<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Macko Archives - Pavel Macko - Bezpečnosť, Technológie, Stratégie</title>
	<atom:link href="https://pavelmacko.sk/tag/macko/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://pavelmacko.sk/tag/macko/</link>
	<description>Pavel Macko - bezpečnosť, technológie, stratégie</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2025 18:24:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>sk-SK</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>General Pavel Macko&#8217;s Security Radar 127</title>
		<link>https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/08/23/general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-127/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-127</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pavel Macko]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2025 12:20:05 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[bezpečnosť]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medzinárodná]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obrana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politika]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zahraničie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Macko]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peace negotiations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Putin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security guarantees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security radar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trump]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ukraine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War in Ukraine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Zelensky]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://pavelmacko.sk/?p=2159</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>127th Edition: Cooled Hopes for Peace After the Trump-Putin Summit The possible warming of relations and ending of the war from the Trump-Putin summit in [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/08/23/general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-127/">General Pavel Macko&#8217;s Security Radar 127</a> appeared first on <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk">Pavel Macko - Bezpečnosť, Technológie, Stratégie</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">127th Edition: Cooled Hopes for Peace After the Trump-Putin Summit</h2>



<p><strong>The possible warming of relations and ending of the war from the Trump-Putin summit in cold Alaska quickly cooled down. Allies are discussing security guarantees, which however will not be according to NATO&#8217;s Article 5. Hamas would now agree to a temporary ceasefire, but Israel already has a military operation plan.</strong></p>



<p><strong><mark style="background-color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)" class="has-inline-color has-vivid-purple-color">#France #Macko #Peace negotiations #Putin #Russia #security guarantees #security radar #Trump #UK #Ukraine #USA #War in Ukraine #Zelensky</mark></strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" width="1024" height="673" src="https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar127-1024x673.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-2160" srcset="https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar127-1024x673.jpg 1024w, https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar127-300x197.jpg 300w, https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar127-768x505.jpg 768w, https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar127.jpg 1250w" sizes="(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></figure>



<p>Transcript of a popular podcast prepader together with the weekly <strong>.týždeň.</strong></p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> Welcome to listening to the 127th edition of General Pavel Macko&#8217;s Security Radar. Welcome, General.</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> Thank you very much, pleasant listening.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Fog of War: Developments in Ukraine</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> What is the development on the two main battlefields? Let&#8217;s start with Ukraine.</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> I&#8217;ll start traditionally, let&#8217;s go to the strategic bombing. Despite intensive negotiations taking place at all possible levels and diplomatic messages, the clearest message of how the Russians mean it was precisely by sending missiles and drones to Ukraine. This makes it clear to everyone what they are after &#8211; to drag out time.</p>



<p>The most massive attack was on the night of August 20, where they hit Lviv, Mukachevo, Lutsk, attacking mainly western Ukraine. In Mukachevo, just a few kilometers from the Slovak and Hungarian borders, they attacked an American factory. This is also an answer to those who say that when the United States will mine minerals there, it will be a sufficient security guarantee. This resonated sometime after February, but it&#8217;s not like that.</p>



<p>They also attacked the Pavlohrad Mechanical Plant. The Russians still declare that they destroyed stocks of Sapsan missiles. I don&#8217;t know that, Ukraine of course doesn&#8217;t confirm it anywhere.</p>



<p>Similar to how Ukrainians recently showed the Flamingo missile… In this case, it&#8217;s better to stick to the principle &#8222;don&#8217;t shout hop until you&#8217;ve jumped&#8220;. Why? It&#8217;s clear that Zelensky needs to say such things to boost the morale of his own population and soldiers. But here it&#8217;s better to maintain operational security. Russian intelligence services have indications, but they never have precise information, we shouldn&#8217;t give it to them.</p>



<p>It&#8217;s not good to hint at what I have and what I can do with it. If the Ukrainians wanted to create a real psychological shock, they should have fired that Flamingo at a proper Russian base. It is said that they have already done so, but probably not yet.</p>



<p>The point is that the first moment of surprise is key. Flamingo is a large missile with a large radar signature. It&#8217;s a subsonic missile that flies like a cruise missile. This means it will be detectable by Russian systems. The Ukrainians should have done exactly what the Russians do &#8211; release a large swarm of drones, confuse Russian systems, and in between send them one proper hit.</p>



<p>We&#8217;ll see if the Ukrainians will use those Sapsan or Grim-2 ballistic missiles. Russian claims about their destruction are probably a hoax, just like claims that they destroyed twice as many HIMARS as were ever delivered to Ukraine. And despite that, HIMARS are still firing.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Ukrainian Counterattacks</h3>



<p>When we look at the Ukrainian side, of course Ukraine also tried to return these attacks and was relatively successful. They had a massive drone attack from the night of August 19 to 20. The Russians claimed they didn&#8217;t cause damage, but independent sources report infrastructure damage in several places.</p>



<p>The Volgograd oil refinery and the railway station in Voronezh were attacked again. Something exploded in the Ivanovo region. Ukrainian intelligence claims that Konstantin Nagayko, the Russian commander responsible for the attack on Kharkiv, was injured in an explosion. It was probably an action by Ukrainian intelligence services.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Summary of the Situation</h3>



<p>To summarize, my comment would be that the Russians are dragging out peace negotiations (they claim they no longer want a ceasefire, only peace) and currently, from a strategic bombing perspective, they are concentrating on Ukraine&#8217;s industrial base. They are trying to undermine it to the maximum extent possible and intersperse it with attacks on the civilian population. Of course, as winter approaches, they will again concentrate on energy infrastructure to take away their breath.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Developments on the Battlefields</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> How are the Ukrainians doing? Did they manage to stop the breakthrough at Dobropillya?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> It looks like yes. That initial hit was very successful. This means that Ukrainian forces brought in reinforcements, divided the Russian formation into several parts, but couldn&#8217;t completely finish it off. The Russians are of course reinforcing it, but the Ukrainians…</p>



<p>We don&#8217;t have a visual aid, of course, we&#8217;re in the radio version, but imagine something like an oval with an arm coming out of it &#8211; like when you inflate a glove and a thumb sticks out. That was the protrusion at Dobropillya. The Ukrainians blocked it, divided it into several parts, but now they are trying to further attack the base from which that protrusion came, to release the &#8222;steam&#8220; from this area.</p>



<p>The Ukrainians are relatively successful at this. It is true that the Russians have the 8th Combined Arms Army there, they have the 51st Combined Arms Army, they attacked there with elements of at least three brigades. Of course, the forces are thin on both sides. If we&#8217;re talking about a brigade, it&#8217;s certainly not 3,500-7,000 soldiers, because Ukrainians had even larger brigades than the Russians. But the Russians are pushing reinforcements there because they know exactly that if they lose momentum there, they won&#8217;t be able to threaten the rest of Donbas.</p>



<p>So now it has stabilized a bit, but it&#8217;s basically a success for the Ukrainians &#8211; they contained it, pushed back. They also had a small success around Pokrovsk, where for the first time they cleared the interior of Pokrovsk from sabotage reconnaissance groups and slightly its surroundings as well.</p>



<p>On the other hand, the Russians slightly advanced in the vicinity of Chasiv Yar and Toretsk. Not that they would control those cities, but they got a bit further beyond them. They slightly advanced by one settlement in the Dnipropetrovsk region, but from the Russians&#8216; perspective, this is probably propaganda, suggesting that they could attack in that direction as well.</p>



<p>The last thing I would like to mention &#8211; there are signals emerging that the Russians could shift pressure, since they&#8217;re not succeeding directly in Donbas, more to the Zaporizhzhia region, to the southern front.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Addition to Dobropillya</h3>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> I have just one note about that. I caught quite a good analysis from the Czech profile Perun. They are guys who have been working with drones for a longer time. They talked about why the breakthrough at Dobropillya happened &#8211; the Ukrainians thinned out the defensive lines there. We discussed this a few episodes back, we said that instead of a continuous line, they created &#8222;strongholds&#8220; or support points with drone operators.</p>



<p>But of course, the other side also reacts. The Russians have a unit and system called Rubikon, which we also discussed. They use Rubikon in such a way that they don&#8217;t attack directly just the first line, but mainly the supply routes, convoys, and destroy the troops&#8216; supplies. This proved successful for them in the Kursk region, and that&#8217;s why the Ukrainians eventually withdrew. They had good terrain there, but it also had a disadvantage &#8211; it was channelized, they had only a few valleys and roads through which supplies could be delivered.</p>



<p>Now it&#8217;s interesting that NATO has also started building a drone wall or drone barrier in the Baltics. The wall alone is not enough. It needs to be said that you always need a combination of means. In the end, war is always about will, and there must also be a soldier with will.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> When you mention drones, everyone imagines only those that fly, but now I notice that Ukrainians use many ground drones. Is that real?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> It is real. I&#8217;ll also do a bit of advertising for the weekly, because I started writing a series about drones. This issue contains the history of drones, which might surprise many &#8211; drones go back to the First World War. So it&#8217;s nothing new.</p>



<p>I recommend getting the latest issue of the weekly. But to return to the question &#8211; yes, Ukrainians are significantly progressing with ground drones. They were successful with naval ones, they cleared the Black Sea Fleet from Crimea, and now they are more significantly deploying ground drones.</p>



<p>My conclusion from this is that it&#8217;s important. The battlefield is becoming more technological, nobody can stop that, but in the end, every war is a battle of wills. Where there is will, those defend themselves. When we don&#8217;t have will, no technology will help us.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Middle East</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> Let&#8217;s move to the Middle East. How is the situation developing there? Hamas allegedly already agrees with a 60-day ceasefire. I&#8217;ll allow myself an assessment &#8211; it&#8217;s certainly the result of Israeli pressure that they agree.</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> Definitely, because Israel announced that it&#8217;s no longer going to negotiate. They approved the decision to go and occupy the rest of Gaza. We discussed those goals and stages in detail last time. Last week, Israel started planning a detailed military plan. They had a strategic plan, which we discussed, and the detailed military plan, which I hinted at last time, Israel has now announced that they have completed it.</p>



<p>The Americans pressed Hamas or the Palestinians to engage in negotiations. Hamas announced that it is ready to negotiate. Because they said they are ready for another 60-day ceasefire.</p>



<p>Netanyahu, of course, said: &#8222;You know what, we&#8217;ve already decided and we&#8217;re going to strike you, we have a military plan.&#8220; Netanyahu has now suspended those operations, but again, it&#8217;s more of a negotiating strategy, a communication strategy, because militarily he already has things prepared. After all, we all know that those measures were set up so that only preparatory military activities are to take place now. The main task is only from October 7, because they said they would start at the earliest on October 7, and they would also symbolically start the sharp combat phase on the anniversary of Hamas&#8216; attack from October 7, 2023.</p>



