Western corporate media commentators, pundits, intellectuals, even generals have all made assumptions about Russian military strategy. Many of them have taken reports from Ukrainian social media and cheerleaders in the Ukrainian government and pushed them as effective propaganda against the Russian military operation. There is no end to the speculation, sensationalism, pride, and contempt that they can show. But let’s look at some of their assumptions to see if those assumptions about Russian military strategy actually coincide with a realistic picture of the situation on the ground and at Russian High Command.
The approximate battle lines in the Donbass as of a week ago. The command posts and supply lines in the core of Ukrainian strongholds are already being destroyed.
Western corporate figures often say that Phase One of the military operation was a failure as a result of Russian redeployment out of the Kyiv theater and other areas only to focus on a smaller piece of Ukrainian territory. Yet this assumes that Russia wanted to conquer Kyiv. Does that assumption make sense? Conquest requires a ratio of three invaders to one defender, but Russia started out with the opposite ratio, indicating that conquest was not the first objective..
With all of those troops encompassing Ukraine, though, what would be the actual objective? It would have had to have been a political capitulation, that Ukrainian officials in the face of such a display of force would surrender territory to the Russians of Ukraine and that they would reach a diplomatic settlement with Russia in regard to military and political alliances in Europe, namely staying out of NATO and promising to take international positions that wouldn’t threaten interests. Russian strategy assumed that officials in Russian parts of Ukraine would facilitate surrenders and a transfer of territory, and that the regime in Kyiv would be shaken by the reality and become eager to come to an agreement with Russia.
Yet this did not happen. It can be seen that the residents and officials in Russian territories of Ukraine have not been as eager to facilitate a surrender and transfer of territory as expected. It is understandable since we now know that Ukrainian resident and officials are under threat by Ukrainian secret services and nationalist paramilitary organizations that promise to punish traitors in their midst.
By Rybar’s count, based upon Ukrainian insider information, Ukraine has already lost a few divisions of their best men, equipment, and supplies.
Perceptions on the ground have also been shaped by a completely nationalist media environment without any opposition, all since Russian news stations were shut down and censored from public consumption. Thus they are only now learning what Russians have to say about these issues after Russian troops explain it to them on the ground. To a certain extent, they have been brainwashed.
The regional governments are also often appointed directly by Kyiv, and so their loyalty lies with the central government rather than the people over whom they rule.
So as a result of taking all of these realities into account, Russia has adjusted towards a strategy that will also allow them to attain their national security needs. The initial Russian invasion resulted in a severe decimation of Ukrainian heavy weapons and vehicles and supplies, so that important units all over the country lost significant firepower and cannot move all of their personnel and equipment to meet a shifting battle space. Thus they have been “pinned” to certain areas around Kyiv and elsewhere. They cannot be used to reinforce other fronts. Russia keeps destroying battalion after battalion of equipment and supplies, so Ukrainian ability to adapt has been blown apart.
As you can see by the work of Ukraine War Maps, Russia will be able to continue putting pressure onto the center of Ukraine as Ukrainian positions in the east are destroyed.
And so now Russia can take territory piece by piece, allowing them to fulfill territorial and demilitarization objectives without nearly as much cost or sacrifice. Russia keeps pounding away at battalion after battalion in the eastern region of Donbass and keeps slowly squeezing them, netting them, and cutting them off from routes of retreat and resupply. Yet many Westerners think Russia is going so slowly. What they don’t realize is that Russia can take their time now to reduce Russian casualties and grind away at Ukrainian units until Russian foot-soldiers can break through Ukrainian lines in a practical fait accompli. This strategy can be used for a long time to allow Russia to destroy the Ukrainian military in the east and march across Ukraine. Do Western strategists not believe that Russia has enough firepower to pursue their favorite strategy of war?
Another point is that, as more and more Ukrainian brigades and divisions are defeated, the whole of Ukraine’s military will lose the strength to fight, and the path will become easier for Russia to pursue.
When the Donbass is cleared, therefore, then the lines of defense in central Ukraine become thinner and thinner, and as other territory is cleared in the south, the noose will become tighter and tighter. At this point, Russia will find the opportunity to send in a couple more corps of troops to finish the jobs around Kharkov and Odessa, thereby completing the encirclement. Russia will be able to pull the noose as tight as they want, destroying more and more Ukrainian units in the west and disabling the Kyiv regime to the point of capitulation.
https://venmo.com/code?user_id=2399715727507456261
Hello,
I just came across your Twitter and then your Substack. It seems we’re of like mind and, possibly, background as well.
I’m down in Charlottesville, but spent many years in and around DC and Fort Meade. I left the government sector last year. It’s exciting to be in the “real world,” which seems a bit like a frontier to me after so long with the USG.
Just wanted to reach out and say I’m enjoying your work! Nicely done.
Lee
Russia will defeat NATO and Us Proxy War