Ben Morgan: Russian offensive slowing down. Should Ukraine attack or wait?

69
1099

Russia’s offensive is slowing down. Attacks continue along the frontline but with less and less success.  At key points like Vovchansk and Chasiv Yar, Russia is stuck, unable to advance.  Military theory tells us that the time for Ukraine to strike may be approaching.

Discussing ‘tempo,’ the flow and pace of war  

Effective strategy and tactics require an understanding of ‘tempo.’ The term tempo refers to the pace of activity and the natural transfers of combat power and initiative between combatants as they transition between defending or attacking. Defence tends to be a more economic phase of war because the ground can be engineered to maximise the defender’s combat power.  Trenches and fox holes protect defenders.  Barbed wire, Dragon’s Teeth and mines slow and attrit the attacking force.

Likewise, the attacker is forced to compensate for these advantages by applying extra combat power.  Manoeuvre, artillery, bombs and manpower mitigating the defenders advantages at the cost of the resources required to generate this extra combat power.  Petrol for moving soldiers, equipment and ammunition around.  Artillery ammunition to destroy bunkers or defences. Lots of soldiers to clear obstacles and fight their way through defended positions. This is why tactics manuals often recommend having at least a 3-1 advantage for success in the attack.

Therefore, in any campaign there is a natural flow of combat power, the attacker expending more combat power to break through defences. While the defending side can use its advantage to build combat power.  In very broad terms, the speed that combat power can be built or expended dictates the tempo of a conflict. In Ukraine, early in the war there was roughly a six-month rotation of combat power advantage. Initially, Russia’s combat power was high during the invasion.  Ukraine absorbing Russia’s offensive, then building its own combat power and replying in late-2022 with the Kherson and Kharkiv Offensives. Russia switched to defensive operations and spent most of 2023 re-building its combat power ready to start attacking after Ukraine’s 2023 offensive culminated. Since then, Russia has been on the offensive.

Currently, the tables are turning and after 10 months Russia’s offensive is slowing down. Recently, Russian progress ‘on the ground’ is reducing, indicating their culmination is close.  Tempo dictates that this is an opportunity for Ukraine to transition to offensive operations. Russia’s weakest moment will be at the point of culmination and if Ukraine attacks it will be setting the pace of the campaign, limiting Russia’s opportunity to rebuild its combat power.  Ukraine will have the ‘initiative’ able to decide when the next phase of combat will take place.

- Sponsor Promotion -

Current conditions in the land campaign

Since October 2023, Russia has maintained a ‘full court press,’ attacking Ukraine along the entirety of its frontline in a broad 750km semi-circle.  At certain key points Russia has launched large, consistent attacks including taking Bakhmut and Avdiivka. Operations that indicate an interest in advancing to the border of Donetsk, securing this region.  The capture of Bakhmut and Avdiivka in turn provides firm bases for offensive operations of this nature.  It seems likely, that capturing all of Donetsk Oblast is an objective driven by the need for a win that would justify the cost of war to Russia’s people and allow for a politically sustainable offer to negotiate ceasefire terms.

However, Russia has failed to capture Chasiv Yar, a town on high ground about 8km west of Bakhmut. Chasiv Yar was the mains support base for Ukraine’s defence of Bakhmut. If it is captured Russia will have better opportunities to capture all of Donetsk because the town’s high ground provides a tactical advantage that opens the way for an advance to the region’s two major cities that are still in Ukrainian hands; Sloviansk and Kramatorsk. The failure to capture Chasiv Yar is probably related to Russia’s decision to disperse effort along the whole frontline including attacking Kharkiv Oblast. This operation’s planning seems flawed because it diverts important resources away from Donetsk.

Some commentators opine that the Kharkiv attack was designed to draw Ukrainian forces away from the fighting in Donetsk and from continual fighting along the Kreminna-Svatove Line. If it was initiated for this reason, it has not worked.  Ukraine still holds Chasiv Yar and there does not appear to have been any depletion of defences in either of these areas.

Instead, Russia is now increasing its force commitments attacking Toretsk and Ochreteyne, south of Chasiv Yar.  The objective is probably to cut Ukrainian supply lines on the T0504 and H20 highways. Over the last two-three weeks Russia has made very little progress. on any front. This indicates that it is running out of combat power.