<p>So now these are the so-called &#8222;shaping operations&#8220; or &#8222;forming operations&#8220;, where they are building conditions… On August 8, they already issued an evacuation order for people to leave Jabalia and Gaza City. Now logistical infrastructure is being built in the south. So regardless of what Netanyahu said, the main combat operations would not have started anyway. But he created space and pressure on Hamas by that: &#8222;You know what, this is the last chance, we&#8217;ll suspend it, and this is the last chance for you to come to an agreement. We won&#8217;t go and kill all of you, but you won&#8217;t be in power anymore, you must leave the Gaza Strip, there will be some other authority instead of you, and you must demilitarize.&#8220;</p>



<p>And they don&#8217;t want that. They don&#8217;t want it because again the trick with the two-month ceasefire is: &#8222;Okay, so out of those 50 hostages, we might return 30 dead ones and 10 live ones, and we&#8217;ll keep those 10 again and we&#8217;ll drag out time again.&#8220;</p>



<p>Despite all the criticism of Israel at this moment, it&#8217;s good that Israel is pretending to be more restrained and wants to wait and see what Hamas actually agrees to. And if it doesn&#8217;t meet its parameters, it will pressure them: &#8222;Okay, I&#8217;ll pull out not from the drawer, but from those topographic pouches, the battle plans, and we&#8217;ll go and finish it.&#8220; Or we&#8217;ll agree in such a way that we won&#8217;t have to negotiate on another ceasefire, that this will already be a permanent ceasefire.</p>



<p>We&#8217;ll see how it develops, but in the meantime, during that week, exactly what happened was that they completed that military plan. Operational and tactical planning has some time sequence. I&#8217;ve been dealing with this for years, also at allied levels. Those large contours of the plan were clear, different alternatives, so-called &#8222;branch plans&#8220; &#8211; branching of plans, what will be if… &#8211; to calculate all possible reactions. And Israel has now completed this.</p>



<p>Meanwhile, some security operations continued. There was bombing again in southern Lebanon. Here I just remind that Lebanon is disarming Hezbollah. The Lebanese government has issued clear instructions to disarm Hezbollah.</p>



<p>Netanyahu appears a bit controversial, with his tough talk and speaking about Greater Israel. That&#8217;s fine to some extent, but what disturbs me, and maybe it&#8217;s counterproductive, is the further expansion of settlements in the West Bank, because it will provoke further reactions that divert attention from the core of the problem, which is now in Gaza.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> I would like to ask about those settlements, because to laypeople like me, it sounds like: &#8222;Well, they&#8217;ll build a few houses there, so what? What could bother anyone about that?&#8220; What is the principle issue with building those settlements?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> The principle is that the West Bank, according to the original UN resolutions when the state of Israel was created, was assigned to the Arabs. After the Arabs expelled… we were saying here that Israel, when it was established, had about 750,000 inhabitants. And the Arabs in that first Arab-Israeli war, when Czechoslovakia was still supplying weapons and aircraft to Israel for it to survive at all, in response to their being unsuccessful in that war and not destroying the state of Israel, expelled 850,000 Jews from their countries where Jews had lived for centuries. That&#8217;s more than the population of Israel itself.</p>



<p>So the Israelis placed them on their territory, but it was dense there and there isn&#8217;t water everywhere. In the desert, it&#8217;s not easy. So these Israelis, for at least 20 years, or Jews, were in refugee camps. Many established settlements, they said: &#8222;Okay, when you expelled them from your countries and we no longer have space in what was allocated to us,&#8220; so they established settlements and settled those Jews also in territories originally assigned to Arabs and built some settlements there.</p>



<p>Now it&#8217;s controversial because if some two-state solution is to be made in the future, then Israeli settlers, when there is suitable land, want to go there and they go into the risk that they will be in that hot cauldron with a population that doesn&#8217;t want them there, and they still build settlements there.</p>



<p>It&#8217;s exactly like when the Russians bring their own people everywhere… That&#8217;s why it&#8217;s controversial, because it disrupts the compactness of the territory, and the Arabs fear that in the future, when there is some arrangement, Israel will also claim that part of the territory because it already has settlements there.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Strategic Backstage: Trump-Putin Negotiations</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> Since the last radar, the Trump-Putin meeting in Alaska took place, followed by Zelensky&#8217;s negotiations with Western leaders in Washington. It even looked like a trilateral Putin-Trump-Zelensky meeting could take place this week. But I didn&#8217;t believe it at all. But it&#8217;s starting to get complicated again. How do you personally evaluate that development? You certainly see it through slightly different eyes than we laypeople.</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> What we more or less agreed on with Martin Swarovsky, when we were last at your place in a joint video before the negotiations, is being fulfilled &#8211; that we don&#8217;t have great expectations from these negotiations.</p>



<p>Why? Because I also have to look at the symptoms that accompany it. If you give an ultimatum to someone like Putin, and then you yourself send your emissaries, that was Witkoff, who went to Moscow two days before the ultimatum expired, and that meeting in Alaska was arranged, which is fine…</p>



<p>I also supported it, because the United States, unlike our Minister of Foreign Affairs or Prime Minister, have that displacement and are the player that can contribute to ending the conflict. They have all the tools for which the Russians would have to think whether they want to go into confrontation with the United States, or they realize that they cannot win that war anyway, so it&#8217;s better to end it.</p>



<p>The problem is that when you send negotiators and then the ultimatum expires and despite that, the Russians don&#8217;t agree to a ceasefire, you&#8217;re sending a signal that you don&#8217;t have the will to continue and bring things to an end. It could have been done like this: &#8222;Okay, we&#8217;ll negotiate in Alaska, but a ceasefire must occur by August 8, and when it doesn&#8217;t… then we won&#8217;t negotiate.&#8220; Or: &#8222;We&#8217;ll negotiate, but when a ceasefire doesn&#8217;t happen, I&#8217;ll impose sanctions in the meantime, and when we agree in the negotiations, I can suspend or cancel them, but since I&#8217;ve given an ultimatum once, I must keep it.&#8220;</p>



<p>Otherwise, we teach the opponent that we are not so determined, we are not so decided, and therefore they will drag out time with us. And that&#8217;s exactly what happened.</p>



<p>I laconically noted on social network X that the problem today is that the Russians have nothing, but they have a lot of vodka and will. And we have almost everything, but we don&#8217;t have that will. And therefore, in the end, not our economic strength, not the military strength of the collective West, not Ukrainian determination, but Russian will to continue in that war will prevail, and the Russians will drag out time.</p>



<p>So very briefly: In Alaska, there were indications that the negotiations could lead to a result, but neither side said the complete details. The good news was that Trump, after Merz and company intensively negotiated with him before, and Zelensky too, doesn&#8217;t dare to accept something right away, but he didn&#8217;t want to appear as the bad one who would a priori accept Russian demands. That&#8217;s why he adjourned it and said that we&#8217;re almost close to an agreement, but… this is a quote: &#8222;Until everything is agreed, nothing is agreed.&#8220; That&#8217;s what President Trump said at that press conference, where he gave the first word to Putin.</p>



<p>Then he said he would consult with allies. He consulted with allies, the allies even with Zelensky traveled to the White House. Those negotiations were constructive, but with two major strategic conclusions:</p>



<p>1) The first was that the US will not provide troops for potential security guarantees. What is leaking, although no one will confirm it to you, is that more or less internally, the United States is reconciled with the fact that Ukraine will have to cede territory &#8211; but not just any territory for any territory, but Donbas, that it will have to cede. And that is the &#8222;Fortress Donbass&#8220; or &#8222;Donbass fortress&#8220;, which has been fought over not for 3.5 years, but for 11 years.</p>



<ol class="wp-block-list">
<li></li>
</ol>



<p>I&#8217;ll remind you that when that Russian war started, the Russians occupied, with those so-called rebels, who were actually members of the Russian intelligence service, or Wagner Group members, or &#8222;soldiers on vacation&#8220; (Russian soldiers on vacation), also Sloviansk. Ukrainian forces conquered it and pushed them out, and that&#8217;s when they built that strong defense in Donbas. And that was also Lysychansk, that was also Severodonetsk, which later fell. Then Bakhmut also fell, but they still have that rampart, fortification, and those economically important cities.</p>



<p>So the Ukrainians cannot surrender this, because firstly, the Russians were not able to conquer it militarily. Maybe they will gain it in 10 years, but until then, if the West did exactly what it should, Russia would collapse and economically would have to accept other conditions.</p>



<p>So it was said that the United States does not support Ukraine in NATO. Well, strategically, they probably agreed with Putin: &#8222;We won&#8217;t provoke you, you need guarantees.&#8220; Putin himself said in Alaska that Ukraine also needs guarantees. So it was agreed that they would agree. And that&#8217;s always such… I say that what happens behind the scenes is important.</p>



<p>Western allies, since they knew that the United States would not go into direct confrontation, that they don&#8217;t have too much will to push for sanctions, and that at the same time Trump is impatient and wants to have it over with as quickly as possible, so they said they would give security guarantees. And those were then negotiated during the week.</p>



<p>So if it won&#8217;t be Article 5, we all knew that Ukraine cannot be admitted to NATO now during the war, but until the last moment, not only Jens Stoltenberg, but also the new NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, assured that it&#8217;s only a matter of time before Ukraine will be in NATO. And now we&#8217;re deviating and saying that we&#8217;ll give it other security guarantees.</p>



<p>I don&#8217;t want to say I don&#8217;t believe them, but it&#8217;s important for Putin to believe it. Because if something is to deter you, you must be convinced that the other side will do it. I&#8217;ll translate it for laypeople: If we say that we&#8217;ll give security guarantees such that peace will be agreed and we&#8217;ll put troops there to supervise the implementation of the agreement and the Russians will also know about it, then the Russians would have to agree with it, because otherwise they won&#8217;t sign the peace or it will be a pretext for them to continue the war.</p>



<p>Theoretically, we wouldn&#8217;t have to ask the Russians. But it would have to be credible, because all those security guarantees lie in the fact that it doesn&#8217;t matter whether you put 5,000 or 500,000 soldiers there. In the end, it must be that if after the conclusion of peace, Russia attacks Ukraine again, those who provide security guarantees go to war with Russia. I don&#8217;t mean by that that they go to destroy Moscow, but at minimum they will go into a sharp war with it to kick it out of Ukraine. And until Putin has the feeling that this is absolutely guaranteed, he won&#8217;t believe it.</p>



