Someone leaked French Joint Staff assessment to a French newspaper.
Nothing new for most of us, ukraine can’t win and in fact is weaker and weaker.
“The situation looks exceedingly bleak for Ukraine, which might in part explain Macron’s recent declarations around sending troops to Ukraine.
“A Ukrainian military victory now seems impossible”
The reports Marianne consulted write that Ukraine’s counter-offensive “gradually bogged down in mud and blood and did not result in any strategic gain” and that its planning, conceived by Kiev and Western general staffs, turned out to be “disastrous”: “Planners thought that once the first Russian defense lines were breached, the entire front would collapse […] These fundamental preliminary phases were conducted without considering the moral forces of the enemy in defense: that is, the will of the Russian soldier to hold onto the terrain”.
The reports also highlight “the inadequacy of the training of Ukrainian soldiers and officers”: due to a lack of officers and a significant number of veterans, these “Year II soldiers” from Ukraine – often trained for “no more than three weeks” – were launched into an assault on a Russian fortification line that proved impregnable.
Without any air support, with disparate Western equipment that was less efficient than the old Soviet material (“obsolete, easy to maintain, and capable of being used in degraded mode”, the report mentions), the Ukrainian troops had no hope of breaking through. Add to this the “Russian super-dominance in the field of electronic jamming penalizing, on the Ukrainian side, the use of drones and command systems”.
“The Russian army is today the ‘tactical and technical’ reference for thinking and implementing the defensive mode,” writes the report. Not only does Moscow have heavy engineering equipment that allowed it to construct defensive works (“almost total absence of this material on the Ukrainian side, and the impossibility for Westerners to supply it quickly”) but the 1,200 km front, known as the Sourokovine line (after a Russian general), has been mined to a huge extent.
The reports also highlight that contrary to Ukraine “the Russians have managed their reserve troops well, to ensure operational endurance.” According to this document, Moscow reinforces its units before they are completely worn out, mixes recruits with experienced troops, ensures regular rest periods in the rear… and “always had a coherent reserve force to manage unforeseen events.” This is far from the widespread idea in the West of a Russian army sending its troops to the slaughter without counting…
“To date, the Ukrainian general staff does not have a critical mass of land forces capable of inter-arms maneuver at the corps level capable of challenging their Russian counterparts to break through its defensive line,” concludes this confidential defense report, according to which “the gravest error of analysis and judgment would be to continue to seek exclusively military solutions to stop the hostilities”. A French officer summarizes: “It is clear, given the forces present, that Ukraine cannot win this war militarily.”
“The conflict entered a critical phase in December”
“The combativeness of Ukrainian soldiers is deeply affected,” mentions a forward-looking report for the year 2024. “Zelensky would need 35,000 men per month, he’s not recruiting half of that, while Putin draws from a pool of 30,000 volunteers per month,” observes a military officer returned from Kiev. In terms of equipment, the balance is just as unbalanced: the failed offensive of 2023 “tactically destroyed” half of Kiev’s 12 combat brigades.
Since then, Western aid has never been so low. It is therefore clear that no Ukrainian offensive can be launched this year. “The West can supply 3D printers to manufacture drones or loitering munitions, but can never print men,” notes this report. “Given the situation, it may have been decided to strengthen the Ukrainian army, not with fighters, but with support forces, in the rear, allowing Ukrainian soldiers to be freed up for the front,” admits a senior officer, confirming a “ramp-up” of Western military personnel in civilian clothes. “Besides the Americans, who allowed the New York Times to visit a CIA camp, there are quite a few Britons,” slips a military officer, who does not deny the presence of French special forces, notably combat swimmers for training missions…
“The risk of a Russian breakthrough is real”
On February 17, Kiev had to abandon the city of Avdiivka, in the northern suburbs of Donetsk, which had until then been a fortified stronghold. “It was both the heart and symbol of Ukrainian resistance in the Russian-speaking Donbass,” highlights a report on the “battle of Avdiivka,” drawing a series of damning lessons. “The Russians changed their modus operandi by compartmentalizing the city, and especially by using gliding bombs on a large scale for the first time,” notes this document. When a 155mm artillery shell carries 7 kg of explosive, the gliding bomb delivers between 200 and 700 kg and can thus pierce concrete structures more than 2 m thick. A hell for Ukrainian defenses, which lost more than 1,000 men per day. Furthermore, the Russians use sound suppressors on light infantry weapons to foil acoustic detection systems on the ground.
“The decision to retreat by the Ukrainian armed forces was a surprise,” notes this last report, highlighting “its suddenness and lack of preparation,” fearing that this choice was “more endured than decided by the Ukrainian command,” suggesting a possible onset of “disarray.”
“The Ukrainian armed forces have tactically shown that they do not possess the human and material capabilities […] to hold a sector of the front that is subjected to the assailant’s effort,” continues the document. “The Ukrainian failure in Avdiivka shows that, despite the emergency deployment of an ‘elite’ brigade – the 3rd Azov Air Assault Brigade –, Kiev is not capable of locally restoring a sector of the front that collapses,” alerts this last report.
