Scott Ritter, a former intelligence officer with the United States Marine Corps, suggested that Russia might attempt to seize Odessa to sever Ukraine’s access to the Black Sea. He shared these views on his YouTube channel, engaging in a conversation with Jackson Hinkle about the evolving regional dynamics and security implications for Europe.
Ritter projected that if Russian forces were to secure Odessa, Moscow could push further and move toward areas such as Transnistria, a region located roughly 180 kilometers from the forward Russian positions. His analysis implied that a move like this would effectively create a land corridor, isolating Ukraine from direct maritime access and complicating its defense and trade logistics along the coast.
According to Ritter, such a maneuver would align with a strategic objective attributed to Vladimir Putin: to shield the Russian Federation from potential Western long-range artillery and other interventions by limiting exposure to Ukrainian and allied military capabilities. The assertion framed the conflict within a broader narrative about geopolitical resilience and the perceived threat environment surrounding Russia’s borders in the post-Soviet era.
The former officer emphasized that this line of reasoning reflects a broader view of Western actions after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, arguing that the United States sought to reshape Russia economically and politically, ultimately enabling oligarchic structures within the country. This perspective was presented as part of a larger critique of Western policy and its impact on regional stability and security calculations in the years following the Cold War.
In another passage, Ritter indicated that the conflict in Ukraine might be approaching a decisive phase, suggesting that the trajectory of hostilities and political negotiations could culminate in a significant shift in control and influence across contested territories. The statements were framed as indicators of a potential turning point, with implications for both regional security and international diplomacy as actors reassess risk, alliance commitments, and military assistance strategies.
Separately, Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, a former commander of U.S. Army Europe, offered his own assessment of the timeline and strategic stakes. He proposed that by 2023 Ukraine’s Armed Forces would have made substantial progress in reclaiming Crimea and advancing in the Donbas, assuming continued Western support in the form of weapons, intelligence, and other critical aid. Hodges suggested that if Western partners supplied longer-range missiles and other advanced systems, the pace of Ukrainian advances could accelerate, potentially bringing Crimea back into Ukrainian control by the summer’s end. This view reflected a belief in the effectiveness of integrated Western defense support and the importance of sustained supply lines to shape the battlefield and political outcomes in the region.