The stockpile of artillery shells in Russia has decreased to 30%, the remaining missiles are almost exhausted, and the maximum of Russian production is about 40 cruise missiles per month. All this forced Moscow to abandon its ambitious plans to seize Kyiv and shift its efforts to an attempt to occupy the entire Luhansk region and Donetsk region.
Summing up the year of the great war in Ukraine, V interview Forbes, head of the GUR Kyrylo Budanov.
Kyrylo Budanov, 37, is one of the most media-savvy military personnel of Ukraine, he gave dozens of interviews to Ukrainian and international media. The scout is categorical in his answers: Russia is almost exhausted, Ukraine will soon win.
Such forecasts sound reassuring to war-weary Ukrainians, but they tend to come true. Budanov was one of the few official representatives of the authorities who warned of the Russian invasion at 5 a.m. on February 24. He also predicted the first victories of the Ukrainian defenders from the de-occupation of Kharkiv Oblast and Kherson.
The words of Budanov, who became the head of the GUR at the age of 34, have weight for the president as well. Forbes sources in Bankova say that the chief intelligence officer is one of the few in the country who has direct access to Zelenskyi.
Budanov meets Forbes journalists in his half-dark office. There are photos on the walls. On them is the GUR mission, which evacuated people from Afghanistan during the fall of Kabul in 2021, and the defenders of Azovstal during the deaf encirclement by the Russians. Behind Budanov, there is no longer a map with Russia divided into parts. It lies folded on the table. "Now we are cutting it," jokes the head of GUR.
In an interview with Forbes, he told whether we should be afraid of an attack on Kyiv, where the GUR gets its information, and how long Ukraine is ready to keep Bakhmut.
Russian offensive and mobilization
Russia is currently on the offensive on almost the entire eastern front. Is this the big offensive that has been talked about for the past two months, or should we expect something else from Russia in March?
The big Russian offensive they have in mind is already underway. But it continues so much that not everyone even sees it - such is the quality of this attack. They have a strategic task - to reach the administrative borders of Donetsk and Luhansk regions by March 31.
Do you think this is the maximum they can announce now? Announcements are usually more ambitious than real possibilities.
I don't think, I know. This is what they dream of, they will not be able to do it.
Western mass media actively wrote about the fact that mass mobilization will begin in Russia at the end of January or at the beginning of February. They predicted numbers up to 500 people. Now it does not look like it has started.
And who told you that she is not there? It is hidden.
Is it possible to covertly recruit so many people?
In a country with a population of more than 100 million, what is the problem with recruiting 500.
What do we now know about mobilization in Russia, since the numbers vary?
During the first open wave of mobilization, they recruited a little more than 316. Here the question is: if everything is fine in Russia and they called another 000, why continue the mobilization? So, not everything is good. This will lead us to a simple conclusion: how many losses in the Russian Federation? This figure is sky high.
Of these 316, how many are already directly at the front?
More than 90% were sent immediately. No one trained them - immediately to the front.
There is no conditional stock?
A small percentage went to the formation of new units, but the majority went to the restoration of units that suffered losses, they are all at the front.
There is an assumption that we need to pay close attention to news about mobilization. If Russia manages to recruit 300 or 000 men, then the section of the front will be short-circuited for such a number of men on their side, and then an attack on Kiev can be expected. What do you think about it?
This is questionable logic, I do not share this opinion. The offensive in one direction or another is not limited by the number of people you want or can place somewhere.
But it increases Russia's capabilities.
We have an open war. What is surprising, that there is such an opportunity? Besides the possibility, there is also the reality. The reality is that they set themselves the goal of reaching the administrative borders of Donetsk and Luhansk regions by March 31. You can feel the difference: taking Kyiv in three days and going to some borders someday.
Is there an understanding of how many they can call up, not in terms of the number of people, but how many machine guns, armored vehicles, and tanks they can issue?
There are enough automatic machines for any number, there is not enough armored vehicles even now, but this does not hinder them at all. Now there are many divisions that are being formed from scratch. They go without equipment, on "Urals" and "Kamazas". They no longer have BMPs and armored personnel carriers in their state. The equipment is all removed from long-term storage, they have already removed more than 60%, there is about 35% left, which can be quickly restored. Single production, and it does not cover needs.
What about Medvedev's claim of 800 tanks a year?
800 tanks a year, they are not able to do what they did in wartime, but in their best years.
About Bakhmut
It is not the first time that materials appear in foreign media where they advise us to reduce our presence in Bakhmut in order to preserve forces for a possible counteroffensive in the South. And they say that the importance of the city is not so much strategic as political.
I would like to see how such an offer would be made to the President of France. To say that you have a problem, leave the city of Marseille, it is not so strategic.
Is there more political expediency or military expediency in keeping Bakhmut?
Can you imagine that the president of the United States would be told: "Let's temporarily surrender New York, that's the way to do it"?
If we recall the Second World War, then Stalin was told that Kyiv should be withdrawn. He also said: "How can you retreat from the mother of Russian cities." We know what that led to.