What the Russians will do with this tactical success remains to be seen. Will they continue in the current mode of “nibbling and slowly shaking” the entire front line, or will they seek to “break through in depth”? “The terrain behind Avdiivka allows it,” signals this recent document, also warning that Western sources tend to “underestimate” the Russians, themselves adept at the practice of “Maskirovka,” “appearing weak when strong.” According to this analysis, after two years of war, Russian forces have thus shown their ability to “develop operational endurance” that allows them to wage “a slow and long-intensity war based on the continuous attrition of the Ukrainian army.”
Comment: Aleksandar provided this French General Staff assessment and his comments on that assessment as a comment to a recent post. I found it quite informative and decided to share it as a stand alone post. Good job, Aleksandar.
A few things struck me. The report wrote “The Russian army is today the ‘tactical and technical’ reference for thinking and implementing the defensive mode.” I think that is an understatement. The Russian Army has long been characterized as being experts in the defense. The construction of the Surovikin Line and the use of artillery and drones in the defensive battles proved out that notion. Fairly early in the Ukrainian counteroffensive, it became apparent there was not going to be a breakthrough. It was a forlorn hope to expect otherwise. The opposite side of this coin is that the hope of a grand Russian breakthrough is equally forlorn. The Russian have proven far better at conducting a defense than they are of conducting an offense beyond the first few weeks of this invasion. The Ukrainians, in spite of years of Western training, are cut from the same cloth.
I also don’t know why “the decision to retreat by the Ukrainian armed forces was a surprise.” After staying too long at Severodonetsk and Bakhmut, it was a relief to see the Ukrainians conduct a withdrawal, a withdrawal under considerable pressure I might add. If they had not employed the 3rd Air Assault Brigade to anchor the withdrawal, the Russians would have captured quite a few Ukrainians along with their equipment. That employment is proof of deliberate planning by the Ukrainians, probably initiated well before Syrskyi took charge.
TTG
The Russians did capture quite a few Ukrainians along with their equipment in Avdiivka.
Peter Williams,
Captured Ukrainians were in the single digits and dozens, a lot of them wounded and unable to be evacuated.
I’m going to be very cruel to “my” staff.
We French are very good at analyzing defeats. In the past, our own, now those of others. It’s both a habit and a taste for revenge.
[My cruelty lies in the fact that the French army has been harnessed to wars it couldn’t win, or win alone. The conclusion is that we’re not very good at forecasting. The uncertainties of the future seem unmanageable. Add to this the weakness of the staff in the face of political power, or its servility].
That said, the account seems accurate, reflecting what appears to be valid information and a definite effort at analysis, as always.
Well, France is really no worse in this aspect than other major powers. By the way, what do you think about the general French retreat from Africa, and new eagerness to get involved in the Caucasus? Another area to try to destabilize Russia, using Armenia as a tool? Is it sustainable, what with Iran, Turkey as well as of course Russia right there in the neighbourhood.
But analyzing victories don’t give good results.
See NATO exercises for example.
I can’t remember one defeat.
( one time situation was so dire that the third day, they add one US armored division in the game…..NATO won !)
But at the end,every time, main issues ( logistics, coordination ) were not addressed.
@ kodlu
I have written on this site fast and short on the subjects you raise.
Africa: good riddance. Now it’s the Russians’ turn to deal with the ethnic and religious problems in our former zone.
Armenia: I wrote 3 times. In short, Armenia is in a suicidal cycle, given its history. I deeply regret this. France can do nothing except excite its neighbors to the south and east. I suspect the USA can do little more.
@aleksandar
I couldn’t agree more. It must be that efforts to produce a good historical analysis exhaust them to the point of doing nothing else (!).
I have written on this site fast and short on the subjects you raise.
Once upon a time we had a very, very interesting (French-Lebanese) junior author on the upper layers. But then. He may have lost his entry on the list of authors & topics on SST, or he never had one. Although it feels he had. I would be very, very surprised if that was you. But then?
What’s your take on the special France-NATO relationship. With emphasis on 2009? Are you a Gaullist?
Note
I haven’t translate this in English.
Arnaud Bertrand did it.
Quae Sunt Caesaris, Caesaris.
aleksandar,
I found the Arnaud Bertrand Twitter post. It’s still a good find with good comments.
https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1767562336452440422
Meanwhile, during the past two days:
Ukrainian UAVs, improved Shaheds, struck a power plant in St Pete, an oil depot in Oryol, a oil refinery in Nizhninovgorod, plus several other big bavovnas throughout the country.
Ukrainian cybernauts put anti-war messages on Russian media, DDoS’ed Putin’s presidential election, and hacked into portions of Russia’s infrastructure.
Russian patriots from the Siberian Battalion and Free Russia Legion pulled off three separate cross border raids in Belgorod and Kursk Oblasts.
Also this AM:
Hit another oil refinery, this one in Ryazan; this is the fourth in 24 hours.
Just now destroyed another of Putin’s S-400 SAM so-called wonder weapons.
Got another $600M in weapons and artillery ammo, half from Washington DC the other half from Copenhagen.
Putin responds by attacking several civilian residential high rises in Ukraine.
So what ?
I could also write a 80 000 words post about one Abrams destroyed there or two Patriots, or one Nasams and so on, and so on.
None of these actions on both side will modify the military trend.
Even those $600M in weapons and artillery ammo.
