пентагоновский брифинг Кирби 30 мартаMR. KIRBY: Yeah, so on the withdrawal, we -- we have seen, over the last 24 hours, the repositioning of a -- a small percentage of the troops that -- and the battalion tactical groups that Russia had arrayed against Kyiv, probably in the neighborhood of 20 percent of what they had, they are beginning to reposition. Some of those troops we assess are repositioning into Belarus. We don't have an exact number for you, but that's our early assessments.
None of them -- we have seen none of them reposition to their home garrison, and that's not a small point. If the Russians are serious about de-escalating, because that's their claim here, then they should send them home, but they're not doing that, at least not yet. So that's not what we're seeing. And I don't know, you know -- our -- our assessment would be, as we said yesterday, that -- that they're going to refit these troops, resupply them and then probably import -- employ them else -- elsewhere in Ukraine. But I -- I don't believe that at this stage, we've seen the refitting going on, you know, with any specificity.
насчёт отвода, мы понаблюдали 24 часа, похоже они отводят может быть 20% от того, что было под Киевом. Вроде бы они их отводят в Беларусь.
Но не домой! Если бы они не врали про деэскалацию, они бы их домой вернули. Так что мы думаем, они их накормят и обратно в Украину зашлют.
MR. KIRBY: I don't have anything today in terms of specifics. Just broadly speaking, Felicia, we've seen them counterattack and retake territory to the west and to the northwest of Kyiv. As we see some Russian troops reposition and move away, we have seen indications that the Ukrainians are moving forward, as you might expect them to do.
Where it's really notable is in the South. I mean when we were talking early on, remember these are sort of three lines of axes that the Russians have used north, east and south, generally speaking and in the south they had made the most progress in the first couple of weeks. And now the Ukrainians are literally clawing back some of that territory, particularly just to the northwest of Crimea, so the Kherson area and the positioning of the Russians around Mykolaiv, which they now have lost a lot of footing there. So we've seen the Ukrainians very tough in trying to get back territory there in the south.
Now Mariupol, again I don't need to tell you this because you guys are all covering it, but that obviously there is a lot of heavy fighting going on right there. We think that there are some Russian forces that are very, very close to City Center; Ukrainians are fighting very, very hard. The town is just being shellacked with air strikes and bombardment, as we talked about earlier. Both sides fighting very, very hard over Mariupol. From a geographic perspective, clearly it's very important to both sides because of where it's located, right there at the southern sort of end of the Donbas Region.
Мы видим, что украинцы атакуют и отвоёвывают территории на северозапад от Киева.
Но самое примечательное - на юге. Украинцы буквально откусывают назад земли на северозапад от Крыма, Херсон и Николаев, русским там плохо.
Мариуполь - вы наверно сами знаете, вы там ведёте репортажи. Там тяжёлые бои. Русские уже близко к центру города. Город просто поливают бомбами. Город конечно очень важен, у него такое положение на краю Донбаса.
Then General Wolters last year, about a year ago this month, said Russia is the primary threat -- it's the existential threat against the United States. And I'm just asking you, acute sounds like a step down from existential and primary threat and almost a deliberate attempt to deemphasize Russia and overemphasize China. This is going to come up as an issue, so I'd like you to address it.
MR. KIRBY: No, it's a fair question. I mean, it's not about deemphasizing Russia. Nobody's deemphasizing Russia. We've said many times here, certainly you and I have talked about this many times. I mean, you -- nobody's taking the Russian threat lightly nor should we.
Now yes, they've underperformed. They've made pretty big mistakes in Ukraine, planning and execution wise. Of course, they've also faced a much stiffer resistance than they anticipated, but nobody's shortchanging the -- the kinds of threats that they continue to pose.
And you can see it for yourself, my goodness, just take a look at the video and the imagery coming out of Ukraine and you can see the damage that -- that this military is capable of -- of -- of exerting and causing. But the secretary has been nothing but completely candid from literally day one that the pacing challenge in his view for this department is China.
- Генерал Волтерс год назад говорил, что раша - главная угроза, жизненная угроза сша. А вы теперь говорите - "острая" - как будто понизили уровень, как будто специально не выделяете рашу, и выделяете китай.
- Вопрос конечно интересный. Не то что я не выделяю рашу. Её бля трудно не заметить. Никто не должен отмахиваться от рашистской угрозы.
Да, они выступили дебильно. Сделали большие ошибки в Украине - и по планированию, и по действиям. И противника недооценили. Но они всё-таки представляют угрозу.