But what is combat power?

Measuring combat power is an art and a common refrain in the commentator community is the inevitability of Russian victory because of its military and economic size.  Measured in strict terms of manpower and numbers these commentators are right. Russia does have more manpower, artillery, aircraft, ammunition and tanks.  However, Napoleon, one of history’s greatest generals is famous for stating that “In war the moral is to the physical as three to one” or that measuring combat power is not just about assessing the numbers.  If this was the case, war would be a simple science. Based on these simplistic measures the US should have won the Vietnam War, the Soviet Union the Afghanistan War or Argentina the Falklands War.

Instead, combat power includes a range of intangible elements including a force’s motivation, the stubbornness of its soldiers, the imagination and elan of its leaders, its level of training and its organisational culture.  A range of factors that the last two years demonstrate are in Ukraine’s favour. My key observation is that even with the incredible range of Open-Source Intelligence available now, external observers have limited insight into the realities of each side’s combat power.  We can only speculate, but my opinion is that Ukraine is in a strong position.  The key indicator is Russian progress because very little ground has been taken, even early in the year when Ukraine was reported to be chronically short of ammunition.  Further, the ground that has been surrendered is of limited value. If I was a Russian commander, I would rather hold Chasiv Yar with its high ground and ability to interdict important motorway networks than Vovchansk.

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s combat power is growing daily as new weapons and equipment arrive. Additionally, Ukraine’s new mobilisation laws are now in effect meaning that there are reportedly 14 new brigades being trained.  A large force, that used effectively could open the opportunity for operational level manoeuvre. Additionally, for months Ukraine has been working hard to degrade Russia’s air defence network.  Drones attacking fighters on the ground, Patriot missiles sniping Russian airborne early-warning and command (AWAC) aircraft and long-range missiles knocking out air defence radars and launchers.  A campaign that may become more effective because Ukraine’s new F-16s can use the AGM-88 High Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM).  A weapon that has proven lethal against Russian air defence radars in previous conflicts. If Russia’s air defences are degraded enough there may be the possibility of using Ukrainian airpower to support an offensive.

In short, Russia’s combat power appears to be waning while Ukraine’s is increasing. This inevitably leads to questions about what Ukraine plans to do next.

Ukraine’s options

Ukraine’s stated aim is to push Russia out of its territory, making offensive action inevitable at some point.  It is also important to consider that the sustainability of US aid is a key risk to Ukraine’s strategic position. This aid may be compromised if Donald Trump is elected president in November.  Considering the stated aim and this risk my assessment of Ukraine’s two broad options is outlined below.

Option 1 – The counter punch

Ukraine organises a sudden offensive designed to take advantage of Russia’s culmination.  The offensive would be immediate, aiming to capture ground this summer before the US election. The aim being to demonstrate to US voters and international supporters that Ukraine is still in the fight and can defeat Russia. The short timeframe would mean setting limited objectives, probably something like; pushing the Russians out of Kharkiv Oblast.

This option takes advantage of the natural tempo of the campaign and maximises Ukrainian impact by striking Russian forces while they are at their weakest. Supporters of this option can point to Ukraine’s 2022 Kherson and Kharkiv offensives that finished with a disorientated and vulnerable Russian force on the east bank of the Dnipro River.  Perhaps if Ukraine had been more aggressive at that point, before Russia built the Surovikin Line it could have gained more ground.

The key disadvantage of this option is the risk that a less than fully prepared Ukrainian force is defeated, or over extends itself and is subsequently defeated if US aid is compromised after the election.

Option 2 – Wait and attack

Ukraine remains on the defensive, focussing on using long-range missile fire and air attack to make Crimea untenable. It does not waste manpower in the land campaign. Sacrificing the opportunity presented by the campaign’s tempo.  Instead, Ukraine continues to defend and build its combat power, while watching events in the US.

The advantage of this option is that it is safe, Ukraine is not over-extending itself, before the US political situation is clear. Instead, it can slowly build the resources it needs for a large offensive in 2025, or later depending on the aid situation. By waiting Ukraine can plan more thoroughly, considering changes in US politics.  A later offensive’s objectives are likely to be more extensive, perhaps an advance to the Sea of Azov.