Main issue is this one:
“Zelensky would need 35,000 men per month, he’s not recruiting half of that,while Putin draws from a pool of 30,000 volunteers per month, “.
And only game changer so far are these gliding bombs that are able to destroy defense line anywhere and give Russians a nice LOA to engage an armored division depth.
Putin’s ISR and targeting has improved. It was bound to adapt after two years of war. But one Abrams? A 44-year-old tank? Congratulations to Putin. How many T90’s had their turrets tossed in Ukraine? 100-plus if you include the one that was taken out by 25mm fire from Bradley IFV’s.
And that doesn’t count all the burned out scrap metal littering Ukraine’s landscape that used to be Putin’s T80’s, T72’s, T64’s, T55’s.
No.
“At war, what count is not what you lose, but what you can produce “.
Aleksander –
I agree that production and logistics wins wars. China’s new industrial might will probably bury us unless we can bring more factories back.
But I’m not convinced that Russia’s MIC is producing any good stuff right now. Certainly not tanks as they are just retrofitting ancient mothballed tanks out of their armored vehicle boneyards. They are buying missiles from Kim Jong Un and Ali Khamenei. Artillery shells are also coming from NorKo. And although they are now producing Iranian Shahed drones, it’s only an assembly operation as they cannot fabricate the parts and have to import them from Iran.
You should read latest reports from IC.
– Russia produce 250 000 round per month.
(NorKo strategy is based on artillery capabilities.
A huge number of howitzers, 1 million/year production and around 10 millions stockpiles. If Russia can buy there, why not ? )
– Shahed are not used on the battlefield.
Lancet, entirely Russian, are.
Recently upgraded, more payload, range extended and AI target search enhanced.
Aleksander –
Lancet is interesting. It appears its guidance system is a lot better than the one in the Shahed. But then Shahed does not need good guidance as Putin just uses it as a long range terror weapon on Ukrainian cities. He needs something better. If only the Lancet had night-time optics, longer range and larger warhead. Something like the Ukro-Shahed that is blowing up refineries, oil depots and power plants deep inside Russia – some as far as 800 km beyond the border.
The Pentagon’s got to have serious people buried inside it who can think. For a start, American logistics planning has always been brilliant and still is. That’s not achieved by think tank types or by “it’ll be alright on the night” merchants. There will be military professionals around somewhere who can think logically and who don’t fool around.
They don’t have to have read Clausewitz or Svechin, or go in for any fancy strategic thinking. Just insist on two plus two equalling four and stand for nothing less. That is the minimum to be demanded from officers who have the lives of others in their hands. Over the last two years we in the West have seen a near universal failure to achieve that minimum.
Those officers will have known from the start that anyone who hoped to achieve a military victory in Ukraine was on a loser. The numbers simply don’t add up and never have. Therefore they put their money on breaking Russia in the sanctions war. Also, though it’s now forgotten, they put their money on the Russians achieving a swift decisive victory and then getting worn down by the subsequent insurgency. They were hoping for “Russia’s Afghanistan”.
That combination of Russian economic chaos, the consequent destabilisation, and a long wearing insurgency would certainly have led to a Western victory of sorts. At the least it would have led to the Russians being severely weakened. At best to the disintegration of the RF.
But all relied on the sanctions war succeeding. It didn’t. And the Russians sidestepped the guerilla war trap and will probably continue to do so.
In February 2022 this venture looked plain hopeless and I discovered over the succeeding months that there were people around, people who knew a hell of a lot more than I ever could about the relative strengths of the two sides, who knew it was hopeless. I didn’t have to look far for such confirmation. I found one of our own senior Generals in England had been dubious about the venture from the start. There were plenty of other professionals around none, unfortunately, able to make their voices heard in the tumult of war hysteria that engulfed us in the West in that disastrous year.
What we’ve been seeing ever since is the politicians scrambling around trying to put lipstick on the pig. Trying to find some way of saving face with the electorates they’ve led into this failed venture. And far too many military men – Hodges springs to mind as one of the most vocal but there are dozens upon dozens of others – who see it as their duty to assist the politicians in saving face rather than seeing it as their duty to serve their countries with sound military advice.
Milley, Cavoli and Radakin, the most senior military around in their respective fields of responsibility, would have been cashiered had they let NATO troops in for the deadly amateur night they let the Ukrainian troops in for. And below them there have been countless so-called “professionals” also assisting with this vicious PR farce. We expect our politicians to be rubbish but that our military officers are too indicates how deep the rot has gone in the West. These men are not “soldiers” in any meaning of the word Colonel Lang would have recognised. They are venal and opportunistic amateurs whose only function was to help the politicians play their PR games.
EO
But that’s exactly the issue. Regime change wars & COIN ops against isolated 2nd or 3rd tier enemies do not require fancy strategic thinking. This one definitely does and I’m just not seeing it. What I am seeing is military, economic, diplomatic and other initiatives being hurled like jello against a wall. Who are the individuals determining the highest level of coordinated strategy, can you name them? Austin, Biden, Yellen, exceptionalism-for-brains Blinken? Please.