Да вы сами посмотрите, сколько всего они могут разрушить. Но Китай страшнее. Вот такие раша неудачники.
Q: Can you talk about any conversations with Chinese counterparts in recent days here? And have you seen any signs or indications that -- of Chinese military assistance to Russia? Is that still a concern?
MR. KIRBY: We see no indications of Chinese military assistance to Russia. I don't have any conversations at the very -- or senior levels of the department to read out. It's -- like Russia. It's not like we don't have a military-to-military multiple communication channels to speak with the Chinese. It's not like -- it's not like there's a blackout there, but I don't have any conversations at the secretary's level to speak to today.
- вы говорите с китайцами? вы видели какие-то признаки, что китайцы помогают русским военным?
- не видим ничего такого. Хотя я б не сказал, что я разговариваю постоянно с ихними генералами. Это как раша.
Q: Yes. Thanks, John. Yes. In testimony over the last couple days there was some talk about the intelligence picture on the wait up to the war, and Wolters, you know, suggested that there could have been, you know, gaps in intelligence both underestimating the Ukrainian fight and overestimating the Russian ability to win this thing quickly. Have you guys started your post mortem on that thing? I mean, it definitely has an end. Once the war started, you know, you can close the book on it. So I know it's ongoing, but it seems like you guys can start doing an assessment of how, you know, on one hand you got it very right about their intent to invade. On the other hand you got it very wrong and your assessment that, you know, Kyiv, would fall within days and the Ukrainian military would dissolve. Can you --
MR. KIRBY: I might make a couple of points here, Alex. This is not a war the United States is fighting, so I wouldn't expect that there'll be some formal after action review the way we are conducting one, for instance on the last year or so in Afghanistan. Obviously the intelligence community, the interagency will I'm sure informally at the appropriate time take a look at what we have learned by watching and seeing how Russia has underperformed and how quite frankly amazingly the Ukrainians have performed.
I mean, you know, obviously we all want to learn from things as we -- as we see them, and we're going to learn from our own -- our own behaviors here. Our efforts to help defend Ukraine or help Ukraine defend itself. We'll certainly at the appropriate time take a look at how we performed in that regard. We'll certainly at the right time take a look at how hard we worked to bolster NATO's Eastern Flank. And to Meghann's question, I'm sure there will be lessons we'll learn there about what the posture in Europe ought to look like going forward, but I think it's too early right now, Alex, to sit down and wring hands over specific intelligence assessments.
You're right. We did say for a long time that we had indications that Russia was going to invade, and while certainly the performance of the Ukrainians on the field of battle has been amazing and incredible and inspiring, it's not -- and I've said this before. It's not like their performance came as a shock to people here at the Pentagon. It wasn't by accident.
- были какие-то разговоры про разведданные перед войной, и Волтерс сказал, что наверно чо-то данные были не совсем чоткие, потому что недооценили украинцев и переоценили рашистов, думали, рашисты прям быстро победят. Вы уже начали выяснять, чо делать, почему так вышло, откуда вы взяли, что русские такие прям вояки, и что делать, чтобы больше такого не случилось?
- Нуу, алекс, это не наша война, мы не воюем, чо уж копаться, почему да как вышло. Это ж не афганистан. Разведка наша конечно в удобное для себя время разберётся, и обдумает, чо мы тут все наблюдаем, а наблюдаем мы, как русские лажают, и как украинцы - честно говоря - просто поразительно выступают.
Конечно мы все извлекаем уроки из того, что видим, и из нашего поведения. Наши усилия помочь защитить Украину и помочь Украине защищаться. Мы конечно оценим наши плюсы и минусы. Но вообще пока ещё рановато ставить оценки.
Вы правы, мы давно говорили, что раша собирается напасть, и хотя украинцы воюют поразительно и невероятно и вдохновляюще, не то что это прям такой уж шок для нас, это не случайность, (мы их учили)
Q: Well yes, but I'm just acknowledging that upfront. I mean, why didn't that change your calculus that Kyiv would fall very quickly?
MR. KIRBY: I won't get into specific intelligence assessments over Kyiv falling or not falling, Alex. I don't think we ever publicly acknowledged a certain range of dates or hours or weeks with respect to Ukraine. I understand that there are officials out there that are talking like that and did talk at the time, but there was never an official position by the department about how long Kyiv would hold out.
- да неужели нешок, а чо ж вы тогда прогнозировали, что Киев быстро падёт?
- Я не буду вдаваться в подробности оценок, падёт или не падёт. Мы ваще официально не обнародовали никаких там сроков или дней или недель. Кто-то там болтал, ну и что.
