By: Dr Metod Berlec
As the third anniversary of Russia’s military attack on Ukraine approaches, we spoke with experienced journalist, war correspondent, and head of the School of Media and Communication at the Faculty of Applied Social Studies, Dr Valentin Areh.
Valentin Areh was born in August 1971 in Ljubljana. In 1997, he graduated in history and sociology from the Faculty of Arts at the University of Ljubljana. In 2003, he completed his postgraduate studies there, focusing on the sociological aspects of the American electoral system. From 1990 to 1991, he served as a soldier in the Yugoslav People’s Army (YPA) in the Knin region. In 1991, he participated in the Slovenian War of Independence and was awarded the Loyal to the Homeland badge. Between 1991 and 1995, he reported as a war correspondent for Slovenian and numerous foreign media from the wars in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as from the Middle East, Kosovo, Chechnya, North Macedonia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Ukraine. From 1996 to 2010, he worked at POP TV as a war correspondent and foreign affairs journalist for the 24UR news programme. From 2010 to 2024, he was employed at TV Slovenia’s news programme, working as an editor and, most recently, as acting director of TV Slovenia. Since mid-last year, he has been the head of the School of Media and Communication at the Faculty of Applied Social Studies in Nova Gorica.
Valentin, since we know each other from our days at the Faculty of Arts in Ljubljana, from the history department, I will address you informally. I still remember how passionately you described your experiences as a war correspondent in the early 1990s in the hallways of the faculty. Back then, you reported on the Balkan wars mainly for the newspaper Slovenec, Revija Obramba, and Mag…
During my student years, from 1991 to 1995, I worked as a war correspondent covering the wars in Croatia and later in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Together with Igor Vučić, an excellent cameraman for Italian television networks, we were the only Slovenian journalists who spent long months on the battlefields. Vučić was the author of many of the most-watched scenes of destruction in Sarajevo, aired by the world’s largest television networks. Occasionally, we met other, though rare, Slovenian war correspondents: Marjan Jerman, Ivo Štandeker, and photographer Alojz Krivograd – Futy. Sadly, the last two were killed in Bosnia in 1992. Those wars connected me with Vučić and Jerman forever and marked us deeply.
What drew you into war correspondence? Was it the smell of gunpowder, the adrenaline, or the desire to present the reality of war zones to readers, listeners, and viewers?
It was the desire to report on the people who were helpless, suffering, and dying because of war. To reveal the brutal reality of war, where every soldier’s goal is simply to survive.
Even back then, you were known for reporting almost directly from the front lines. If I recall correctly, mainly from the Croatian side.
I always wanted to be where people were dying. That is where the strongest stories were. Most foreign journalists, including us, reported from the Croatian or Bosnian side because the Serbs did not allow us into territories under their control. Nevertheless, on rare occasions, we did manage to enter Serbian-held areas.
Your path as a war correspondent took you to Israel in 1996, Iraq in 1998, Kosovo in 1998–1999, and then to Chechnya in 2000…
In Kosovo, as a war correspondent for POP TV, I was arrested, interrogated, and threatened with execution. I must thank Tomaž Perovič, the then-director of POP TV’s news programme. At his request, Jelko Kacin and members of the Slovenian Intelligence and Security Agency (SOVA) reportedly intervened with Serbian authorities to secure my release. The war in Chechnya in 2000 was also horrifying. The Russians deliberately bombed hospitals, civilian settlements, and killed thousands. Foreign journalists, including myself, also faced threats from Islamic extremists within certain Chechen rebel units. Some foreigners were kidnapped for ransom, while others were killed. Among them was Reuters cameraman Adam Tepsurkajev.
Then came September 11, 2001 – the terrorist attacks on the United States – and just a month later, you were already in Afghanistan. You even wrote a book about it, Afghanistan – Stories of a War Correspondent.
In Afghanistan, I worked together with my colleague Simon Pavlin for POP TV, Associated Press, Discovery Channel, and Italia Uno. There were no other Slovenian journalists there. Vlasta Jeseničnik, a correspondent for RTV, left Afghanistan before the war even started. We managed to capture footage of battles with the Taliban outside Kabul, which was later broadcast on all major global television networks.
Skipping forward two decades – to Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine. You left your position as director of TV Slovenia to report directly from the battlefield in Ukraine. Were there no other journalists among RTV Slovenia’s 2,200 employees willing to go?
Journalists in Ljubljana resisted reporting from Ukraine. Most of them were preoccupied with their political struggle for the so-called ‘depoliticization’ of RTV. The head of the journalists’ union, Helena Milinkovič, even demanded that every RTV journalist in Ukraine should have an armoured vehicle and personal security guards. When I told my colleagues in Ukraine about this, we all laughed until we cried.
You reported directly from the frontlines near Kyiv and in eastern Ukraine for TV Slovenia.