Whilst Russia is theoretically much weaker in some dimensions it definitely does have a coordinated top level strategy and the team working on it are in a different league. Thus deficiencies in military strategy in Ukraine on the ground in 2022 & 2023 were able to be offset. Diplomatically Lavrov blows Blinken out of the water and to a large extent this explains why sanctions were ineffective. See here for another important reason. The West clearly did not realize the depth of the Russian alliance with China and Iran and Russia’s diplomat weight in general. The result is that the reaction to a NATO initiative in Ukraine may come in an entirely different dimension and geography (e.g. Ansar Allah’s kinetic BDS campaign, or India’s purchases of oil). The boutique strategizing of the regime change apparatus is just not set up to deal with a full spectrum response like this.
Putin’s whole career in power has been shaped by the constant need to resist threats to Russia in one way or another and his team have spent over two decades preparing for this. Operation Nuland was a strategic mistake of gigantic proportions. The river Halys has been crossed and there is no going back.
Barbara Ann – that packs a lot into a short sentence. “The boutique strategizing of the regime change apparatus is just not set up to deal with a full spectrum response like this.”
Sums it up. Used to write angry comments on that in 2022. “The politicians can’t even do wrong right!”
This was the most ineffectual Operation Barbarossa that could be. Granted, it was a vicious venture. Granted, neither the US nor the UK – of all countries! – should have been riding alongside the White Tiger this time round. But, though illogically, the incompetence hurts as well.
Naive, looking back on it, being angry at the incompetence. Our politicians screw up on just about any issue you can think of. Foolish to think they might run a war efficiently.
That mindless incompetence is going to backfire on us in Europe, don’t know how much yet. Tough, but fair enough if that’s all we can elect to manage our affairs. And it wasn’t just the politicians. Plenty in the European electorates also still mired in the old tribal animosities.
So you could say that whatever the backlash for us, we in Europe have brought it on ourselves, politicians and electorates and all. But it’ll also result in well over a million dead or maimed and the Ukrainians losing what’s left of what could have been a viable country. It didn’t have to be like that though, to be realistic, that’s more or less how it usually turns out with these ventures.
EO,
“This was the most ineffectual Operation Barbarossa that could be.”
You forget who invaded who. What kind of bizarro world are you living in? Ukraine didn’t even invade their own occupied territory (Crimea) or breakaway territories (LNR and DPR).
The West’s and especially the US originally sought to merely prevent Russia from launching a military invasion. That failed. They then sought to evacuate the Ukrainian government in anticipation of a quick Russian victory. Zelenskiy’s government didn’t comply. He needed ammunition, not a ride. Russia also screwed the pooch with their lightning SMO. There was to be no repeat of Crimea. Ever since then, our strategy has been colored by a fear of Putin doing something crazy. That does smack of incompetence. But even in the face of that incompetence, Russia’s only hope is to persuade the West to give up totally. Unfortunately for them, the Ukrainians will not give up and the East Europeans are following suite.
TTG – on this I’d suggest that it’s not a question of the justice of the cause. Just a question of straight military competence.
In the Ukrainian war I see a failed and to my mind vicious neocon/Europoodle attempt to, as Rand put it, “overextend and unbalance Russia.” Others see it as an “unprovoked” Russian assault on Ukraine presaging further assaults on Europe.
But whoever is right on that, it’s past doubt that the Western conduct of this war, irrespective of whether the West was in the right or not, was amateur night start to finish. The Russians ran rings round us and are still doing so. Though I’m not at all sure our PR aces masquerading as Generals have grasped that even yet.
These people, the Milleys and Cavolis and Radakins and the rest of them, should not be running our respective militaries. They’re losers, and criminally irresponsible losers at that. If you’re right and the Russians are on the rampage, or if they might go on the rampage in the future, then God help us if we don’t have better men at the top than these.
Maybe I’m talking out of turn when it comes to your lot but you do know – of course you know though you’re too tactful to say so – that our UK defence forces are in deplorable condition. And judging by Radakin’s performance to date, he’d fall over his own feet if we found ourselves up against Liechtenstein.
EO,
You put far too much faith in that one Rand study. It’s not US government policy. There are Russian writings calling for the full obliteration of all things Ukrainian. I doubt that’s official Kremlin policy.
I won’t argue that our current crop of military leaders are brilliant strategists, logisticians and tacticians. They aren’t. The Russian military leaders have destroyed their carefully groomed image of military brilliance with their invasion of a much smaller enemy. In two years they haven’t been able to conquer all the Ukrainian territory that their political leaders now claim as part of Russia. Nor have they subdued the Ukrainian military or broken NATO’s will.
What a crock. Russia is defeated! Just like we were told by our dear leaders for the last two years. Ukraine needs 35,000 men a month? That’s more than Napoleon told Count Metternich he spent per month. Slava Nuland! And make sure everyone blames Biden and the US ’cause all those Europeans have clean hands and good intentions.
The need for 35,000 new Ukrainian recruits per month just to keep keep combat power levels, does shed some light on the consequences of Russian artillery superiority. Ukrainian losses most definitely exceed Russian losses.
Poul,
They need that many recruits per months to fully replace both casualties and all those who have been fighting for two years. They’re maintaining will less than half that. The Russians need 30,000 per month just to keep what they have.