<p>2) The second thing is the United States, and here I will be positive towards the United States. The United States said they won&#8217;t put troops on the ground. It&#8217;s quite logical, because it&#8217;s really the case that we, Europe, have the primary interest in security in Ukraine. And therefore quite logically, J.D. Vance, with whom I don&#8217;t have to agree on everything, says: &#8222;So put your own troops then.&#8220;</p>



<ol start="2" class="wp-block-list">
<li></li>
</ol>



<p>But the United States must have a firm commitment, even if they won&#8217;t have a commitment in Article 5 to Ukraine, they must have a firm commitment to their allies. And they also said that they will support us from the air. And that air support can be logistical. They have a huge transport fleet, so they can quickly bring in supplies and reinforcements for allied troops.</p>



<p>It can also be combat. They have combat aircraft, we&#8217;ve seen that they can, with those aircraft carriers and aircraft they have in Europe today, and with tankers they can bring in, get to that area very quickly. They can maintain what they maintained over Iran &#8211; continuity of combat operations. Not that we fly for 3 minutes, fire a missile, and have to land. They can keep aircraft in the air, they can create continuous pressure, they have means like long-range missiles and the like. So theoretically, they could do it.</p>



<p>And now we see Russia&#8217;s reaction &#8211; at this moment, Russia is starting to speculate. They say that China should also be in those security guarantees. Logically, it seems fine. On the other hand, we in Europe can probably say that we don&#8217;t need it. The Russians are creating an axis with China and North Korea. And besides North Korean soldiers, we don&#8217;t need Chinese soldiers in Europe either. Let China guard its space in Asia nicely and not stick its horns into Taiwan, the Philippines, and beyond, where it&#8217;s pushing. Certainly not into Europe. Because that wouldn&#8217;t be a true guarantee.</p>



<p>And the Russians want such a guarantee… I can imagine, for example, Turkish troops as separation troops. Because the Turks have relatively good relations with both sides. We&#8217;ll see how it develops. But I&#8217;m starting to suspect that the meeting, as you suggested, won&#8217;t happen. Already now, the Russians are saying that they first need to negotiate things at the working level. Trump has actually already said that the Russians and Ukrainians should go to negotiations themselves.</p>



<p>And here I&#8217;ll give a final anecdote. President Trump boasted. First, he said that he had already closed or ended 5 wars. Then 7. Now he said 7. I&#8217;ll leave it for another podcast, but I want to say that, for example, between Serbia and Kosovo, there was no imminent war threat. That was virtual from Trump.</p>



<p>Where credit can be given to him is certainly in the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, because those parties also negotiated with the White House. And they also humiliated Putin because they went to close it in Washington with the assistance of the United States. And the United States is also involved there in the corridor between Karabakh and Armenia.</p>



<p>When we look at India and Pakistan, Pakistan nominated Trump for the Nobel Prize and India says you had no hand in it at all, you weren&#8217;t involved. And finally in Cambodia and Thailand, yes, China and the United States assisted with that, pushed, but the mediator was ASEAN. The Prime Minister of one of the ASEAN countries was the main sponsor who secured that agreement. But of course, these two big ones, the USA and China, gave that political-strategic signal that they are behind that agreement, they are pushing for it, and so it happened.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Weapons Deliveries for Ukraine</h3>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> How will it be with weapons deliveries for Ukraine?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> These weapons deliveries continue, various formats are being negotiated. What was said holds true, that the United States will sell those weapons to NATO and NATO will pass them on to Ukraine. Financial mechanisms are being sought for how to finance it. I think this will continue.</p>



<p>Several initiatives have been announced, because here we need to have a clear scenario: As long as Russia keeps dragging out the war, Ukraine needs that support and help. We&#8217;ve seen that Trump is even using his so-called &#8222;presidential drawdown authority&#8220;. This means that without Congressional approval, he can reduce part of the army&#8217;s supplies. Here we&#8217;ve returned to the regime that was roughly under President Biden.</p>



<p>But for domestic politics, President Trump now has an excuse, because he&#8217;ll say: &#8222;I did everything for there to be peace, but the Russians won&#8217;t listen, so I have to help the Ukrainians.&#8220;</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> Yesterday he even said that Biden forced the Ukrainians only to defend themselves, that war cannot be won by defending and that the Ukrainians should attack. Did I explain it correctly?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> Bingo! That&#8217;s exactly what I said back in April of last year, when I said that everyone says Trump is unpredictable. We knew that. I said, prepare for a roller coaster.</p>



<p>But what was essential was that I said that Trump, if he gets angry, can go into it radically. And those are the remarks about whether Zelensky is willing to attack Moscow and so on. Because it&#8217;s like this: Even if Ukraine doesn&#8217;t want to defeat Russia on Russian territory, in defense you can avoid losing. But you can never win. No war was ever won by defense.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Anniversary of August 21, 1968</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> Yesterday we commemorated that sad anniversary of August 21, when the Russians invaded us. You, from what I know, were also at some memorial events. But I would first ask you if you could comment on such a simple fact that Prime Minister Fico didn&#8217;t say a word about it.</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> I think it&#8217;s completely clear. In &#8217;68, the world was divided into two camps. And our ancestors had no choice. And despite that, they had collaborators here who legitimized the entry of Soviet troops.</p>



<p>As Juraj Mesík wrote yesterday in a commentary for one newspaper &#8211; let&#8217;s tell the truth, that people didn&#8217;t write about Soviets anywhere when those Russians came here. They wrote &#8222;Russians go home!&#8220; And by Russians, they meant that empire. Now we&#8217;re not talking about nationalities that they drove into it from their country and those partner states.</p>



<p>But when they came here, we still had collaborators who sanctified it. But back then our ancestors couldn&#8217;t help themselves against that enormous superiority that rushed in here during the night. But today we can choose. And today we have collaborators here who are again speculating to go this same path, and it&#8217;s outrageous that the Prime Minister did not comment on this.</p>



<p>But something else is also outrageous. Foreign Minister Blanár did comment. And purely technically, if I didn&#8217;t know what he said before and who he is, what he said was correct.</p>



<p>Even the President expressed himself. I allowed myself to needle him and troll him yesterday, because the President said that we must be in the European Union and NATO to not experience something like this, for it not to be repeated. So I&#8217;ll remind everyone, and I&#8217;ll be bad and biased, that the President began his presidential campaign by taking a photo with the Russian Federation&#8217;s Ambassador Bratchikov. And that testifies to his sincere interests in Russia, where he still hasn&#8217;t understood that Russia is an aggressor, that Russia has been conducting this imperial policy for the last 300 years, and that we should be on guard against Russia, and not collaborate with them or collect points from misguided citizens who would even today welcome these occupation troops on our territory.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> And where did you spend yesterday?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> I spent it in Trnava. It&#8217;s true that Patrik Lenghart, a university teacher, an activist, convinced me to also join a civic association, an activity called &#8222;Wednesday,&#8220; where we are trying to limit the influence of foreign powers, in this case Russia, here, because the Russians are trying to create again an atmosphere in Slovakia like the one that preceded the invasion in &#8217;68.</p>



<p>So I was with Michal Kocáb in Trnava, there were also artists who supported it. It was a more than two-hour event, we were reminiscing about the symbolism of these events, but also those threats and what is happening in Ukraine, what is the connection between what is happening in Ukraine, the year &#8217;68, and what can happen to us if we&#8217;re not careful.</p>



<p>This same thing was expected from our government. It didn&#8217;t have to explicitly attack Russia, but it should have given a clear signal to citizens: &#8222;This is happening in Ukraine and that&#8217;s why we&#8217;re going to support Ukraine and our common interests within Europe.&#8220;</p>



<p>And do you know what the Prime Minister did? It&#8217;s not that he didn&#8217;t express himself. The Prime Minister also made the headlines of Indian newspapers. I follow those English-language and Indian ones, where he made headlines. And for what does our Prime Minister make world headlines? He didn&#8217;t get there with any reform, he didn&#8217;t get there with anything extraordinary that would be in Slovakia. Slovakia got to the headlines of world media the most during his governments when they killed Kuciak, when he attacked Macron and called everyone in the West warmongers. And now again, because he said that Slovakia will block all European support activities towards Ukraine.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">History of the Second World War</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> Let&#8217;s go to history, the cycle from the Second World War. Last time we discussed the Balkans, if I remember correctly. What was happening to the east of us?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> This worked out for us and factually it&#8217;s not a plan, I can tell the listeners. Because the original plan was that we would get to the Slovak National Uprising, but that can&#8217;t be realized, that war was longer, more complex.</p>



<p>We&#8217;re missing from that picture, when we take from the year &#8217;40 to &#8217;41, the Soviet Union and what was happening in its surroundings. And a lot was happening there. Outwardly, the Russians or Soviets pretended to be a neutral power, but in reality, they were very active.</p>



<p>I&#8217;ll remind that we discussed the Winter War, and it ended in March 1940 with some peace agreement. The Winter War with Finland. The Russians understood that they wanted to have that Karelia to secure the defense of Leningrad then, but they knew that they couldn&#8217;t turn Finns into Russians, so they left the rest alone, because they got a beating right in that first phase anyway. In the second phase of the Winter War, they were a bit more successful.</p>



<p>But what continued? The Soviets continued to cooperate very intensively with Nazi Germany. They were allies. When we look at spring-summer 1940, they expanded and occupied &#8211; they did an Anschluss &#8211; the Baltic states: Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia under the pretext of protecting their western border. They called it &#8222;securing the western border&#8220;. And as if they were protecting these nations. So in June they occupied them. And in July they immediately annexed them. They created Soviet republics in these three countries and annexed them.</p>



<p>In June 1940, the Soviet Union also forced the cession of Northern Bukovina and Bessarabia from Romania. That&#8217;s today&#8217;s Moldova. In the fall, the Soviets under Stalin tried to conduct diplomacy. They plotted even more with the Nazis.</p>



<p>I remind that the Soviet Union on September 17, 1939, attacked Poland, 17 days later than Slovakia and Nazi Germany. And they divided Poland between them. So Stalin, based on those Molotov-Ribbentrop pacts, tried to get closer to Hitler and Nazi Germany. They wanted to divide Europe and the world.</p>



<p>So Molotov in November 1940 visited Berlin, where he negotiated about the possible entry of the Soviet Union into the pact of three powers, which was Germany, Italy, and Japan. In short, the Soviet Union still in November 1940, for its dirty imperial interests, after it stole the Baltics, after it stole Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, wanted to become part of the fascist axis of Germany, Italy, and Japan. I&#8217;m just reminding all those Russophiles.</p>