In March 2022, together with cameramen Igor Vučič and Sandro Dokič from TV Koper, I went to the frontlines in Kyiv. At that time, after intense battles, the Ukrainians had just stopped elite Russian units on the outskirts of the capital, which was at risk of being encircled. Later, I filmed reports from the battlefronts near Kharkiv, Bakhmut, Toretsk, and Zaporizhzhia. I find it strange that in three years of war, not a single other Slovenian journalist has reported from the frontlines in Ukraine.
Did anything in Ukraine particularly surprise you, given your past experiences in war zones?
The number of dead and wounded, the complete destruction of cities larger than Ljubljana, and the sheer power of airstrikes, rockets, and artillery bombardments. I witnessed such intense shelling that, for the first time in my life, I briefly doubted whether I would make it home alive. It was also deeply disturbing to see soldiers severely affected by the psychological toll of war.
While reporting from Ukraine, you became the target of insults and false claims spread by political activists within RTV through their media.
They lied, claiming I had never been in Ukraine and that RTV leadership even admitted I had faked footage. These were despicable lies spread by certain journalists from TV Slovenia’s news programme. I only regretted that they managed to block the broadcast of my exclusive reports. Thanks to my Ukrainian friend and top-tier cameraman Viktor, I was granted special permission by General Valerii Zaluzhnyi to visit frontline positions near Bakhmut, specifically in Chasiv Yar. Apart from us, only CNN and Sky News teams managed to do the same within those 14 days.
I assume this was extremely dangerous for both of you.
It was not as dangerous on the battlefield itself because we took shelter in a bunker with Ukrainian soldiers during the heavy shelling. The real danger was traveling to and from the frontlines through Chasiv Yar. We were exposed to Russian artillery, drones, or helicopters on the roads. Despite securing a global exclusive, RTV refused to broadcast our footage. The people in Kyiv, who had granted us exceptional access, were absolutely shocked by RTV’s actions.
What reasons did the editors give?
They claimed there was not enough airtime for stories from Ukraine. Some hinted at revenge because, as TV director, I had shortened Dnevnik and Odmevi by a few minutes, following the example of ORF and ZDF. Others accused me of promoting Ukrainian fascists or engaging in anti-Russian propaganda. In the end, RTV aired only three of my reports from the Bakhmut area. The remaining six, which depicted the suffering of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians, were left in limbo. Slovenian viewers never got to see them.
In the fall of 2022, after a successful counteroffensive, it seemed that the Ukrainians were on their way to liberating Ukraine, having forced Russian units to retreat from Kharkiv and Kherson. What stopped them?
At that time, the Ukrainian army liberated over 6,000 square kilometres of territory in just a few weeks – an area roughly the size of Slovenia’s Styria region. Their advance was halted because they no longer had enough soldiers, weapons, or ammunition. The Russian army gained time to reorganise and significantly strengthen itself despite suffering heavy losses. The number of Russian troops on the Ukrainian front increased from 180,000 to 300,000.
Another attempt to liberate the occupied territories was the counteroffensive in the summer of 2023. Despite high expectations, it did not produce results. Why?
There were two main reasons: the overwhelming superiority of Russian forces and tactical mistakes by the Ukrainian military leadership, which ultimately led to General Zaluzhnyi leaving his command position. In short, the Ukrainians attempted to break through Russian defences near Zaporizhzhia and push south toward the Azov Sea. However, Russian forces stopped their advance with air and helicopter strikes, drone attacks, and heavy artillery. The Ukrainians were also trapped by heavily fortified and mined Russian defensive lines. When Viktor and I arrived at the battlefield near Zaporizhzhia, both sides were engaged in intense shelling, but neither was able to advance. The only other foreign journalist there at the time was CNN’s war correspondent Ben Wedeman with his small team.
Last year, we witnessed the slow but steady advance of Russian occupation forces in eastern Ukraine, particularly in the Donbas region.
In 2024, Russian forces in Donbas occupied an additional 4,168 square kilometres of Ukraine – about 70 percent of Slovenia’s Styria region. After suffering heavy losses, they managed to capture several small towns over the course of a year, including Avdiivka, Toretsk, Selidove, Vuhledar, and Kurakhove. This advance was made possible by Moscow’s willingness to achieve victory at any cost. The life of a Russian soldier is worth nothing. Russia sends wave after wave of troops into battle, with soldiers dying one after another. In their first assault on Bakhmut, they lost 3,000 men. In the second, they sent 5,000 more. After all of them were killed, they sent 10,000, and so on. It was only after approximately 100,000 Russian casualties – killed and wounded – that they finally managed, after ten months of brutal fighting, to overrun the exhausted and decimated Ukrainian defence. This is Russia’s recipe for victory.
Due to the intense battles, both sides refer to the so-called “meat grinders”.
Russian forces attack Ukrainian positions in completely open fields, launching assaults without any cover. According to captured Russian soldiers, they have no choice – behind them stand special units that would shoot their own men if they turned back and refused to continue the assault. This tactic was already used by Stalin’s Soviet Union during World War II. Russian commanders also send soldiers into attacks as bait to expose weak points in Ukrainian defences. Since they are essentially running to their deaths, many take psychotropic drugs. Some use these substances – or simply alcohol – to dull their fear of suicide missions. Despite horrific losses, Russia continues to send more and more soldiers to Ukraine. By the summer of 2024, there were already 520,000 Russian troops fighting in Ukraine. Today, that number has reached an almost unbelievable 700,000. On some battlefields, the ratio of forces is 1:20 in Russia’s favour.