If we go further according to your logic, then this led to the victory of the Soviet Union.
But 400 people were killed and captured during that operation.
For me, as a patriot and a soldier, the surrender of even a millimeter of territory is a disaster. This is my personal logic, you can agree with it, you can not. From a military point of view, holding Bakhmut gives us the ability to contain the Russians in that area and inflict catastrophic losses on them.
Are we exhausting them in this way?
We exhaust them and defend our territory, which in no case can be evaluated in the context of whether it is appropriate or inappropriate to leave.
It is about redistributing forces, not about simply surrendering the city. Perhaps it is more effective to use people in other directions?
I do not agree with this logic.
About the remnants of Russian weapons
You mentioned earlier that Russia is running out of supplies of equipment and shells, in particular 152 caliber. That they have shells left at the limit of 30% of the total number. With so many shells and with such equipment, how can they go on the offensive?
Any. Therefore, this "huge offensive" is not even noticed by everyone. As for the stockpile of weapons, they are now setting up mass production of artillery shells. This once again confirms that there are no stocks of shells, they are not enough.
For two months now, the Russian groups operating in our country have been living in a mode of maximum saving of ammunition. More or less normal ammunition is now used exclusively in Bakhmut and in the Lyman direction. They tried to storm Ugledar several times, and will continue to try, so this location was added. All other areas are in ammunition saving mode.
How many of them are now manufactured in Russia?
They produce much less than they use.
When and if they will be able to develop this production, sufficient to conduct an artillery war?
It will never succeed. Russia is not the Soviet Union. They have already felt it and understood it, it is a fact.
But the projectile is not a drone, it does not need to import electronics.
It is not so easy, it requires a lot of industries that have been destroyed in 30 years. For 30 years, Russia, like many other countries of the post-Soviet space, sold stocks.
Do they have the ability to find these shells in North Korea?
Theoretically, there is an opportunity. Do they deliver from there? There are no confirmed cases in North Korea. A test batch was imported from Iran, now they are trying to import another batch, no longer a test batch, it is about 20 shells. This is nothing compared to the numbers that are used.
We and our partners also have a shortage of these shells.
Indeed there is. It is impossible to compare the defense-industrial complex of the Soviet Union, ours, and most Western countries with the capabilities that existed during the Cold War.
What it means? Will the war move from artillery to other tactics?
Everyone sees the transition to another tactic in Bakhmut. Ugledar was a prime example of this. In Bakhmut, in general, the infantry just goes wave after wave. Their artillery only supports them, armored vehicles are generally units. Armored vehicles were used in Ugledar, but they were destroyed in the first hours, and just like that, everything turned into shooting battles.
Earlier you said that Russia has three or four rockets left, and then they will have to fire from a conveyor belt. Has this moment come?
Small percentages of the total amount remained. Less is produced than they use in one volley, production does not keep up. Russia is not the Soviet Union.
You talked about their conditional maximum - to produce 50 missiles per month.
Less. In total, they produce sometimes 20, sometimes 22 Kalibr missiles per month. These are the ones that are released from the sea. About 15, sometimes up to 20, missiles of the "X-101" type. That is why the number of missiles decreases in each salvo. The intensity of shelling is decreasing. At first, there were massive rocket attacks on Mondays, then once every eight days, now once every ten days, fortnightly. They reduce the number of missiles and increase the time interval.
What prevents the Russians from increasing the production of missiles?
No power, it's a soap bubble. It is impossible, if you have not done anything for 30 years, in one day, in the conditions of war and sanctions, do as you want.
Electronics imports from China have increased by 500%, six times over the past year. There are components that are necessary for the manufacture of rockets. From our side, we are doing something and can we do something to prevent these components from entering Russia?
These are exclusively civilian goods and microcircuits that may have dual use. This is a problem. If you import a vacuum cleaner, it is a vacuum cleaner. Based on the realities in which Russia lives, they have to buy millions of such equipment and disassemble it into microcircuits.
This is a great shame even for the Russian ideology, because they have gone so far as to buy washing machines, vacuum cleaners and disassemble them into microcircuits, which will then be inserted into missiles.
The media announced the construction of an Iranian-Russian factory for the production of "shaheds" in Tatarstan.
Who announced?
Financial Times, New York Times, respected media.
If I start criticizing respectable media, I will be criticized myself. I have nothing to say. Maybe I just don't know the answer.
Do you not have such information now?
I don't have any confirmed information that "shahed" was collected in Tatarstan and it exists somewhere. Maybe I just haven't seen it yet.
About the information policy of GUR
You said in the interview that you use many sources for your conclusions. Can you rank the top five sources used by Ukrainian intelligence in the XNUMXst century?
This is standard. Like any special service in the world, they work about the same. These are technical means of intelligence, technical penetration, penetration into cyberspace, phones, computers. But the most important thing is agency work. Only agency work can provide answers to difficult questions.
Your deputy said that they have sources among oligarchs, businessmen, Putin's inner circle. If we have them, why talk about it?
