Name: 俄國稱影片顯示普丁官邸遭攻擊證據 | DW News (Russia says video shows evidence of attack on Putin's private residence | DW News)
Uploaded: 2026-01-01T17:02:29.000Z
Duration: 5 min 32 s

Now, Ukraine has dismissed video footage presented by Russia as evidence of an alleged Ukrainian drone attack on Vladimir Putin's residence.

現在，烏克蘭駁斥了俄羅斯提出的影片，稱其為所謂烏克蘭無人機襲擊弗拉基米爾·普丁官邸的證據。

Ukraine's Foreign minister described it as laughable.

烏克蘭外交部長形容這很可笑。

Russia's Defense Ministry said Ukraine launched 91 drones at the residence in the Novgorod region and that Russian air defenses thwarted the attack.

俄羅斯國防部表示，烏克蘭向諾夫哥羅德州的官邸發動了 91 架無人機，俄羅斯的防空系統挫敗了這次襲擊。

Kyiv accuses Moscow of inventing the attack to block progress and talks on ending the war in Ukraine.

基輔指責莫斯科捏造襲擊事件，以阻止烏克蘭戰爭的進展和談判。

Well, let's look at this with Anna Matveyeva, who's a senior visiting research fellow at King's College London's Russia Institute.

好的，我們來聽聽倫敦國王學院俄羅斯研究所的資深訪問研究員安娜·馬特維耶娃怎麼說。

Her research interests include conflict and security.

她的研究興趣包括衝突與安全。

Let's start with the video that Russia released.

我們就從俄羅斯發布的影片開始談起。

I think that it's important, the timing of the video and the timing of the incident.

我認為，影片發布的時間點和事件發生的時間點很重要。

I have to mention that it's not the most dramatic incident in the whole Russia Ukraine war, but

我必須說，這並不是整個俄羅斯烏克蘭戰爭中最戲劇性的事件，但

I don't think that the Russians have completely made it up because frankly speaking, why should they?

我不認為俄羅斯人完全是編造的，因為坦白說，他們為什麼要這麼做？

There is already a lot of other attacks going on and we also have Western silence because the Western rudders also were monitoring the skies.

已經有很多其他的攻擊正在發生，我們也有西方的沉默，因為西方國家也在監控著天空。

And if they would say, no, we have registered no attack, we whatsoever, that would perhaps sound a bit more credible rather than we just have the statement from the Ukrainian side.

如果他們說，不，我們沒有記錄到任何攻擊，那聽起來可能更有說服力，而不是我們只有烏克蘭方面的說法。

All right, so the silence of Ukraine's backers rings loud in your ears.

好的，所以烏克蘭支持者的沉默在你聽來非常響亮。

And if this was therefore a Ukrainian attack, what do you think its purpose might have been?

如果這確實是烏克蘭的攻擊，你認為它的目的是什麼？

The significance of the incident is not in terms of damage or potential damage, but

這起事件的重要性不在於損壞或潛在損壞，而是在於

in terms of the timing and in terms of the message it sends.

Because in December there were already two attacks.

因為在十二月時已經發生了兩起攻擊。

There was an assassination in Moscow of a Russian general who was just going from his flat to his workplace trying to, to get into his private car.

在莫斯科發生了一起俄羅斯將軍的暗殺事件，他只是從住家要去上班，試圖，試圖進入他的私人汽車。

Apparently that's something which has been well planned, prepared, organized.

顯然這是經過精心策劃、準備和組織的。

Then there is this drone attack again, long range drones, again, targeting of a specific kind of civilian target.

然後又有這起無人機襲擊，遠程無人機，再次針對特定類型的平民目標。

So that gives a sense that the rules of engagement of this war are changing and the Russians response and say, okay, if you are escalating, we are also prepared to escalate and maybe you would not like it.

所以這讓人感覺到這場戰爭的交戰規則正在改變，俄羅斯的回應是，好吧，如果你們在升級，我們也準備好升級，而你們可能不會喜歡。

Right, so if this was a Ukrainian attack, do you think it was a serious attempt to try and kill the Russian president?

對，所以如果這是一次烏克蘭的攻擊，你認為這是試圖殺死俄羅斯總統的嚴重企圖嗎？

Or would it be perhaps more of a spectacular, just, just for show?

或者可能更像是一場引人注目的表演，只是，只是為了做樣子？

It is something which is sending a signal that we can do it and we can reach significant, significant symbolic targets.

這是在傳達一個訊息，表示我們辦得到，而且我們能夠達成重要的、極具象徵意義的目標。

But just one drone, if it managed to get through the Russian defenses, could have inflicted significant damage.

但只要有一架無人機，如果它成功突破俄羅斯的防空系統，就可能造成嚴重的損壞。

But the thing is that we are coming to a crucial time in the peace negotiation process, and

但關鍵是，我們正進入和平談判過程中的一個關鍵時刻，

that's why this incident has importance much more than just the military side of things.

這就是為什麼這起事件的重要性遠遠超過單純的軍事層面。

Let's talk about that timing, because the whole of this conversation has been based on the idea that it is.

讓我們來談談這個時機，因為我們整個對話都是基於這個想法，那就是確實如此。

Russia's claim that this is a Ukrainian attack is credible.

俄羅斯聲稱這是烏克蘭的攻擊，這是有可信度的。

So this is where we're approaching this from.

所以我們是這樣切入這個問題的。

This attack, if it, if it happened, happened at a time when President Zelensky was actually, actually

這次攻擊，如果它發生了，發生在澤倫斯基總統當時

正與唐納·川普舉行會談的時候。

So if this was a Ukrainian attack, why would they choose that moment to carry it out, to send a certain signal to the Russian side that things can get worse for you?

所以，如果這是烏克蘭的攻擊，為什麼他們要選擇那個時刻進行，向俄羅斯方面發出一個信號，表示情況對你們來說可能會變得更糟？

Well, this is the rules of asymmetric warfare.

嗯，這就是不對稱戰爭的規則。

What you can and cannot do within the parameters of engagement.

在交戰參數內，你們可以做什麼，不可以做什麼。

Normally, they are kind of conventions and understandings rather than kind of the laws of war, if you like.

通常，這些更像是慣例和默契，而不是所謂的戰爭法。

But this is also something which gives Russia some kind of sense that they can do something drastic.

但這也讓俄羅斯覺得他們可以採取一些極端的行動。

And if Russia would be provoked into some kind of drastic response, that Ukraine can go back to President Trump and say, hey, this is what they are doing to us, and

如果俄羅斯被激怒而採取了極端的反應，烏克蘭就可以回去找川普總統說，嘿，他們對我們做了這些，

And Anna Matveva from King's College, London.

還有來自倫敦國王學院的安娜·馬特維耶娃。