As I followed events in the last few weeks, it was hard to draw clear conclusions from the whole theater of battle other than it seemed that Russia would be able to take all the territory it’s leadership desired in order to fulfill its military and political objectives. I could see paths toward victory, but the steps to get there seemed to allude my expertise and imagination. As I pondered the collapse of the Russian frontline in Kharkov, i tried to figure out what could have possibly gone wrong. It seemed like a ridiculous failure, even a failure that an outside observer wouldn’t imagine committing, and yet it involved decisions and attitudes that need to be examined. And the leadership style of Abraham Lincoln offers insight into how to go about doing so.
Lincoln was president of the United States during a critical period of American history, a period in which we didn’t know the ultimate fate of the country. Likewise Russia as well as the world is faced with a true crisis to its future identity as well as its place for humanity itself. Are different cultures and peoples going to be able to strike their own paths apart from the liberalizing meat grinder of the Western Globalist system, or are their lives going to become evermore intwined with the decisions made at the G7, Bilderberg, Davos, Brussels, Washington and others?
Well, the fate of the world still lies in our hands, not to mention the hands of President Putin. When President Lincoln was in office, he made it a point to visit his workers personally on a regular basis. He personally went to the offices of his cabinet secretaries to talk to them about their tasks on a regular basis, and he wasn’t known for being one to gloss over discrepancies or problems. He also visited troops and battlefields in person to get a feel for himself and be able to serve as his own witness to the results of policies being implemented at his command.
Likewise it is necessary for all of us in our lives, whenever we are placed in any positions of responsibility, to stay aware of the periphery as well as stay in touch with all the other links in the chain of command over whom we ever assume any leadership. What could we have done differently in this situation?
Well for one, let’s start to define the problem that faces us: We face a strategic defeat in a whole section of the theater of conflict, we face a credibility loss in the maintenance of geopolitical imperatives, and we abandon so many pro-Russian people in Ukraine to fates of immanent recrimination and repression at the hands of the Kievan and NATO thugs.
Russian reports conclude that the strategic locations Ukrainian forces attacked were held by units of the Russian national guard, the Republican militias, and Russian internal security forces. No Russian BTGs were present, giving them no support from the heaviest and most advanced equipment, and also leaving them without the personnel trained to the highest standards of strategy and tactics. Russian allied forces also didn’t bother building the fortifications necessary to prepare for any kind of serious assault on their positions whatsoever. Thus either Russian leadership didn’t expect any serious offensives in the area, or they were unaware of the potential vulnerabilities. Either one is a failure of management and leadership.
Why didn’t they know that these vulnerabilities existed? Why didn’t they know that there was a massive Ukrainian fist on its way equipped with heavy artillery and armor, trained and quipped to NATO standards and augmented by troops from NATO countries? This information can only be gleaned by diligent and regular checks of all areas of operation and a review of every point of information transfer. I tried to corroborate all of my information with Russian, German, and American sources. I tried to check all of the key geographic details on the map and review key equipment, logistics, and manpower details. But obviously many of us missed something pretty big, and so did Russian leadership. How come we didn’t have signal, photographic, and human intelligence to show us the advancing Ukrainian and NATO forces? Why weren’t we aware that such key locations in the theater of conflict were so vulnerable to attack? I want to do better. I hope Russian leadership does better. The world is in our hands.
To my readers:
I have a lot of plans for this blog, from deep dives into German, Russian, and American grand strategy to historical explorations on the ideologies and cultures that led to their development and to the development of political and military circumstances all across the world.
I can only expand my work and reach with your help. Every donation comes with me answering a question of your choice.
Here are two ways to donate:
https://venmo.com/code?user_id=2399715727507456261
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/tberg
And make sure to like, share, subscribe—and spread the word!
It helps more than anything.
Unlikely that the RF was 'blindsighted' at all. On the other hand those without any military service and knowledge of operational arms are blindsighted all the time. That is true and furher complicated by the fact that the general staffs on both sides of the Atlantic keep information close, so don't feel slighted.
Furthermore, howlywood (intentional pun) is not a substitute for staff officers college. Unfortunately that is the sum total of military knowledge and experice that most, including too many politicians have.
The best, brief, take on this is from Larry Johnson - who does have the background expereince to offer intellegent opinions and analysis:
https://sonar21.com/understanding-planning-orders-and-troop-movements-in-ukraine/
Larry refers to Andrei Martyanov. One must get used to AM's style - to the point, un-PC, to put it mildly. It's the message, not the delivery that is impotant.
Douglas MacGregor is also a good source to look at.
I think that Feral Finster's second point is important. The 'probes' near Zaproroxhe (sp. approximate) and Kharkov coincide with the OTAN Rammstein meeting. Keep the $$$$$$ flowing and the psyop going!
Don't let internet maps and most especially google satellite maps get you excited. They are not to scale, do not show terrain in any meaninful detail, and do not accurately reflect force distrubutions. The maps that do are property of the general staffs involved, not on the internet.
That this is war that is not covered by imbeded reporters attached to frontline units, however censored, should tell you something. Read where the 'reports' that are published are coming from - besides not from the front, not even from the country where the fighting is. London? Berlin? Really?
War is an equal opportunity situation - all sides get a say - action and then there is reaction - repeat over and over again. This is not a win or loss for any side, whther this probe or the total SMO, yet. And there will be more to follow.
1.Poor reconnaissance and intelligence.
2. Lack of personnel. Trying to conquer Ukraine with 150,000-200,000 troops is not going to work.
3. An unwillingness to wreck Ukraine. Start with transport and communications infrastructure, then everything else. Keep in mind that the Ukrainians have no problems fighting dirty, using civilians as human shields, phoney atrocity stories, etc..
The counteroffensive should have been noticed, there should have been adequate personnel to deal with it, and it should have been impossible for Ukraine to maneuver troops or supplies in the first place.
Anyone who thinks the current situation is really what the Russian leadership wanted is delusional. The question now remains whether Russia is ready to do what it takes to win.