<p>On June 22, 1941, a breach was made to that, when the Germans attacked the Soviet Union. That&#8217;s why the Soviets say, because you have to translate those words, &#8222;treacherous attack&#8220;, because even under communist propaganda, you&#8217;re older, Jeno, you remember it, that they always said &#8222;treacherous attack on the Soviet Union&#8220;. That was in those Czech documentary films. Treacherous in that they were the closest allies of Nazi Germany and it betrayed them when it already saw that they weren&#8217;t sufficiently prepared, and implemented Operation Barbarossa.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> What military operations did the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, so this word I&#8217;ve already removed from my vocabulary, undertake in this period, besides that Winter War?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> Let&#8217;s say directly Bolshevik Russia &#8211; the Bolshevik Communist Party was then called the All-Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik). Literally.</p>



<p>Well, that occupation of the Baltics, that was a lightning military operation without a declaration of war, where they actually sent units, occupied strategic points, and forced governments to resign. Now, that&#8217;s why I&#8217;m reminding of this, this is exactly like through carbon paper, this is what the Russians do systematically. They did it in &#8217;68 here, they landed at Ruzyně, stole, took our political leadership to Moscow, and subsequently established their regime here, installed their people here, with whom they then ruled.</p>



<p>They even forced on us a treaty, which our Prosecutor General Maroš Žilinka, an associate of this Petrushev, where he goes to the Hermitage and walked with him a few years ago, talked about, and that&#8217;s such a shame. He said that it was an excellent treaty, that it was far better than the defense cooperation agreement with the United States.</p>



<p>And this is Slovakia, and this is what we don&#8217;t realize &#8211; those threats, that the Russians are coming, and it doesn&#8217;t matter whether it was Tsarist Russia, whether it&#8217;s Bolshevik Russia, whether it&#8217;s now post-imperial Russia. The Russians have always done this &#8211; they occupied key squares on the chessboard, replaced the pieces, took control, when they couldn&#8217;t control, they destroyed everything with bombs, missiles, tanks.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> How did the neighbors react to everything that those Russians got up to?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> Well of course, and that&#8217;s another explanation of why history sometimes happens as it happens. Because besides this, they also conducted covert operations and repressions in those occupied territories.</p>



<p>Just as here after 1945, even before the communists took power here, they exported people illegally to gulags, they did this in these countries too. The NKVD, which was the predecessor of the KGB, the Soviet secret police, carried out extensive purges, deportations, arrests in newly occupied territories, to destroy potential resistance and ensure Sovietization. This is what would await Ukrainians if Ukraine fell, this is what would await all of us if they fell.</p>



<p>So the reaction of those countries was quite clear. Poland was dismantled. There was only domestic underground resistance there, but it was dismantled. Finland, since it lost territory in that war, after the Nazis attacked the Soviet Union, quite understandably joined the German side, because they hoped to at least recapture lost Karelia.</p>



<p>Romania also had to cede that Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina in 1940, so later it joined the German invasion against the Soviet Union. Hungary was watching very carefully, because when they occupied that Bessarabia and Bukovina, the Russians came closer to the borders of Subcarpathian Ruthenia, which was then in Czechoslovakia, but the more southern part was Hungarian-speaking, and the Soviets pushed in there. So Hungary also joined the war against the Soviet Union alongside Germany.</p>



<p>I mentioned Poland, and the Slovak state &#8211; we had relatively normal relations with the Soviet Union and under the influence of those events, we also joined and sent the Rapid Brigade on June 22, 1941.</p>



<p>In other words, with its disgusting imperialist policy, Russia pushed those countries, which could have been either neutral or perhaps even allies with them, into Hitler&#8217;s fold, because in the end, those countries had no other choice if they wanted to survive. They had to join where they thought they would be better off.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">360°: Africa</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> What&#8217;s on your radar, Pali?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> I have several things there, but it&#8217;s Africa again. That&#8217;s a beautiful area. The main thing that caught my interest from those agency reports is that the Nigerian army reported on a significant operation in the Lake Chad basin, where they eliminated the highest leader of Boko Haram.</p>



<p>This drew attention also because of the importance of that region, because we&#8217;re talking about Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon, and Niger. The operation is considered quite a big blow to the jihadist group, which has been plaguing that region with violence for more than 10 years. These are just hard-core jihadists.</p>



<p>Besides that, there was an interesting incident that a bomb exploded near a military air base in Colombia, as if violence was returning there. There was a fight there also with Maoists who were hiding in the mountains. Tension in Syria, intra-Syrian tension, was renewed in connection with the 12th anniversary of the deadly chemical attack near Damascus. These are such unresolved problems.</p>



<p>But what stood out to me the most was that Boko Haram.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> And what actually is Boko Haram?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> Boko Haram was founded in Nigeria, in the northeast, by some Muhammad Yusuf in 2002. By the way, it&#8217;s similar to how Hamas was formed. There was also a Yusuf there who founded Hamas.</p>



<p>It started as a religious movement that opposed Western-style education. Actually that &#8222;Boko Haram&#8220;, &#8222;haram&#8220; means forbidden, and that &#8222;Boko Haram&#8220; was like &#8222;we don&#8217;t want this Western education&#8220;. Just as the Taliban started in Madrasas somewhere in Pakistan, and also tried to return to Islamic conservatism, Sharia law.</p>



<p>But of course, subsequently it began to radicalize there. Yusuf was killed outside of court during skirmishes, they had a new leader, and he was no longer concerned with education or culture, but with a hard jihadist uprising. First they focused on Nigeria, then they went to Cameroon, Chad, and Niger and exploited the permeability of borders and those various ethnic ties. And they started to stick their necks out.</p>



<p>I remember that they kidnapped schoolgirls, raped them, but that&#8217;s less known now. In 2015, they then pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. The Islamic State was supposed to be a worldwide caliphate, Islamic, that would control the whole world. And they declared themselves as the West African province of the Islamic State.</p>



<p>And just a statistic: That uprising caused 350,000 deaths, 3.2 million displaced people in that area, in the Lake Chad basin. Of course, agriculture, trade, access to health services were significantly disrupted.</p>



<p>So a multinational joint operational group was then formed there, composed of units from Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon, and Niger, who tried to fight against them. Then we had units in Mali, even international ones, and a European mission, which also tried to help locals in Mali against these Islamists.</p>



<p>But in Mali, what then happened was that a military junta seized power and kicked out these units as well.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> And what do the Americans, French, and Russians do with these juntas, with those local ones, in this area?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> And this is interesting, because we discussed within the Security Radar that a belt of those West African juntas was created. ECOWAS was 15 countries that were in that sub-Saharan area and West Africa, which cooperated as an economic association like the European Union or something similar. And they broke away, because there is a junta in Mali, in Burkina Faso, and also in Niger. We discussed this recently.</p>



<p>And now what happened? The United States, along with the French, had a base in Niger, from where, in cooperation with those local governments, they helped fight against these Islamists, jihadists. After the junta took power in Niger, they kicked them out, so the United States and France withdrew their troops and left that area.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> And imagine who is there…? Can I guess? Russians.</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> Exactly. The Russians wormed their way in there, the Wagner Group came there first, and now the Russians have done it in such a way that they created the Africa Corps. By the way, the Africa Corps is a Nazi legacy from the past, Erwin Rommel commanded it. So the Russians have now built, following the model of those Nazis, the Africa Corps. These are basically successors to the Wagner Group, but the Russians now openly admit that they are supported, financed, and sponsored by the Russian Ministry of Defense.</p>



<p>These are trying to do several things there. First, to keep those juntas in power, to help them against the Islamists, because they disrupt order there, and mainly to mine diamonds and other minerals. To earn money.</p>



<p>Russia is strategically focused on this &#8211; they are trying to monopolize. This is also in Ukraine. There are large gas deposits around Crimea and in some parts of Ukraine. When the Russians take it, Europe will still be dependent only on Russian gas or from the rest of the world.</p>



<p>This is something that happened &#8211; after the collapse of the colonial empire, the Western world seemed to be less interested in Africa, abandoned it. 65% of natural resources today are controlled by China, and Russia is trying to grab the rest as quickly as possible.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> And what about the French?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> The French, unfortunately, are gradually leaving from there. They are losing influence there, even though they were former French colonies.</p>



<p>And the Russians, exactly as always. Let&#8217;s take it. In Europe, the Russians say that they still celebrate victory over fascism, even though they brought the second totalitarianism. And a moment ago we said that they were close allies &#8211; the Soviets and the Nazis. So although the Russians say, they maintain that tradition that they fight against fascism, at the same time they are the biggest sponsor and supporter of these extreme right-wing movements throughout Europe.</p>



<p>And in Africa, they do the same &#8211; they say that they help countries against former colonialists and the like. And gradually, in silence, they build their Russian colonies there. I just remind that in reality, Russia, where its territory is today, never built colonies and went straight to annexation. As Putin said, where the foot of a Russian soldier steps, it is ours. &#8222;This is ours.&#8220;</p>



<p>And this is a message probably also in connection with the anniversary of August 21, 1968, and the occupation of Czechoslovakia. Russian troops have already entered here twice. And that&#8217;s why Putin still thinks he has a claim to this whole Central and Eastern Europe. And it would be ideal for him if there were puppet governments here, like in Belarus. Because Lavrov also said this week that it&#8217;s not just about some territories in Ukraine. That they want to have such a political regime in Ukraine that they need and want.</p>



<p>And this is actually a warning and the main message of this week. Beware, these are permanent Russian imperial interests, here and in Africa. They will have cutthroats, killers there just to keep those countries under their influence.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Quote at the End</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> What could perhaps be a quote for this difficult week?</p>



<p><strong>General Macko:</strong> I&#8217;ve been saying for a long time that Russian imperial policy has not changed from Tsarist Russia through Bolshevik Russia to the present day. It&#8217;s just called differently. And that Putin dreamed of re-establishing Greater Russia. He&#8217;s a man from the KGB, raised on one teat of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the other from the KGB, and that stayed with him.</p>



<p>And that these people, supporters of Russia, like our red revolutionary Blaha and similar ones, actually still preach some Red Revolution, which, regardless of the victims, is supposedly the best for society.</p>



<p>So I&#8217;ll remind what none other than Sir Winston Churchill said about this regime: <mark style="background-color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)" class="has-inline-color has-vivid-red-color"><strong>&#8222;Everyone sees how communism decomposes the soul of a nation, makes it miserable in peace and vile in war.&#8220;</strong></mark></p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Read also:</h2>