Did he say names or anything that might lead to an answer? There are more than 100 oligarchs in Russia, and there are different degrees of closeness. Some are close to Patrushev, some - to Bortnikov, some are close to the conditional president, others - to Kiriyenko. So who is it about?
So this is our information tactic?
Let them check all 100 (laughs). Do you know what they will find? I will give a real answer to the question.
2,5 years ago, we made a controlled drain on one question, outlining the circle from where such information could come. Do you know what the reaction of the Russians was? They began to carefully check everyone who fell under this circle. They narrowed it down to about 30 people. After that, they came to the point that one of these 30 must definitely be. They started checking everyone with polygraphs and looking for family ties.
As a result, all 30 people were dealt - a certain number were fired, and a certain number sat down. Because each of them had family ties that led them to Ukraine, it so happened that our countries are closely connected. If they follow the same logic, the whole world will applaud.
Russia seems to be waging this war online, there is almost no announcement of military operations. It seems that even the Russian Federation has never fought like this before.
This is waging information warfare. How has Russia been doing all this time? Even take the example of the same Bakhmut. If you read the official sources of the Russian Federation, I am not talking about the unofficial ones, they have already taken him 10 times since June. It is now February, and they say: a little more.
It looks strange, announcing its offensive.
If we are talking about the other side, we must remember that the stupidity of Russians knows no bounds. In addition, do not forget, although Russia is a maximally vertically oriented structure, it is difficult to call it a state, there are still two towers. Two towers of the Kremlin, facing each other, who will win, and announce in advance.
Is it the FSB and the military?
It's not just the FSBs and the military, there everyone is divided into two towers. Conventional hawks and conventional liberals, and those that are very conventional. They are more about the money than what they claim to be.
About fires and explosions in Russia
At the end of last year, the Molfar OSINT agency counted, that only in November-December 2022, the statistics of fires and major incidents in Russia doubled. Which of this is coincidence and coincidence, and which is the result of the war?
Much of this is no accident. Something is constantly burning. Signaling equipment on railways, it lights up several times a day, on various highways constantly for two to three hours, sometimes for five to six hours, traffic is suspended in the entire section. It is clear that it does not just burn like that.
Do Ukrainians help in Russia?
Why only Ukrainians? I would say this: money works wonders.
About the end of the war: the score is 1:1, and the minute is 70
You have a reputation in Ukraine as the main and good forecaster. People whose predictions come true more often than not.
I am not a prognosticator and never have been one. We draw conclusions, not predictions, these are different things.
Your conclusions about the hostilities before the end of spring and the end of the year.
Nothing changed. From the middle to the end of spring, there will be decisive battles.
Will the fate of the war be decided by them?
Yes, this is a turning point.
If we apply a football analogy to the 12 months of the great war. What is the score now and what is the minute of the match?
The score is 1:1, and the minute is 70. This is a subjective vision.
Three reasons why we managed to survive.
If I say that God is with us, will you accept the answer? (Laughs, alluding to the narrative of Russian propaganda - ed.). The second is that we protect our land, it helps. It's easier to play on your own field. The third reason is that the whole civilized world is fighting with us, we are not alone.
And if we take the three biggest wins and losses?
I will say subjectively. The first major defeat was the temporary defeat of Ukraine in the Severodonetsk region. The second is the first period of the war, when the line in the Volnovakha area was broken. And thirdly, this will be a general answer – it is that we allowed the temporary occupation of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in 2014. Here are our three biggest failures, but they are all fixable.
And victories?
Victories are the rejection of the enemy from the Kyiv direction, these are actions in the Kharkiv direction and the return of control over the city of Kherson.
Let's talk about the future. Let's imagine the situation that in the near future we liberated the de-occupied territories, we managed to liberate Crimea and reach the border with Russia. Shall we go further?
This is a question exclusively for the supreme commander, not for me. In my view, we should create conditions for a security zone around our border. How to achieve this, there are many options. 100 km zone is justified, but 40 km will be more or less normal.
So that you understand my logic correctly. Whether we should go further is not a question for me, but creating a security zone around the border is a necessity. There are many options to achieve this goal.
What should this area look like?
A demilitarized zone, without any weapons, with normal control. So that we always have time to react.
Here we are at the borders of 1991, and there is a feeling in society that this is the end of the war. But this is not a fact. What will make Russia end the war?
You are right, it could mean the end, it could mean no end. It is possible to transfer the war into a completely different format, it is possible to switch to a permanent defensive operation. A good example is Israel, which lives constantly in a state of war, conducts a defensive operation along its borders. Most likely, this will lead us to solving internal problems in the previously occupied territories, this is a huge block of issues.
What can end the war? What are the conditions for this on both sides?
We have only one condition - to enter the administrative borders of 1991, we will decide everything else later.
A simple question, but the whole of Ukraine is waiting for an answer to it. When will the war end?
I can only tell you how it will end. It will end with the first phase for us - access to the administrative cordon. But since we talked to you that now it is 1:1 and the 70th minute of the match, make a chronometric parallel.