I commend this new editorial policy wrt the war in Ukraine TTG, a steady diet of Tom Cooper can only take one so far. One comment on this analysis re the “risk of a Russian breakthrough”:
Has it occurred to anyone in NATO that breaking through the Ukrainian lines may not be a requirement or even a desirable outcome of the Russians’ current strategy? The week or so pause we’ve seen since the end of the intensive fighting in the aftermath of the fall of Avdeevka is interesting. Russia clearly had the operational initiative and yet appears to have chosen not to exploit it further.
There could be many reasons for this: A simple inability to do so; behind the scenes peace negotiations; or even a desire to lower the conflict’s tempo in the run up to this weekend’s presidential election, for example. However, I suspect there is a fundamental misunderstanding of Russia’s strategic aims and hence its actions, at least since the war entered the attritional phase*.
NATO, publicly at least, sees this as a war of territorial conquest by a revanchist imperial power. But Russia’s stated aim is “demilitarizing” Ukraine (and thus forcing a capitulation). What if this can be achieved without substantially moving the front lines? Russia is clearly now in this war for the long haul. That may prove to be no further away than a Trump victory in November. In any case, the current gnashing of teeth and rending of clothing among NATO governments indicates to me that Russia might see the attritional phase as adequate for its purposes, at least for the time being.
Russia is at war with NATO, not Ukraine and Russia’s war goal is the defeat of NATO. But this need not be a military defeat. A split in the bloc over the war would achieve the same ends and I think the Kremlin calculates that it can achieve this simply by prolonging a war it has, in effect, already won. It will simply wait for the strained unity in Europe (whose leaders have record low approval ratings) to collapse, and with it will go the Alliance.
We can all read RAND’s research brief on Overextending and Unbalancing Russia. What do NATO planners imagine the Overextending and Unbalancing NATO study on the other side looks like?
*I don’t indulge the fox and the grapes fantasy that Russia’s failure in 2022 to achieve a quick regime change was other than just that; a failure.
One other reason more simple.
Gerasimov knows fairly well how Syrskyi will react.
As no serious ukranian defense line is prepared in the rear, he will send reserve troops to hold the line because he is more prone to static than dynamic defense.
Exactly where russian Arty and Fab 500 can destroy them ” en masse”.
Note that dynamic defense is something complicated requiring a high level of coordination.
( I’m sorry I can’t find again a text written more than 10 years ago by Gerasimov about tactical and strategic patience. )
Aleksander –
Speaking of Gerasimov, where is he? The man has not been seen nor heard from in about ten weeks. Last time he was known to be on the job was in Sevastopol on 4 January. According to Russian media, a General Viktor Poznihir is temporarily performing the duties of the Chief of the General Staff. So, was Gerasimov dismissed, or in ill health, under arrest, KIA or WIA?
https://twitter.com/teemu72/status/1767922676037825016/photo/1
23.02.2024
After the ceremony, Russian Defence Minister General of the Army Sergei Shoigu together with Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation / First Deputy Minister of Defence of the Russian Federation General of the Army VALERY GERASIMOV congratulated the servicemen taking part in the special military operation on Defender of the Fatherland Day, thanked them for their selfless duty, wished them good health, strong spirit, and new victories for the glory of the Fatherland.
Glad to hear he is OK. Source?
Source : RF Ministry of Defense.
And a video this morning, Shoigu and Gzrasimov at a poll station.
Lost and found. He looks unwell, maybe not as he has always a sourpuss.
Barbara Ann, thank you for your remarkable clarity.
“But Russia’s stated aim is “demilitarizing” Ukraine (and thus forcing a capitulation). What if this can be achieved without substantially moving the front lines? Russia is clearly now in this war for the long haul. ”
This is a concept that seems to go over the heads of the Pro Ukraine block. I wrote a comment within the first month of the SMO that Russia likely has a different mentality in this war as evidenced by numerous wars throughout its history which all these apparent military experts seem to overlook…they are more psychologically attuned to taking losses then the western nations are. (Eg. The soviet Finnish war, Barbarossa, war in Chechnya)
This phenomenon of outlasting just does not register in the west. Eastern nations have always been more committed in this sense (maybe due to a conditioning more in line with authoritarian rulers)
Putin never defined the the conditions of final victory in Ukraine, a special military operation is ambiguous ‘open to interpretation’ if like, what about if you said the goal is simply to bleed Ukraine of its military manpower and military offensive capacity (they have already mostly succeeded if that is the case) Alternatively for Ukraine to win they will not declare victory short of expelling Russian forces from every on of Ukraine… which will never happen as this is clearly a war of attrition. Russia had the advantage from the outset. The west has long lost the stomach for prolonged war. Despite the billions invested against sandal wearing insurgents in Afghanistan they lost, if people are really honest with themselves we lost this war when it began all the rest is hubris.
Barbara Ann,
The clarity of this comment is remarkable compared to the fog of war for the last two years in the media.
An aspect that has avoided highlighting until recently is that the Ukraine Russian War is re-fighting WWI in trenches with drones & satellites against a nuclear armed opponent. The NY Post reported that in 2022 a CIA analysis indicated a 50% chance of the use of tactical nuclear weapons if Russian Territory is seized. This war is a true meat grinder like WWI a little over a century ago. The NATO Generals’ hubris and incompetence mirrors that war with their recommendation to proceed with the summer offensive in 2023 would likely cause a nuclear war if successful and then did not halt it when Ukraine failed to break through the first lines of the Russian defense. Their arrogance is so supreme that they did not build defensive lines in depth before the offensive. It appears that the intention is to get a cut of the funds being spent for replacement weapons, armament and shells from the military contractors plus to stress Russia to repeat the 1990s collapse.
