Europe should learn from Ukraine while preparing for war – British general
British General Sir Rupert Smith, former NATO Deputy Supreme Commander Allied Powers Europe (DSACEUR), stated this in an interview with Ukrinform.
"In a shorter term, we Europeans, whether in the EU or not, probably using the NATO structures that already exist, need to continue to support Ukraine in every possible way we can – with materiel, training, assistance, etc.," the general said.
He explained that Europe cannot risk "Ukraine falling into Russian hands."
"Leave aside freedom of choice or the fact that Ukraine's was invaded. If Russia is in possession of a geographical space called Ukraine, then you have doubled the European border with Russia, and you don't want to do that. And secondly, all those men in Ukraine, with enormous amounts of experience and lots of equipment will be in Russian hands. And they'll start to be pointed at us. And we don't want that either. So, for those two reasons alone, Europe should continue to support Ukraine in every possible way. At the very least, to maintain the current military situation and, ideally, make it a lot better, particularly in the air defense and the electronic spectrum," Smith said.
He separately emphasized the key lessons Europe must learn from Ukraine.
"We've got to learn, or relearn, what it means to have a wartime economy. A wartime economy involves gaining control of your manpower. Because if you don't do that, you won't get a balance between soldiers on the ground, the right people in the ships and airplanes, and the right people in the factories and so on and so forth. And we're watching Ukraine having great difficulties in doing this. It's very difficult, and it's not the same answer as you would have applied 70 years ago during the Second World War," the general said.
According to him, sustaining defense and a wartime economy requires industrial and technological development.
"Where's the balance 'between guns and butter'? Also, there must be balance between technological development and industrial capacity. And we can see that going on in Ukraine. The lessons are there. There was a limited but existing industrial capacity to make shells and armored vehicles, and so on. But if they just went on doing that, none of the other innovations would have been possible. You have to recognize that there's a technological battle in a war between the two sides, and you want to win it," Smith said.
He also highlighted the importance of a "manufacturing battle."
"So you want the best possible gun. But you need to produce plenty of them. And there is a balance to how you do that. And again, you can see it going on in Ukraine. There is wonderful, clever innovation in some given brigade, and another set of innovation in some other brigade. The circumstances of one brigade might be different to another one. But I observe there's very little cross-fertilization between these developments, so you have a fragmented application. And that makes it extremely difficult to produce the volumes," the general said.
He added that Russia has fewer innovations but is maximizing production.
"If it's not a war of choice but an existential war, you need to have a wartime economy. There's other things, too, like we need have the same discussion about hospitals, the way we allocate the doctors and so on. If you do all that in advance, you will have much more credibility and capacity to conduct this war, which you don't want it to happen and wish to deter," Smith said.
The general also highlighted Ukraine's investment potential, through which European armies could receive Ukrainian-made weapons.
"That could be engineered. It doesn't happen next week, but you could start that process. When Britain is making Ukrainian designed drones, that sort of thing is an excellent idea. And let's do more of it. It benefits everybody," Smith said.