<p><a href="https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/08/14/general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-episode-125/">https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/08/14/general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-episode-125/</a></p>



<p><a href="https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/08/15/analysis-of-the-situation-on-the-ukrainian-front-with-general-pavel-macko/">Analysis of the Situation on the Ukrainian Front with General Pavel Macko &#8211; Pavel Macko &#8211; Bezpečnosť, Technológie, Stratégie</a></p>



<p></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/08/23/general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-127/">General Pavel Macko&#8217;s Security Radar 127</a> appeared first on <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk">Pavel Macko - Bezpečnosť, Technológie, Stratégie</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>General Pavel Macko&#8217;s Security Radar 126</title>
		<link>https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/08/21/general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-126/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-126</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pavel Macko]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 18:20:28 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[bezpečnosť]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medzinárodná]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obrana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politika]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spoločnosť]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zahraničie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[360]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alaska Summit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fog of War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Macko]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace talks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Putin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stategic bombing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic backgroung]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trump]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War in Ukraine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Zelenský]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://pavelmacko.sk/?p=2164</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>All eyes are on Alaska for the meeting of Presidents Trump and Putin. Meanwhile, an intense war is raging in Ukraine. Israel has been hit [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/08/21/general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-126/">General Pavel Macko&#8217;s Security Radar 126</a> appeared first on <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk">Pavel Macko - Bezpečnosť, Technológie, Stratégie</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>All eyes are on Alaska for the meeting of Presidents Trump and Putin. Meanwhile, an intense war is raging in Ukraine. Israel has been hit by a wave of heat, and preparations for the occupation of Gaza continue. And tensions are rising again in Congo and its surroundings.</p>



<p><strong><mark style="background-color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)" class="has-inline-color has-vivid-purple-color">#360 #Alaska Summit #Fog of War #Macko #peace talks #Putin #Russia #stategic bombing #strategic backgroung #Trump #USA #War in Ukraine #Zelensky</mark></strong></p>



<p>Full transcript of the popular podcast in weekly .týždeň . Originally released Aug 15, 2025 (in Slovak). </p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img decoding="async" width="1024" height="768" src="https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar126-1024x768.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-2165" srcset="https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar126-1024x768.jpg 1024w, https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar126-300x225.jpg 300w, https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar126-768x576.jpg 768w, https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Radar126.jpg 1250w" sizes="(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></figure>



<p>Welcome to listening to the 126th edition of General Pavel Macko&#8217;s security radar, whom I welcome here.</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Thank you, have a nice day.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Fog of War</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Trump and Putin&#8217;s meeting will begin literally in a few hours. We&#8217;ll return to the preparation and expectations in the background. On the battlefield, or even in the rear, nothing indicates that the war should end. So, Pali, what&#8217;s the development?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Exactly. We see that both sides are trying to achieve the maximum until the last moment. That means, no slackening of troop activity, that they are preparing to take some advantageous defensive positions, but intense fighting is taking place.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: I&#8217;ll start with strategic bombing. I just read that Ukrainians attacked some cargo ship with weapons.</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: I just caught this from you, that it&#8217;s an Iranian cargo ship in a port in the Caspian Sea, where they were transporting Shahed drones. This is a sign that both sides are going all out until the last moment. When we look at Russian strategic attacks, it has quieted down a bit in terms of cities. Nevertheless, the Russians attacked Kyiv, Kharkiv, Dnipro on the 8th. On 10.08, they attacked in the Dnipropetrovsk region and claim to have destroyed 4 Patriot launchers and a radar, which should probably affect air defense. On the 14th, they attacked in Sumy and Dnipropetrovsk.</p>



<p>Russian intelligence says they focused on Sapsan or Grim-2 missile systems. They claim to have eliminated Ukraine&#8217;s capability in the area of these deep strikes.</p>



<p>I&#8217;ll comment on this a bit. The destruction of Patriots wouldn&#8217;t be something exceptional; we&#8217;ve seen it before. 4 launchers, that&#8217;s about half of a fire battery. It&#8217;s a serious loss because they&#8217;re looking for every single launcher. Here&#8217;s just my note, because even before, when they destroyed some part of a Patriot near Kyiv more than a year ago, it turned out that it had been sitting in one place for too long.</p>



<p>This is a mobile device. It is, of course, used for strategic defense in the case of Ukraine, but it needs to be moved. That means moving and implementing measures that the Iranians experienced &#8211; that we must have these devices protected. Not only against those large missiles that shoot it down but also against drones and other devices that its radar doesn&#8217;t normally see. That means, multi-layered defense must be done.</p>



<p>We&#8217;ll see if this is confirmed or not. Of course, it would be unpleasant, but again, this is a big war where neither side can remain without losses.</p>



<p>As for the destruction of Sapsan, I&#8217;m not sure if they really managed to liquidate these factories. Whether they tried to do it, whether it wasn&#8217;t just about the launchers somewhere in Sumy, but that there are those military armories in Dnipropetrovsk.</p>



<p>Here, I would say that sometimes silence is golden. I understand that President Zelensky needs to boost morale and that he talks about &#8222;we have already tested those rockets, we are ready,&#8220; but when he presents it too publicly, he draws a lot of attention, because the other side will evaluate it as a real threat and will do everything to destroy it. It would be more sensible to produce a few hundred and then announce it and the next day make a flurry. But whether they really destroyed it or not, we will see by whether the Ukrainians will use them.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Well, and what about the Ukrainians then, how are they doing?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: The Ukrainians were also extremely active. You already mentioned that last event now, which I haven&#8217;t studied in depth yet, but when we look, they attacked virtually every day:</p>



<p><strong>▪️</strong>August 9 in the Volgograd region &#8211; a refinery in Volgograd, by the way, the smoke can still be seen even now</p>



<p><strong>▪️</strong>August 10 in the Belgorod region &#8211; ammunition depot</p>



<p><strong>▪️</strong>August 11 in the Bryansk region &#8211; a railway junction used for military logistics (by the way, this was also part of that Kursk operation, that there was a possibility to eliminate several of those directions)</p>



<p><strong>▪️</strong>August 12 in the Krasnodar Territory &#8211; they attack there often, but now they attacked fuel storage tanks, and not with air drones, but with naval drones</p>



<p>That means, they actually sailed across the entire Black Sea and hit with naval drones, which are in the Sea of Azov and hit coastal storage tanks. So it wasn&#8217;t quite the eastern Black Sea coast, but it was in the Sea of Azov. That means, they had to get to it or pass by Kerch unobserved under the Kerch Bridge.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: So that definitely caught my interest. I&#8217;m just waiting for when that Kerch Bridge will come up.</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: I think that at the moment it&#8217;s not such a priority that they would invest too much in it. The Russians are guarding it, and it wouldn&#8217;t give any operational advantage to the Ukrainians at the moment.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: And what about Pokrovsk? Is it really such a serious breakthrough as they say?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, now let&#8217;s look at those battlefields. The situation on that Donetsk front is, of course, tense. It&#8217;s like a tightly stretched string, where you just wait for it to snap.</p>



<p>I&#8217;ve been saying for a long time that the Russians are increasing that pressure, they have numerical superiority, they&#8217;re trying different tactics. And they managed a breakthrough with smaller units, they seeped through inconspicuously. And actually, under normal circumstances, if I looked at a 10-kilometer shift &#8211; well, that&#8217;s not like from Lužná to Bratislava. And I&#8217;ll say that in such a big war, it&#8217;s nothing.</p>



<p>Of course, but given that despite that enormous effort, enormous losses, we see those Russian advances &#8211; step by step, house by house, trench by trench, and it took them a year and a half &#8211; they actually made about a 10-kilometer advance over the course of this week.</p>



<p>Towards Dobropilia. I&#8217;ll just explain it, we don&#8217;t have a map, so it&#8217;s like:</p>



<p><strong>▪️</strong>They&#8217;re fighting at Kupiansk. The fighting still persists there, nothing fundamental is changing. They&#8217;re trying to capture Kupiansk through that bridgehead, across the Oskil River.</p>



<p><strong>▪️</strong>They&#8217;re fighting at Chasiv Yar, where they&#8217;ve already gotten behind that area, behind Chasiv Yar, but the Ukrainians are still holding in the northwestern part of Chasiv Yar.</p>



<p><strong>▪️</strong>Kostiantynivka is free, but they&#8217;re kind of bypassing it.</p>



<p><strong>▪️</strong>Battles similar to those in Chasiv Yar are also in Toretsk.</p>



<p>And to that, there&#8217;s also the area that is Pokrovsk. At Pokrovsk, they got from the south to Dachne, that&#8217;s southwest, that they bypassed Pokrovsk. But to Dobropilia, when they got further, there&#8217;s actually that road that goes from Pokrovsk and then goes north between Dobropilia and Kramatorsk. It&#8217;s such an important road that the Russians are trying to reach, because that would significantly affect logistics.</p>



<p>Despite the fact that terrain vehicles and the like are also used &#8211; the Russians at the beginning of the invasion, and the Ukrainians now need paved communications for large logistics. So it&#8217;s serious, mainly because they caught the Ukrainians being careless. Despite knowing that there&#8217;s huge pressure there, they allowed the Russians to make such a wedge with which they penetrated 10 kilometers. In this case, it&#8217;s quite a lot.</p>



<p>Because it allows, if it were to fall, for example, that Kostiantynivka, it would allow the Russians to open a gate for a larger attack or for the siege of Pokrovsk. But it&#8217;s not something that would mean that everything will collapse now and they&#8217;ll start advancing tens of kilometers. But the Russians will increase that pressure there.</p>



<p>We&#8217;re still talking about them looking for a place to push. Of course, the Russians don&#8217;t control 30% of the Donetsk region. And even if they didn&#8217;t encompass it, they want to have the most advantageous position, so that if by chance in the future, even after some ceasefire, the fighting is renewed, they would get as far as possible.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: We might talk about this tomorrow morning together, after the Trump-Putin meeting. You&#8217;ll be wiser, I probably won&#8217;t be, but you will be. Alright, let&#8217;s go to the criticism of Syrskyi.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Criticism of Syrskyi</h3>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, and this is related to precisely these battles. When we were talking here about him replacing Zaluzhnyi, we said, well, it&#8217;s a legitimate thing for President Zelensky, but by doing so, he&#8217;s also putting his hands more into those operations.</p>



<p>Syrskyi is exactly the person who has that long screwdriver and actually tries to manage, even micromanage, every unit. And here I would say that the criticism is partly justified, partly not.</p>