The Kremlin actions clearly take the possibility of a NATO nuclear attack in this war of attrition seriously. I am so old I remember as a kid how unpopular the Korean War was. It is shocking that there is no western leadership today like Dwight D Eisenhower who promised to go to Korea and ended the conflict with a UN Armistice and a DMZ in August 1953.
VietnamVet & d74
Colonel Lang possessed a clarity of thought on a level I do not expect to encounter again in my lifetime. I tried to be a good student.
Vietnam Vet
“It is shocking that there is no western leadership today like Dwight D Eisenhower who promised to go to Korea and ended the conflict with a UN Armistice and a DMZ in August 1953.”
Today’s Western “leadership” is too arrogant and incompetent.
The other day, Latvian president publicly called for the destruction of Russia. Now, Latvia doesn’t have much of an army. It is clear whose army the European leaders (aka overgrown children) are counting on coming to their rescue if they manage to talk themselves into war with Russia.
Barbara Ann –
Voting has already started in Putin’s election. As a protest some voters are setting fires in polling booths.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1768622796576285131
*I don’t indulge the fox and the grapes fantasy that Russia’s failure in 2022 to achieve a quick regime change was other than just that; a failure.
Barbara, interesting.
Expanding on the question arising from the quote above. Leading a little back in time, not quite as far as Rand’s 2019 expertise. The above quote seems to be a double negative. Was that your intended meaning? It feels you may have wanted to convey the opposite. Whatever looked like a Russian failure really was a victory?
What you may have wanted to convey, is: everybody (MSM) misread Russia’s initial campaigns as focused on Kiev/Kyiv. They had a very different aim. And that aim was actually achieved. Thus, talking of failure is a fox-and-grapes fantasy.
Which leaves with the question: The real aim was what exactly?
Something related to Putin’s recognition of Ukrainian dissident regions?
https://www.c-span.org/video/?518097-2/russian-president-putin-statement-ukraine
Or not at all, it was actually about disarming all of Ukraine.
To me, it feels Russia’s ultimate opponent is not NATO, but the US of A is whom he addresses behind NATO, the leader of the pack, if I may call that. 😉 Is that a sign of anti-Americanism?
I doubt Europe is worthy of Putin’s respect on this matter. Euro-Poodles? Remember. He may well agree with you on that. Who in Europe dared to overstep the boundaries of International Law–well why not–post 1945, as the US did post 9/11? And as he dared to do too now?
A Borg perspective on matters – US and International Law:
https://www.cfr.org/blog/international-treaties-united-states-refuses-play-ball
I do not know anything in International Law that allows states to disarm other states. But then, I am no expert. You do? International Law does not matter. Except maybe in Gaza? Strong leaders like in Israel may be able to expand its boundaries, updating its rules to work in the 21st century? It’s an old hat that should be abandoned? No one ever cared anyway.
LeaNder – I reckon that’s it. “What you may have wanted to convey, is: everybody (MSM) misread Russia’s initial campaigns as focused on Kiev/Kyiv. They had a very different aim. And that aim was actually achieved.”
But I don’t believe they had one aim only. Even their ultimate aim changed according to circumstances. “Denazification and demilitarisation” looks like a concrete and well defined ultimate aim but it’s not.
At the start, leaving the Donbass within Ukraine but safe from attack, and working towards safety for the Russians in Ukraine would have sufficed. We then saw that aim expand to preventing the entirety of Ukraine being used as a means of annoyance by NATO. That aim itself might expand – we don’t know yet – to looking for the “European Security Architecture” that will prevent Europe itself being a means of annoyance. The true meaning of “denazification and demilitarisation” has altered according to the degree of pressure we in the West subsequently exerted or attempted to exert.
And the means used to achieve that shifting aim were themselves not set in stone. Would you accept that, as with the action around Kiev you mention, the Russians had a range of possibilities to work to, and covered each possibility?
So though, for example, the Istanbul negotiations were (my personal view only!) very much a long shot like Minsk II before them, the Russians could have worked to those and left Ukraine intact. And though NATO coming in in force was most unlikely (again only my view) they kept most of their men and equipment back so could have worked to that possibility too.
And so on throughout the full range of possibilities that could have opened out from that February 24th. The Russians didn’t start out with a finished plan that is now being accomplished, even thought it now looks like that. Just waiting to see which way the cat jumped and covering the various ways in which it might jump.
TTG,
“The Russian Army has long been characterized as being experts in the defense. The construction of the Surovikin Line and the use of artillery and drones in the defensive battles proved out that notion.”
“The Russian have proven far better at conducting a defense than they are of conducting an offense beyond the first few weeks of this invasion.”
Russians also are the best in military deception strategy. And it has evolved with time. I know you like Sun Tzu. Perhaps “looking weak when you are strong” is the maskirovka that we are seeing?
