maneuver. Because in addition to positional defense, there is also maneuverable, mobile, point defense, etc.

By maneuvering with a small number, we can force the enemy to keep a large number of troops there. From a military point of view, this is quite understandable and advantageous.

Moreover, as long as we cannot achieve peace on terms acceptable to us, as long as hostilities continue, as our military-political leadership said, if there is a war, it is important that it is also on the territory of the aggressor, that is, on the territory of the Russian Federation.

So, there are both military and political components here. They cannot be completely separated, because war is a continuation of politics by other means. If a certain military operation has a political expediency, this does not mean that it does not also have a military expediency.

– How do you assess Putin’s proposal to arrange a truce on “Victory Day” on May 9? In your opinion, how should Ukraine react to this proposal?

– This is not a proposal, this is an attempt to declare a truce unilaterally. That’s not how truces are declared. This is not an ultimatum. A truce is an agreement between both sides to suspend hostilities for a certain period of time. But Putin is making a demand, saying, I am declaring a truce for such and such days. For us, as for the whole world, these are days of mourning, days of remembrance for the dead, and in Russia it will “victory” and the celebration “we can repeat.”

What should we do? There is a very simple proposal: we should also unilaterally declare a ceasefire, for example, from May 1, for three days. If the Russians do not agree to this, do not adhere to it and do not cease fire, then we can officially announce that we consider ourselves free from the obligation to comply with their ceasefire on May 8-11. This means that during the “victory” our drones can take part in the parade on Red Square.

– French President Macron has said that pressure on Russia regarding the ceasefire agreement will soon be significantly increased. He said he has called on US President Trump to take a tougher stance on Russia. Do you believe that political pressure on Putin from the US and Europe can really achieve a lasting ceasefire?

– As for me personally, I don’t believe it. As for Macron’s statements, there is subtle politics here. Tomorrow will be one hundred days of Trump’s presidency (the interview was recorded on April 29. – Ed.). We remember how many times during these one hundred days he boasted that he had held very good negotiations with Putin, promised that the fighting would stop and that they were very close to signing a peace agreement, but then he noted that he had the impression that his friend Putin was deceiving him.

Therefore, the question arises: are the parties really close to signing an agreement or were these talks about nothing? Indeed, the statements are very beautiful, very loud, but there are no results yet. Has anything changed on the front line? Has anything changed in the Russian air attacks? Has anything changed at all? No. The war has continued, and continues. On the contrary, it can be assumed that the activity of the Russians has increased, especially since they announced powerful offensive actions for the spring-summer of this year. President Zelensky also reported on three directions where the enemy is going to attack. By and large, offensive actions have already begun on the northern front line.

I am convinced that you cannot call a deal good or bad until it is implemented. Therefore, with all due respect to Macron, Starmer, Scholz and the rest of our friends, you cannot evaluate a deal about which we know practically nothing, because its details are not disclosed.

– According to your estimates, how many months of reserve capacity do the Defense Forces have today? The Czech Republic, which is responsible for providing the Ukrainian army with ammunition, claims that there will be enough ammunition until the fall.

– By the fall, at least, we will have enough. Maybe by the end of the year. But it is not a fact that aid from the US will completely stop, given the changes in President Trump’s rhetoric. It is also quite possible that aid from Europe will be increased. And most importantly, the capabilities of our military-industrial complex will increase. We provide more than 40%, almost half of our needs, through our weapons.

Let’s assume that in the near future this 40% will turn into 50%. That is, by and large, we can fight with our own weapons. The EU, Great Britain and the USA will have 50%. The EU and Britain help approximately equally, another 25-30% falls on the USA. The American share will decrease due to the increase in European aid and the production of our own weapons.

When aid from the US amounts to 10-15%, we will be able to completely ignore all ultimatums from the US, because this is not the percentage that gives them the right to dictate anything.

https://war.obozrevatel.com/ukr/v-paradi-pobedobesiya-v-moskvi-mozhut-vzyati-uchast-ukrainski-droni-intervyu-z-majorom-getmanom.htm