MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:
Why did Ukraine assassinate a Russian general on the streets of Moscow? Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov and an aide were killed yesterday by a bomb planted in a scooter as they walked out of a residential building. Ukraine's Security Service made it known that it was behind the attack. Ukraine says General Kirillov was responsible for the use of banned chemical weapons in Russia's war on their country. Russian authorities say they've arrested a man of Uzbek origin that they claim orchestrated the attack on behalf of the Ukrainians. We're going to retired Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman to hear more about this. He is the former director of European Affairs for the National Security Council and now heads the think tank, the Institute for Informed American Leadership. Good morning, Lieutenant Colonel. Thanks so much for joining us.
ALEXANDER VINDMAN: Good morning, Michel.
MARTIN: A couple things stand out here. This was a senior figure in a residential area, not on the front lines. And the fact that Ukraine made it known that they took responsibility - so it seems like they're sending a message. So what was Ukraine hoping to achieve with this attack?
VINDMAN: There are different layers to what Ukraine was attempting to achieve. First of all, the Russians have been attacking Ukrainian leaders, Ukrainian civilians with impunity. There have been multiple assassination attempts against President Zelenskyy, other top national security leaders. And at the same time, because Russia hasn't been successful there, it's gone after civilian targets to pressure Ukraine to relent, to compromise, to yield territory. So Ukraine has been responding both symmetrically and asymmetrically on the battlefield. They've been defending themselves, punching above their weight class.
And asymmetrically, they've been going after targets, whether it's drone strikes against oil, other critical infrastructure, military targets. They've gone after political leadership before and had some successful assassination attempts against mid-level, somewhat senior figures. This is the most senior person that they've managed to assassinate, although, in Ukraine itself, they've managed to knock off some Russian generals that were on the battlefield. So this is just an extension of the war. It looks a little bit different to us. It's a bit different from - with our sensibilities that it's off the battlefield. But for the Ukrainians, for an existential war, this is well within the rules of the game.
MARTIN: So are there any - given everything that you've said, I mean, anybody who's been following this conflict has seen that, you know, Russia has attacked civilian targets - hospitals, you know, schools, etc. But just having said that, are there risks - political or otherwise - to these kinds of targeted attacks?
VINDMAN: As far as Ukraine's concerned, there are not significant risks. From the Ukrainian standpoint, they're under - they're besieged by Russia's attempts to kill their national leadership, to go after civilian targets. Russian threats and saber-rattling don't mean that much, and the Ukrainians know this better than anybody else in the world. They've been Russia's neighbor. They've been fighting this war for nearly three years. To the West, this looks like it could be an opportunity for Russia to escalate and spill over, but that's 'cause we probably don't really understand the threat as well. Russia has limited means here. We should understand that, fundamentally, this...
MARTIN: Well, Russia is promising to retaliate. I mean, they've said that.
VINDMAN: They have said that, but what is it that they can do, realistically? They have no additional tools in the toolkit. They've already gone after the national leadership before. Russia is, frankly, a lot more vulnerable because of their assets around the world, whether it's in Syria, with their proxies, or Africa. Ukraine's a smaller country with smaller interests, less vulnerabilities. Their population, their leadership doesn't travel outside the country because there's a state of war and martial law. And people aren't able to flow out, whereas Russians are. So Russia has far more vulnerabilities.
But we should understand, fundamentally, this is Ukraine trying to pressure Russia to relent and compromise and see if there's a way to bring about an end and also signal to the West that Ukraine is willing to fight in any way it can to preserve its sovereignty and independence. And I think we will see Ukraine continue to do this for as long as they can.
MARTIN: So two points you want to make here. I want to take those separately if you don't mind. Does this signal a change in Ukraine's military strategy, or has Ukraine always considered all of Russia part of the battlefield?
VINDMAN: It has considered Russia part of the battlefield - and, frankly, extensions of Russia. The Russian-supported regime in Syria, the Middle East and North Africa have all been in play, as far as Ukraine's been concerned.
MARTIN: And before we let you go, as you - you also alluded to this - public opinion is important to the Ukrainians. Does this bombing send any particular message to the incoming Trump administration, which is seen, fairly or unfairly, as friendly to Russia?
VINDMAN: I think it's intended to send a signal that Ukraine will continue to fight on and that Ukraine could impose costs on Russia around the world. I think it's not entirely clear whether this is sanctioned all the way at the top, but we'll see - we'll learn more in the next coming days whether this was intended for U.S. consumption for the Trump administration.
MARTIN: Alexander Vindman is the head of the Institute for Informed American Leadership. As we said, he's a retired lieutenant colonel who was the former director of European affairs for the National Security Council. Lieutenant Colonel, thanks so much for joining us once again and sharing these insights.
VINDMAN: Thank you. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