Duty, Honor, Country. Now just a motto, like “Have it your way”.
https://www.westpoint.edu/news/press-releases/west-point-mission-statement-update-0
Fred,
This seems like a commander doing what every commander wants to do… make their mark on the unit. It’s a stupid imperative, but it’s a deeply ingrained imperative.
Strategic Operations..Planning…Infiltration…The Dark Side
…We Lost Haiti to Terrorist Gangs…Right Off of Florida
..Probably Going Chinese Missle Crisis…??And What Cubans
Make Immigration Policys for America Now..
Europe..EU…NATO…Russia..Vlad the great..Vlad the Lesser..
All American Made …Plum Pudding..Messy..Messy Pudding..
Smart Commanders,,,,,,,,Dumb Commanders…Viva La Revulsion…
wow. so Ivan IS ten feet tall.
guess we shoulda taken ’em more seriously.
ked,
Ivan was ten feet tall in mid-February 2022. By mid-March 2022, they proved themselves to be big, bumbling clowns militarily, still dangerous bumbling clowns, but clowns nonetheless.
They were not in Feb 2022.
Now they are.
& they may well degrade in the future. it appears that Russia has succeeded in defending the lands they hold, while gaining scant ground slowly & at high price in both manpower & equipment. if their better-trained army continues to lose combat troops at high proportion sustainable to the Ukrainians over a considerable period … it may not go over well in Russia, eventually. especially after trump is defeated.
See what the “Europoodles” are saying:
“Russia-Ukraine: Don’t mention the peace”
https://www.politico.eu/article/dont-mention-the-peace/
Keith Harbaugh,
Pope Francis called for a Ukrainian capitulation, not just negotiations. I like him, but don’t agree with him on this at all. Russia can bring peace and end the killing by withdrawing all invasion forces. Whether withdrawing to the February 2022 borders would be enough to do so is another question. That may not satisfy Ukraine anymore.
@TTG
“I like him,”
Huh?
Really?
Because he is a Jesuit?
jld,
He embodies the Jesuit idea of helping others and seeing God in all things, to be a man for others. I also found his encyclical letter, Laudato, Si, inspiring.
To me and to MANY genuine Christians (which I am not) he his a nasty clown subservient to the New World Order and probably not even Christian.
A completely “made up” figure, not really the Pope.
jld,
By genuine Christians are you referring to those preaching prosperity gospel or dominionism? Or maybe the Wesboro Baptist Church types?
@TTG
😀
Showing your Jesuitic skills (I have read Baltasar Gracián which I strongly disliked)
But I am not in a mood to argue.
(I have read Baltasar Gracián
what exactly? El Héroe?
@LeaNder
– Oráculo manual y arte de prudencia
– El Criticón
(in French translations)
forget Jesuitic skills & all that, I’m just trying to unpack this; ” To me and to MANY genuine Christians (which I am not) he his a nasty clown subservient to the New World Order and probably not even Christian. A completely “made up” figure, not really the Pope.”
are Christians made genuine in your non-Christian eyes by their determination that Francis is a nasty clown? anyway, you are correct that there are some Christian denominations that assert all Catholics are categorically non-Christian. then there are Catholics who assert he’s not really Pope… maybe like folk who believe every election they lose is fixed? not sure… & I sure wouldn’t want to speak for them.
They did not show the full interview. Vatican has said since that Francis was speaking of negotiation not surrender. A Ukrainian Catholic Bishop has said to the Pope that surrender means death not only for him but also for Ukrainian Orthodox priests; and the Gulag for tens of thousands of ordinary Ukrainians.
Leith,
That was my impression too. Francis called for negotiations, not surrender. It came shortly after Zelensky flatly refused sn offer by Erdogan (probably at the request of Putin) to act as middle man for negotiations with Russia.
Zelenskyy’s stance that taking all the territory lost in 2014 and 2022 seems increasingly unrealistic, but IMO he has no choice but to take that stance until such time as a significant portion, perhaps a majority, of the Ukrainian people also hold that opinion.
Mark Logan and leith,
He clearly called for the killing to stop. He cannot say otherwise. It’s a little different from Jan Pavel II, who had thoughts of resigning the papacy and returning to Poland to join the resistance when Jaruzelski declared martian law. Those feelings run deep, even if you’re the Pope.
If Francis wants the killing to stop then he needs to be speaking to Putin, not Zelensky.
leith, he has – early on & no doubt via private channels too. Oct. ’22:
“My appeal is addressed first of all to the president of the Russian Federation, begging him to stop … this spiral of violence and death…”
given only 10% of Ukrainians identify as RC, one can appreciate their general upset over his stating anything that could be construed as capitulation. ‘course, KGB Vlad seizes all fans (& fanboys) to enflame division & surrender.
it’s been interesting to compare the style of Francis’s papacy vs others recent.
Benedict16: conservative German theologian. lousy administrator.
JP2: conservative charismatic Polish activist.
Paul6: centrist (“… the Cross always divides…”) Italian, steered popemobile through Age of Aquarius.
John23: “the Good Pope”, Italian as heck.
corruption grew so problematic (costly! public! even sinful) in desperation the College turned to an obscure Argentine-Italian Jesuit w/ a chemistry diploma. a kindly place-holder the Deep Vatican could manage easily? a sop to the suspicious SJ (“when he screws this up, we can ignore them for a few hundred more years”)?
ain’t religion a blast?