<p>Simply, no one changes. Zelensky took Syrskyi because he was the less rebellious one and asked less than Zaluzhnyi. On the other hand, it was known about Syrskyi that he&#8217;s that Soviet soldier. That he&#8217;s simply that unyielding one, that he commands. When he defended Bakhmut, he held Soledar for a long time, I criticized it, because they sacrificed three brigades in Soledar.</p>



<p>So the criticism is partly justified, but of course, you have to fight with what you have. You won&#8217;t have better ones. Here&#8217;s a different trend. When I was doing that study with those German colleagues from that first phase of the war, Ukraine still had those experienced soldiers from Donbas. And they really used mission command, or command through objective, they were independent.</p>



<p>But many of them also fell, many of them were rotated. And actually what happened is that we&#8217;ve now reached the stage that they had to mobilize and they&#8217;re using those officers who have those old Soviet habits. And really it&#8217;s as the Wall Street Journal wrote, that &#8222;a big Soviet army is destroying a small one.&#8220;</p>



<p>But that&#8217;s the worst thing the Ukrainians could have done. I&#8217;ve been criticizing it for at least a year and a half, that they must not adapt to Russian tactics, because Russian tactics are based on massive artillery strikes, aviation, and quantity.</p>



<p>It&#8217;s not true, as Tomáš Forró was writing now, that the Ukrainians are also lacking personnel, which is true, but that therefore they have no chance of winning and will lose sooner or later. That&#8217;s not true, because in history, rarely has pure quantity alone won. But of course, it&#8217;s a complex situation, the Ukrainians have to deal with it.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Middle East</h3>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: So, the Middle East. What&#8217;s new there? How is it developing?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: The situation is influenced by the Israeli cabinet&#8217;s decision to occupy and clear Gaza. Currently, it&#8217;s such that preparatory work is underway. The General Staff is still planning the parameters of that operation. As we said in the introduction, a massive heat wave has hit not only Slovakia but also Israel. There, of course, it means something completely different.</p>



<p>At the moment, the order has already been issued for the evacuation of those people from the Gaza Strip. But the conditions or camp in the southern part of the Gaza Strip are not yet prepared.</p>



<p>Intense military operations were taking place. Israel again bombed several Hamas positions. There were also higher casualties. Thus, the humanitarian crisis is deepening. Although in one day, the Israelis released more, but significantly more trucks are prepared than they can let through continuously into that area.</p>



<p>What definitely caught the attention of all media were the protests and the killing of journalists. Up to six of them. Of course, Israel immediately said that the journalist, one from Al Jazeera, is or was… I saw photographs where he was photographed with those terrorists. That he was the head of a Hamas cell. That means, at that moment, he became a legitimate target, because that&#8217;s exactly the controversy, like when an unnamed &#8222;woodpecker&#8220; in Slovakia infiltrated the media as a member of SIS [Slovak Intelligence Service].<br>Well, Peter Tóth.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: I was thinking, who is the woodpecker. Peter Tóth.</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, that&#8217;s exactly where the boundaries end in a democratic society. Here we&#8217;re talking about when someone cooperates with terrorists, they can&#8217;t hide behind a microphone.</p>



<p>Of course, controversy was also caused by the statement of Bezalel Smotrich, a minister from those radicals, who again is considering expanding settlements in the West Bank. That&#8217;s not really the best time and the best topic to be opening now.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Last time, last week, you mentioned that Israel wants to evacuate as many Palestinians as possible from Gaza City down south, by October 7 at the latest. And yesterday I read that they are also negotiating with some African country.</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, and that&#8217;s interesting, because Sudan was divided, there&#8217;s also South Sudan, and actually Israel is also negotiating with South Sudan about potentially relocating parts of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to South Sudan.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Permanently?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: As soon as they come there temporarily and stay there for more than a year, it will be permanent, because these conditions are worsening in the Gaza Strip.</p>



<p>The city if it will be… because there was a conflict between Israeli forces, the Chief of General Staff says let&#8217;s besiege, they&#8217;re going to combine siege tactics directly through entry into the city or so-called &#8222;clearing operations.&#8220; That&#8217;s why the evacuation orders were issued.</p>



<p>The problem is that conditions in the southern part of the Gaza Strip, in that open space where some tent city for 600,000 and more people is supposed to arise, don&#8217;t exist yet. I can&#8217;t imagine it, it&#8217;s also humanitarianly complex.</p>



<p>But on the other hand, these people will be pushed out of that area because of those operations, because otherwise there are huge losses threatened on both sides. And there&#8217;s also another risk, exactly the opposite, that Hamas, on the contrary, will try to forcibly keep those people in the Gaza Strip and in Gaza City. They will persuade some to stay, and some will be held there by force.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: I was completely shocked by the air supply and the fact that one of those packages hit a young Palestinian and killed him. How is it with that supply?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Overall, there have already been 23 such incidents. What&#8217;s the context? Gaza would need about 600 trucks daily to have such a smooth flow. There are several thousand trucks that are de facto already on the way, and now there are several problems.</p>



<p>The Israelis don&#8217;t recognize some unknown NGOs that help, because they don&#8217;t consider them partners. Part is stuck on some security checks and suspiciousness, so Israel wants to control each cargo, which delays it, but technically they could probably do it by putting more personnel there, making several control checkpoints, and getting a larger number of trucks into circulation.</p>



<p>To this comes an airlift, in which countries participate. Canada is extremely active, but also Spain and other European countries, which actually drop this aid. But that pallet has about one ton, that&#8217;s really the most crisis aid. There I would rather understand if some medical aid, medicines, and such things were dropped to get them as quickly as possible.</p>



<p>Israel allowed it because it trusts those partners that they won&#8217;t be dropping weapons and explosives there. But of course, those people are desperate. We&#8217;ve experienced this in Africa, we experience it in various conflict zones, that those people desperately lunge for that aid until the last moment. But that pallet is not a parachute with a person, it falls relatively quickly, which means, unfortunately, that accident happened, and there are several problems.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Strategic Background</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Strategic background. So in a few hours, what will happen?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, a meeting between Donald Trump and President Putin.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: And what do you expect from it? Are you optimistic?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, I have mixed feelings, to be honest. But Trump in his recent statements sounded quite reasonable, he was sending indirect signals to Putin, in my opinion.</p>



<p>But the risk is that he wants to meet one-on-one. This last happened, I think, in Helsinki in 2018, and nobody was enthusiastic about it, because he actually came with such very accommodating steps in favor of Putin.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: So one former colleague wrote that she wanted to faint to interrupt that negotiation.</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Yes, I read that somewhere too. Well, what&#8217;s the risk? It needs to be said that Trump is not a professional diplomat and he&#8217;s up against a KGB agent, who has actually led the state all his life, has these Machiavellian methods under his skin, commands the world map, commands all these nooks and crannies.</p>



<p>It turned out that even with Kim Jong-un, that Trump is… I don&#8217;t want to disparage, he&#8217;s a president elected by 77 million Americans, so I&#8217;d prefer not to comment on him, but simply, he&#8217;s a person who is naive in this. Simply, he doesn&#8217;t have it studied, that&#8217;s the difference compared to Biden, because Biden was a long-time diplomat, a long-time politician. Trump was a real estate agent.</p>



<p>Well, and the problem is that he sometimes nods to something in good faith. It&#8217;s not that he&#8217;s bad, or too accommodating to Putin, but he simply nods in good faith to something that he thinks is fine, and then finds out that it&#8217;s completely different or off, because he sometimes has such childish…</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Maybe he doesn&#8217;t even realize.</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, take for example, he was signing after being elected and after inauguration, he was signing some decrees and some orders, even with Spain, and he asked if it&#8217;s a country in BRICS. So Spain, that&#8217;s one of the bigger partners in NATO. A schoolboy here would probably know that, but again I say, this is the risk that simply the charm of personality, and we don&#8217;t know yet, of course, I wouldn&#8217;t go into these conspiracies, what all they have prepared for Trump.</p>



<p>From his statements, I saw a sincere effort that he won&#8217;t give it so easily to Putin. But Putin will try to use this situation, because he delayed everything, fulfilled nothing, and still demanded a meeting. Trump said he would mainly listen to him. Let&#8217;s hope it will be so.</p>



<p>But actually, it will all be about Putin wanting to open several questions and give that lollipop on which he wants to lure him, because we know that Trump, even in the election campaign, said that he would like to reduce armaments, that he would like simply… Because the INF treaty on those short and medium-range missiles. This strategic agreement fell. The last START is falling. And thereby there&#8217;s no replacement for those disarmament treaties from the times of the deep Cold War, and there&#8217;s a threat that a new round of the arms race will really be unleashed. Well, and the Russians are offering him that they could negotiate about this.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Exactly. And that&#8217;s why the signaling needs to be seen in this context as well, because this is called diplomatic signaling. There will be the Zapad [West] exercise, and among other things, the Russians are communicating that in mid-September, they will practice with the Belarusians the use of tactical nuclear weapons, the use of &#8222;oreshniki&#8220; [nut-crackers].</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: All this is supposed to make a bait and atmosphere. This is reflexive control. That&#8217;s exactly what influences the actions of the other side.</p>



<p>So let&#8217;s wait for the results. It&#8217;s a few hours. I&#8217;m curious myself, because it can go awry in all directions, but one thing is certain. We also discussed this with Martin Svárovský, that in the end, it won&#8217;t work without Ukraine. Ukraine has been at war for too long, has been defending itself for too long, and is too big to just accept a new Munich Dictate with the blink of an eye.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: In connection with tomorrow&#8217;s meeting, Chancellor Merz initiated a whole series of meetings of European leaders. How do you evaluate those activities?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: I think it was necessary. I actually spoke on this topic, I think, on Czech Television last week, that this is exactly what they should be doing, that diplomacy should now be taking place behind the scenes.</p>



<p>Of course, there was something for the cameras, some of it was signals towards Putin, some towards Trump, so that it was also said publicly where some &#8222;red lines&#8220; are in quotation marks, so that Trump would also be in the situation that he has to perceive it and can&#8217;t then subsequently say that he didn&#8217;t know about it.</p>



<p>But I would just pick out two aspects from it. First, what is actually like a prerequisite, on which the partners agreed. Because the atmosphere was good, everyone evaluated it positively. We know that behind the scenes it was probably ugly, as they say in English, so it&#8217;s less nice, but there was no discord in advance.</p>



<p>That means, what they at least agreed on was that the format of the negotiations should be such that any final agreement must be with the participation of Ukraine, perhaps other partners as well. Trump also promised that if they agree now, they could quickly proceed next week to trilateral negotiations, and perhaps there would be other partners there as well.</p>