In recent months, Russia has made its fastest gains on the battlefield near Pokrovsk.
Viktor and I were in Pokrovsk, a small town with a distinctly Soviet appearance. In the past three months, despite enormous casualties, Russian forces have advanced 40 kilometres from Avdiivka. For comparison, the distance from Ukraine’s eastern border to its western border is over 1,400 kilometres. At this ‘rapid’ pace, it would take Russia nine years to occupy all of Ukraine, and – based on current losses – it would have to sacrifice 2.4 million soldiers.
Both sides have suffered heavy losses in this war. Do we have any estimates?
According to various sources, over three years of war, 85,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed, with 415,000 wounded. On the Russian side, estimates from Western intelligence and Russian non-governmental organisations suggest over 800,000 Russian casualties – 138,000 killed and 662,000 wounded. This means that, due to the war launched by Russian President Vladimir Putin, at least 1.3 million people have been killed or wounded. Additionally, 42,000 civilians are estimated to have been killed. At least 14,000 people in occupied territories have been arrested by Russia’s secret police, the FSB – their fate remains unknown. Hundreds of bodies have been discovered in mass, unmarked, and hidden graves in liberated areas – executed after summary trials.
In August last year, Ukrainian forces surprised the Russians by launching an incursion into Russian territory in the Kursk region. Among military analysts, opinions on the strategic value of this operation are divided…
The idea was bold and risky, but it is now clear that it did not achieve the intended effect. Russia’s offensive on other battlefields did not stop as a result. However, one interesting detail is that Putin deployed 11,000 elite North Korean troops to that front – only for them to suffer heavy losses and be forced into retreat.
Would you dare to predict how much longer the war in Ukraine will continue? U.S. President Donald Trump recently told The New York Post that he had spoken with Russian leader Vladimir Putin by phone about ending the war.
No rational person would dare to make such a prediction.
While many on the left, including Milan Kučan, call for an end to Western military aid to Ukraine, do you believe authoritarian Russia poses a threat to Western democracies?
If military aid to Ukraine were cut off, it would enable a total Russian victory and the occupation of Ukraine. Thousands of people would end up in mass graves simply for resisting Russian rule. It is horrifying that anyone supports such an outcome. If Russia conquers Ukraine, it will gain control of Ukraine’s strong military industry and be able to carry out a mass mobilisation in the occupied territory, significantly increasing its military force. Right now, the Russian military already numbers 1.5 million troops – more soldiers than all European countries combined. In Ukraine alone, Russia has 3,000 tanks and 9,000 artillery pieces. No single European country has that much firepower. It is a miracle that the Ukrainian army is still managing to hold off such a massive military force. Russia has two major advantages over Europe. First, Moscow is willing to sacrifice millions of lives without hesitation, while in Europe, fewer and fewer people are even capable of fighting. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte put it most bluntly when he said: “For now, we are safe, but in four or five years, we will not be. The alternative to strengthening Europe’s defences is for its citizens to start taking Russian language courses or move to New Zealand.”
We are approaching the end of our conversation. For a few months, you were the editor-in-chief of the weekly Domovina.
The story ended very quickly.
If I am not mistaken, the director of Domovina – or rather, the company that publishes it – lost many experienced journalists in less than a year, including four editors-in-chief and now even the chief technical editor. Why?
No comment. However, I am grateful to the leadership of the Faculty of Administrative and Social Sciences (FUDŠ) for offering me a job – where I now serve as a journalism lecturer and head of the School of Media and Communication.
So, you are now passing on your knowledge and experience to the next generation of media professionals in Slovenia?
FUDŠ is currently one of the best private faculties in Slovenia. We have top-tier lecturers with extensive experience from both Slovenian and major international media outlets – this is our greatest advantage. We are not just a faculty for journalists but also for camera operators, photographers, video editors, sound technicians, graphic designers, and other media professions. For years at POP TV and RTV, we encountered students who had studied for five years at media faculties yet could not produce a single news segment, report, or even present in front of a camera. That is unacceptable, and FUDŠ is changing that.
Lastly, how do you assess the controversial government media law proposal? It has passed the first parliamentary reading…
I agree with colleagues such as Dr Dejan Verčič, Dr Matevž Tomšič, and Dr Borut Rončević, who have described the law as bad and harmful. Unfortunately, we do not have enough time to discuss all the arguments. But I believe such a law is even dangerous for a democratic society, as it allows the government to restrict free speech and impose censorship. I do not want to see a media landscape in Slovenia that resembles that of Serbia, Belarus, Russia, or China. I worry about what this means for the future of democracy in Slovenia – especially since the law is being supported by the Slovenian Journalists’ Association, many journalists, and parts of the media sector.
(This interview was originally published in the print edition of Demokracija, 20.2. 2025.)