Ked –
Don’t know much about the Jesuits other than it’s founder was a former soldier. That makes the entire Society, and Pope Francis, OK in my book. I also like the fact that Francis worked as a bouncer and janitor before he joined the church. But the guy is 87 so your “deep Vatican” won’t have to put up with him for much longer.
BTW, go Gonzaga.
German political infighting over whether to send Taurus missiles to Ukraine:
https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-coalition-division-taurus-missile-vladimir-putin-war-ukraine/
Russia is bleeding out NATO inventory, something that a flashy offensive operation will not do. To those who say that Russia is the one who is bleeding out, I say this, it will be just like the ending of the Clint Eastwood movie, ‘The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly’? Both sides will pretend to win and the loser will keel over and die.
Important point is that after initial invasion failed Russia has mobilized its industrial resources to produce weapons and ammunition. They have (correctly) concluded that the coming war will be one of attrition and not maneuver, and that we are facing the same conditions as in 1915 World War I.
Neither NATO or Ukraine have done so. In Ukraine because of corruption, but for me NATO countries are more fascinating. We had Macron just the other day declaring Russia to be existential threat and talking about sending troops into Ukraine while taking no steps to mobilize industrial resources needed to support such a decision. Similarly, US is talking about a confrontation with China and yet makes no effort to ramp up weapons production and build up stocks depleted by Ukraine and Israel.
To me that’s the big difference in this war. Leadership on one side is treating it seriously and is taking necessary steps to win it. The other side is delusional and thinks media headlines are a substitute for shells and tanks and aircraft. I am sorry to say, but I am with the Pope on this one. Russia will win in Ukraine despite poor leadership and incompetence because the other side is even more incompetent. Might as well save some lives and agree to a Russian peace now rather than to sacrifice thousands more for the same peace later.
I Remember When Colonel Lang Long Ago…Said That Pope Francis Was a Fraud…And Said to Him “Pack Your Bags FRANK…and go back to Argentina..” Colonial Lang Had HIGH Standards…Very Few Men Like Him..As Barbara Ann Said Above..I Loved Reading every Word He Wrote..So Gifted..I Commend Much of What Barbara Ann Has Written on this Thread,,
I Agree..This is a War Against NATO…and Many Others..Who Know History…Will
not Buy into Allowing Arms & Hammers..From The Former USSR..
Thats Why The Arms…NOW Hammer Russia…Deep ..Very Deep..And The West Has the AI and R&D Advantage…Many More Than FIVE EYES…
I Think This past Four Months Have Been ALL a Magic Act of Disinformation. And YES….Short of Tact Nukes…Russia Is and Will Be ONLY in a Defensive Posture..
The Court Jesters..are After All..Only Clowns…Not Crowns..Blink Blink…Wink..
But the LoCs into Theater remain vulnerable and that vulnerability has increased as the Ukerainians have hd success against the Black Sea Fleet.
Those successes also indicate that Russia lacks support in the occupied territories.
All the Ukrainians need to do is get HIMARS systems close ehough to the LoCs into Theater to control them by fire, then the Russians collapse.
The Russians excel at the Recon/Fires Complex, but still have not been able to successful develop a Recon/Strike Complex on the Operational level. In 2003, the US dropped the Iraqi grid in 3days, the Russians have not been able to do this in 2 years.
In the far off days when I used to play rugby we had a boy on the team who was unbelievable quick. Blink and he’d be somewhere else entirely. He was what one could call a greedy player. Never passed the ball once he’d got hold of it. His sole ambition was to take that ball over the line himself.
Since the sole ambition of the other team was to stop him doing just that, various assorted thugs would bear down on him in order to bring him down. Our star had a simple solution to that. He ran away from them at lighting speed.
So we could all take a bit of a breather once the ball was in his hands. We’d watch him run round in circles and usually end up yards and yards back from where he’d started. Then one of our own backs would finally persuade him to pass the ball so someone else could have a go, and we could start playing rugby again. From rather further back than from where our star’s performance had begun.
Schoolboys seldom take an interest in politics and are never gifted with a crystal ball. Had we known how the Europoodles would come to the fore in the decades to come, and had we cared, we would have called that player Macron.
Well away from the comedy show Berlin/Brussels/Westminster are putting on for our entertainment the enemy is trying to explain to us that there are two sides to every war. It’s quite astonishing how much those on our side earnestly put negotiation proposals to each other, while forgetting as they argue that the enemy might have their own ideas on the matter. Quite astonishing how little we know or bother to find out what the Russians are actually up to and what means they have available to achieve their aims. We mostly invent the Russia we are fighting and our military mostly invent the war we are fighting. At some time these inventions will crumble and reality will obtrude itself. Not yet perhaps.
As for us this side of the Atlantic, while the Europpodles argue furiously among themselves – they’d have won this war long since if talk would do it – the enemy is doing what it’s been doing patiently since February 24th 2022: explaining to us how this war is going to end.
https://sputnikglobe.com/20240313/vladimir-putin-holds-interview-with-rossiya-segodnya-chief-kiselev-1117297434.html
I doubt poodle Macron will listen. Too busy running around in circles, very fast.