<p>The second thing is that a ceasefire is an absolutely basic condition, that there must be some security guarantees, and the United States indicated that they could be engaged in this, we don&#8217;t know yet how, well, and that Russia will not have a veto, even though Trump said that he won&#8217;t let Ukraine into NATO anyway.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Alright, and what if Putin doesn&#8217;t back down?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, if he doesn&#8217;t back down, then we&#8217;re in a situation where Trump has lost his pants and image, because in that case, he will look like a very weak negotiator, because he gave an ultimatum, which he even shortened. The ultimatum expired, but he didn&#8217;t actually implement anything. Meanwhile, of course, to avoid this stress, he sent Witkoff to persuade Putin. I think it&#8217;s on a good path, but I don&#8217;t trust Putin too much.</p>



<p>So I caught such a statement, from Trump&#8217;s first administration was Marshall Billingslea. He&#8217;s such an expert, a plenipotentiary precisely for sanctions, and he&#8217;s actually saying what would need to be done. Complete blocking, that simply those sanctions must come. And that would mean complete blocking against all financial institutions, completely cutting off the Russians from the SWIFT system, but also sanctioning secondarily all foreign banks that would try to produce some secondary, some parallel settlement system that the Russians could use.</p>



<p>Furthermore, immediately impose sanctions on several Chinese banks that have, for example, financed exports to Russia and to the aviation and defense sector. Because that machinery for the aviation defense sector went there.</p>



<p>Another thing is to announce sectoral sanctions on all Russian energy transactions, including secondary sanctions, that means, for the time being, there could also be those 25% sanctions that were announced, or tariffs on India, on China. This could be done immediately, and then that law could also come, which is actually in the American Congress. That&#8217;s Senator Graham and also Blumenthal. They have 84 co-submitters, so there&#8217;s strong pressure there.</p>



<p>And one important thing is that they could also add and expand sanctions on the Russian grey fleet. The United Kingdom did something, the European Union did. In total, there are more than 500 ships that are leased in Russia in all sorts of ways. They would be able to block them in some way.</p>



<p>Of course, if these measures were done, they would be able to throttle Putin by 600 million dollars a day and at the same time, those interests from these frozen parts or from those frozen assets that are there could be given to buy American weapons for Ukraine for the time being. So this would certainly help.</p>



<p>But these are things that we&#8217;ve known for, let&#8217;s say, three years. And with those sanctions, progress is so terribly slow that the Russians always manage to avoid parts of those sanctions in some way.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">VAT on Arms Production</h3>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Alright, let&#8217;s go to Slovakia. Some government politicians, and even the Slovakia movement, have an idea that they want to increase VAT on arms production and maximize the tax and license fees on arms companies, because they allegedly make extreme profits. That seems fine at first glance, you&#8217;re making money on weapons. What do you think about it?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, it has several problems. I would say it bluntly, that it&#8217;s dangerous stupid populism and in the end, it would harm Slovakia. Also our defense capability and it would prolong the modernization of the army. And it could drive those manufacturers out of Slovakia.</p>



<p>I&#8217;ll try to break it down a bit in two minutes.</p>



<p>First, increasing VAT doesn&#8217;t make sense. Those weapons and ammunition are sold primarily abroad, and VAT is applied at the final consumption in our territory. That means, when we increase VAT, on one hand, we&#8217;ve increased the defense budget, and right away we take it, because actually, the state pays that VAT to itself. That means, you just recycle your money, which would mean a significant increase in the cost of modernizing our army, which is probably not the best thing we could do in this situation.</p>



<p>As for those licenses and tax increases, well, we have some tax laws, as generally from the point of view of the rule of law. Making up special taxes, that&#8217;s like when they invented a special pension for Prime Minister FICO and wanted a special pension for the Attorney General, but not every one, but precisely that Žilinka. This is simply nonsense. This simply isn&#8217;t done, because it&#8217;s legally non-standard. There should be clear rules.</p>



<p>But quite essential is that good arms factories have always been a lucrative business. But this would actually make the sale of these weapons and ammunition to Ukraine even more expensive. That means, I&#8217;m surprised at the Slovakia movement, that apart from that lack of knowledge of economic principles, that we&#8217;re actually increasing VAT at home for our own army and making our modernization more expensive, that we&#8217;re going to penalize even the Ukrainians, because we&#8217;ve caught on to some statement by Robert Fico that &#8222;not even a bullet to Ukraine.&#8220; Now we criticize him that he exports more there, that&#8217;s okay that we criticize him, but we don&#8217;t criticize him for the fact that those arms factories, those weapons are exported there. We criticize him for the hypocrisy that Robert Fico is actually presenting with this.</p>



<p>But now imagine, it&#8217;s supposed to be up to 5% of defense expenditure. And so, do we want to buy everything from abroad? Or will we sink our arms factories, or create an environment for them. I would, on the contrary, reduce income taxes precisely to motivate increased production and development of the sector and reduce taxes, or for example, give some state support.</p>



<p>Let&#8217;s take, in Vlkanová we have a Slovak arms factory, which grew on a green meadow, which built a quad &#8211; a combat vehicle, but the main thing is what&#8217;s on it. It&#8217;s actually one of the main tools for example for fighting against drones, which are becoming dominant on that battlefield, and they can export it, and we&#8217;re actually going to burden them with taxes now and punish them for success.</p>



<p>Simply, this is exactly wrong, when we look at the economy having just 0.2% growth now, one of the smallest in the entire European Union and in the eurozone. That curve of growth decline is horrible when we look at the last year and a half, and that&#8217;s not even fully reflecting all those consolidation measures, which are literally suffocating the economy. Let&#8217;s not rake and poke into what works.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">World War II &#8211; Balkans</h3>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: So let&#8217;s go to the continuation of the cycle about World War II. Last time we analyzed the Battle of Britain here, and today we&#8217;re moving to the Balkans. What was happening there?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: So briefly, there was the battle for the Balkans, for Greece. Albania was annexed by Italy already in 1939, but Mussolini was looking at Greece. Now he was frustrated by how the Germans were advancing everywhere with blitzkrieg. So he decided without coordination with the Germans to attack Greece. And it didn&#8217;t end well. It ended well for the Greeks, but only temporarily, unfortunately.</p>



<p>When we talk, these are battles in the Balkans, which eventually includes the occupation of Yugoslavia and ended with the battle for Crete. So I&#8217;ll briefly just first say those events:</p>



<p>On October 28, 1940, Italy attacked Greece from Albania with about 70,000 soldiers. It started with the Italians giving an ultimatum to the Greeks to allow them to advance at sea and to essentially surrender, submit, and subordinate themselves to Italian interests. But the war didn&#8217;t develop according to Italian expectations. The Greeks, first of all, stood their ground and said they wouldn&#8217;t back down and started fighting.</p>



<p>And subsequently, they even pushed those Italians back into Albania in early November. In December to January, in winter, Greek units advanced deep into southern Albania, to key cities, key mountain passes.</p>



<p>And in February, Britain got involved in it. I remind you that at that time, Cyprus was part of the British Empire. The British had interests in the eastern Mediterranean, and of course, Italian expansion into the Aegean Sea would have threatened their interests. So the British began helping the Greeks with the help of the Royal Air Force and their commando soldiers.</p>



<p>And the Italians got a thrashing. Then the Germans launched Operation Marita in April 1941, and on April 27, the Germans finally conquered Athens. Greece came under Axis occupation. And finally, on June 1, 1941, the resistance on Crete also ended.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Well, you already mentioned at the beginning that the main cause of the Italian-Greek war was Mussolini&#8217;s imperial megalomania. And what was going on in Yugoslavia?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, I would still go back a bit to that Mussolini and maybe to those parameters, that when we look, Italy deployed 6 divisions and later increased it to 29 divisions and 400,000 soldiers. But they were poorly equipped, had very low morale, simply it wasn&#8217;t going well for them.</p>



<p>Greece started with 4 divisions and 50,000 soldiers, expanded it to 13, but they had strong defensive tactics, high morale, it was in the mountains. The United Kingdom then got involved, and finally Germany attacked in April with 24 divisions, led by Field Marshal List.</p>



<p>When I return to those causes, Mussolini imagined a new Roman Empire. He wanted to achieve all this in the Mediterranean, he wanted to expand Italy&#8217;s influence to Greece, to Yugoslavia, to the Balkans. And it was also such frustration, he was jealous of the Germans, that in that Axis, where he was together with Germany and Japan, he played second fiddle.</p>



<p>With Greece, there was of course long-term tension. By the way, October 28 is a very significant, memorial day in Greece. It&#8217;s called &#8222;Oxi&#8220; day. Oxi was &#8222;no,&#8220; because the Italians gave an ultimatum to the Greeks, and the Greek prime minister said that they shouldn&#8217;t submit, that simply they would defend themselves. Literally, that was the statement, &#8222;so there will be war then.&#8220;</p>



<p>And actually, when I now return to Yugoslavia, that&#8217;s an interesting development. Because Yugoslavia at the beginning was forced by the Axis countries to sign an agreement with these Axis countries and was like an ally, but that lasted only a few days. In March 1941, it reluctantly signed that tripartite pact under pressure from Germany and Italy.</p>



<p>Two days later, on March 27, there was a coup d&#8217;état in Yugoslavia led by pro-British officers. Yugoslavia became a monarchy, they installed King Peter II as the ruling monarch. This angered Hitler, because he counted on using Yugoslavia for his goals. Suddenly it was unreliable for him and a threat to his Balkan strategy.</p>



<p>The Italians also disappointed him, so he decided to solve things himself and directly. On April 6, 1941, Germany, Italy, Hungary, and Bulgaria launched a coordinated invasion of Yugoslavia. It fell in 11 days, Belgrade was heavily bombed. They divided that Yugoslavia. Germany occupied Central Serbia, Italy annexed parts of Slovenia, Kosovo, and Dalmatia. Hungary and Bulgaria also took a part, the Hungarians the north. And the Independent State of Croatia was established in that territory.</p>



<p>But a resistance movement emerged in Yugoslavia, and the country became a focal point of partisan warfare. This then had an impact on the entire course of World War II and further courses of battles in the Balkans, but even on the Cold War.</p>



<p>If we look at it, that resistance had two parts. One were the Chetniks. That was led by General Draža Mihailović. Later, however, those Western allies opposed him, because they suspected him of helping the Nazis in the fight against partisans. And the partisans, led by Josip Broz Tito, they fought in the mountains. They then received great support from the Soviet Union, Great Britain, and the USA, and eventually gradually liberated that Yugoslavia.</p>



<p>The significance was that the March coup (1941) in Yugoslavia diverted German troops. They had to delay the operation for the invasion of Greece. Thereby, however, the Barbarossa plan was also delayed. The Germans didn&#8217;t manage to get to Moscow after the invasion of the Soviet Union before winter, and actually, it all broke for them. So that was probably the most important thing. And of course, Mussolini&#8217;s collapse.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">360°</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: 360° Pali, what&#8217;s on your radar?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, again, the situation in Congo, in western Africa, and in the Sahel region is becoming more complicated. The UN is paying increased attention to this. And the problem is that the Security Council holds such regular briefings. So they did such a briefing. It actually got like to the top. It also lit up red on my radar, because the Security Council was discussing it.</p>



<p>There&#8217;s a quite difficult humanitarian situation there. There are large such inter-tribal attacks. Well, and actually this something, if you remember that conflict between Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda, that was a very bloody conflict, so this is actually still about the same thing. That this area is such a hot cauldron, where it boils and at the moment it&#8217;s bubbling and boiling over again.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Alright, and what kind of conflict is it? Where does it have its roots?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Well, that conflict, it&#8217;s a long-term conflict. It goes actually back to the colonial era, because there are several groups there, actually large numbers of inhabitants were relocated there.</p>



<p>And when I look, there was always some war there. Actually, this current situation is that in the Kivu area, there&#8217;s such an M23 movement &#8211; rebels, who have actually been fighting for a long time for some self-determination. There&#8217;s a big escalation of violence, they&#8217;re dragging Rwanda, Uganda into it.</p>



<p>But when I take it that those roots go really back to the fact that actually during Belgian colonial rule, large numbers of those Hutus and Tutsis were forcibly relocated from Rwanda to eastern Congo. And that of course caused long-term ethnic tension. Those ethnicities compete or vie for survival, for their living space, for access to food, to resources.</p>



<p>And there was a whole series of wars there. The Masisi War in 1993, then there was an uprising in 1996, which was led by Tutsis in Kivu and it grew into further regional wars, which drew in Rwanda, Uganda, Burundi. There was the so-called Second Congo War. And that is sometimes called the African World War. It was in the years 1998 to 2003.</p>



<p>Europe tried to intervene there, as did the UN. And actually, what happened then was that 9 countries and dozens of armed groups actually fought each other, everyone against everyone. So it&#8217;s very complex there, it will continue to be complex, there are those cycles of violence and various militias, and there are of course also geopolitical factors. Simply, there are long-term fights and unrest in the Congo area. It&#8217;s actually a country rich in gold, tin. But also other minerals that are mined there, some, for example, important for the electronics industry. There&#8217;s 80% of the world&#8217;s reserves of coltan, where there are two types of such elements, which are actually used in the electronics industry.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: You mentioned regional influences. How does it affect neighboring countries?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: At the moment, it&#8217;s such that the whole surroundings are destabilized, and we have just in North Kivu 2.5 million people who have been displaced. And thousands more people are hiding in individual areas. There&#8217;s a total collapse of healthcare. Well, and there&#8217;s a lack of access to basic food.</p>



<p>This potentially threatens that if it doesn&#8217;t manage to be dampened, and the world&#8217;s largest UN mission is operating there between them, then we have a huge conflict, which can again change to the fact that more of these countries will actually get involved with each other. And that will also mean huge pressure on already broken countries, like Mali, Niger, and those others. And those refugees will simply move somewhere, presumably only northward.</p>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: Last week we were talking here about Cambodia and Thailand. Those two countries were also filling world media. It&#8217;s somehow quieted down. Is there anything new there?</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: Positive, because so far the ceasefire is being observed. There was also some diplomatic development. Cambodia and Thailand held a meeting of that General Border Committee, or what we would call, that demarcation commission, in Kuala Lumpur on August 7. They agreed in detail on a 13-point ceasefire plan. The movement of troops was frozen. There&#8217;s a ban on attacks on civilians. ASEAN observer teams are being deployed there. So it&#8217;s a fortunately good development so far.</p>



<p>But even that short conflict has its humanitarian and economic impact. When I look at my notes, 130,000 evacuated in Cambodia, they report injured children. GDP in Cambodia will decrease by 3% this year and as a result of a 20% decline in tourism. And there&#8217;s a problem that they have rotating, migrating workers there. That movement will also be restricted. So here you can see that even such a very short conflict can have quite strong consequences.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Final Quote</h2>



<p><strong>Moderator</strong>: So let&#8217;s go to the quote.</p>



<p><strong>Pavel Macko</strong>: This week I was thinking that we all have such great expectations. In the end, we&#8217;ll probably be disappointed. I would give one from Samuel Huntington, the author of the book about the clash of civilizations, very famous, popular, which came out in the 90s. And he says that &#8222;expectations should not be taken for granted, because you never know when you will be disappointed.&#8220;</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/08/21/general-pavel-mackos-security-radar-126/">General Pavel Macko&#8217;s Security Radar 126</a> appeared first on <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk">Pavel Macko - Bezpečnosť, Technológie, Stratégie</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Len aby sa Putin neprepočítal!</title>
		<link>https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/02/27/len-aby-sa-putin-neprepocital/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=len-aby-sa-putin-neprepocital</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pavel Macko]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2025 15:44:06 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[bezpečnosť]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medzinárodná]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politika]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spoločnosť]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zahraničie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Macko]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mier na Ukrajine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peskov]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Putin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rusko]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trump]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ukrajina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vojna na Ukrajine]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://pavelmacko.sk/?p=1896</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Anektované územia Ukrajiny sú už súčasťou Ruska, vyjednávať o nich nebudeme, zdôraznil Kremeľ v súvislosti s úvahami o rokovaniach o prímerí. #mier na Ukrajine #Peskov [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/02/27/len-aby-sa-putin-neprepocital/">Len aby sa Putin neprepočítal!</a> appeared first on <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk">Pavel Macko - Bezpečnosť, Technológie, Stratégie</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p><strong>Anektované územia Ukrajiny sú už súčasťou Ruska, vyjednávať o nich nebudeme, zdôraznil Kremeľ   v súvislosti s úvahami o rokovaniach o prímerí.  </strong></p>



<p><strong><mark style="background-color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)" class="has-inline-color has-vivid-purple-color">#mier na Ukrajine #Peskov #Putin #Rusko #Trump #Ukrajina #USA #Vojna na Ukrajine</mark></strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-full is-style-default"><img decoding="async" width="680" height="420" src="https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/PUtin.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-1897" srcset="https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/PUtin.jpg 680w, https://pavelmacko.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/PUtin-300x185.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 680px) 100vw, 680px" /></figure>



<p>Donald Trump je biznisman divokého strihu, ale aj oficiálne zvolený a aktuálny prezident USA, ktorého treba rešpektovať. Vabank môže hrať so svojou firmou. Zjavne mu to ale nevychádza s USA ani so svetom.</p>



<p>Keby vo vzťahu k Ukrajine nerobil nič, len zastavil pomoc a neútočil na Ukrajinu a nekolaboroval s Ruskom, bola tu ešte pomerne vysoká nádej na to, že Rusku by došiel dych.</p>



<p>Aj keď sa zatiaľ USA a Rusko len oťukávajú a ešte sa nedá hovoriť o rokovaniach, americká rezolúcia BR OSN do istej miery aj právne legitimizovala ruskú agresiu. Bohužiaľ, FRA ani UK v záujme udržania NATO nenašli dosť odvahy túto rezolúciu vetovať. Nechceli tak potenciálne popudiť veľmi impulzívneho prezidenta USA.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Slabá východisková pozícia USA</h3>



<p>Výsledkom je takmer nulová východisková vyjednávacia pozícia USA pri prípadných rokovaniach a zrada Ukrajiny. Ak sa doteraz neuskutočnili mierové rokovania, tak nie preto, že by Ukrajina a Európa nechceli mier, ako to tvrdia ruskí kolaboranti Fico a Orbán či prezident Trump. Neuskotočnili sa preto,  lebo Rusko malo neakceptovateľné požiadavky na kapituláciu Ukrajiny.</p>



<p>Americká stratégia, ak vôbec môžeme o nejakej stratégii hovoriť, zatiaľ nie je založená na sile, ako to sľubovali ešte pred pár dňami, ale na slabosti, ústupkoch Rusku a zrade.</p>



<p>To povedie k tomu, že Rusi budú svoje agresívne požiadavky ešte stupňovať. Doteraz chceli, aby Ukrajinci odovzdali aj to, čo Rusi ani za 11 rokov vojny nedokázali dosiahnuť vojensky. Teda odovzdanie aj neokupovaných častí 4 nelegálne anektovaných oblastí, Luhanskej, Doneckej, Záporožskej a Chersonskej. </p>



<p>Vôbec by ma neprekvapilo, ak by Rusi, povzbudení americkou (ne)stratégiou, teraz prišli s požiadavkou na úplné odovzdanie celej ľavobrežnej Ukrajiny. Teda všetkého územia na východ od Dnipra, ktoré ani v najväčšom sne nemajú šancu dostať vojensky.</p>



<p>Ako som už naznačil, toto ešte nie sú rokovania a Američania zatiaľ nemajú žiadnu zmysluplnú stratégiu okrem veľkých vyhlásení, dobrých iba tak pre sociálne siete. Má to ale aj svoje výhody. Čokoľvek, čo doteraz USA povedali, môžu kedykoľvek zmeniť.</p>



<p>A na šťastie pre Ukrajinu aj pre nás, Putin by si mal dávať veľký pozor na to, čo chce a nepremeškať poslednú šancu, ako rozumne z tejto nezmyselnej vojny rýchlo vycúvať. Lebo ak svojou nenažratosťou popudí prezidenta Trumpa, môže dosiahnuť zásadnú zmenu jeho postoja. POtom sa nebude stíhať diviť ani stiahnuť z okupovaných území.</p>



<p></p>



<p>Čítajte viac  k téme: <br><a href="https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/02/26/fakty-vs-propagandisticke-fikcie-26-02-2025/">FAKTY vs PROPAGANDISTICKÉ FIKCIE (26.02.2025) &#8211; Pavel Macko &#8211; Bezpečnosť, Technológie, Stratégie</a></p>



<p></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk/2025/02/27/len-aby-sa-putin-neprepocital/">Len aby sa Putin neprepočítal!</a> appeared first on <a href="https://pavelmacko.sk">Pavel Macko - Bezpečnosť, Technológie, Stratégie</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