A disadvantage of this option is that it may reinforce the idea that Ukraine has either given up or that Russia is simply too strong.

Summary

Russia’s offensive is culminating and the campaign’s tempo dictates that this provides Ukraine with an opportunity to attack. Attacking a weak opponent maximises the opportunity for success. However, Russia may culminate before Ukraine’s new units are completely ready, creating a risk.  On the other hand, maintaining tempo and attacking as Russia culminates provides opportunities to maximise the impact of an offensive.  A conundrum that military commanders have wrestled with for generations because there is seldom a perfect time for an attack.

If I was on Ukraine’s staff my advice would be Option 1, attacking soon but with limited objectives.  My reasoning is that a key consideration of this war has been the impact of the information domain.  A less well-known quote from Napoleon is that “Four hostile newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets.”  Ukraine will not be defeated by Russia; it will be defeated because its supporters losing confidence in it.  A situation that mitigates against inactivity and supports aggressive action.  It is a higher risk option but that risk can be mitigated by setting limited objectives. Additionally, if my assessment is correct and Ukraine’s forces are in better shape than reported a sudden offensive may be very successful, taking Russia by surprise and forcing larger than expected withdrawals.

However, my pick is that Ukraine will choose Option 2. Opting for a safer approach, this appears to be more consistent with Ukrainian leadership’s previous campaign decisions. Regardless of the approach chosen we are entering a period with the potential for sudden and significant activity, so keep watching.

 

Ben Morgan is a bored Gen Xer, a former Officer in NZDF and TDBs Military Blogger – his work is on substack

69 COMMENTS

  1. They will wait. Talking to people there they expect this to go on for a long time and are prepared for it.

    I know one person who left their farm in the “liberated” territories because they chose not to become Russian citizens, but they now have a new place and life goes on.

  2. Hahahahahahahahah
    NATO Ben coping again about how Zelensky has completely exhausted the regime he rules over of the cannonfodder he would need to try and seize back any part of the liberated territories.

    • Week 126 of Putin’s Mighty Mighty two week take over of Ukraine and Mohammed Khan still believes as hard as any Putin MAGA supporter.

        • A quip I saw on tv a israel pm (olmet?) make to a jewish audience in London, “It is said that in Britian an anti-semite is someone who hates jews more than is necessary!”

          What evidence is there of MK hating Zelenski more than is necessary?

  3. An offensive? With what? With raw recruits press ganged and fed to the front a fortnight later? With a huge deficit in firepower? What an appalling prospect.

    Ben seems unable to recognise that all Russia has to do is conserve manpower and bombard. Gaining ground is a secondary consideration.

    Meanwhile Biden is gone, Kamala is likely to lose and with them Project Ukraine is going to be defund Ed and dropped.

    • There are now numerous private Earth-observing sats that you can buy photos from, and they show that Russia has just about emptied out all their tank boneyards. Artillery tube replenishment not lookign too good either. I especially laughed at this bit from another site:
      For now, with the help of North Korea, Russia appears to have enough shells, probably about 3m this year—sufficient to outgun the Ukrainians until recently by at least 5:1 and sometimes by much more. But the downside of such high rates of fire has been the wear and tear on barrels. In some highly contested areas, the barrels of howitzers need replacing after only a few months.

      Yet, says Mr Luzin, there are only two factories that have the sophisticated Austrian-made rotary forging machines (the last one was imported in 2017) needed to make the barrels. They can each produce only around 100 barrels a year, compared with the thousands needed. Russia has never made its own forging machines; they imported them from America in the 1930s and looted them from Germany after the war.

      And one of those factories got hit by the Ukranians last week.

    • Nick J,

      I assume the “gaining ground is a secondary consideration” is a recognition that the current front line is as far as Russia can go. That their ability to go on the offensive is as limited as that of Ukraine.

      Essentially the same point I have made for several months.

      It all points to a peace settlement or armistice some time in the next few months, irrespective of whether Trump wins. Ukraine has been bolstered so that it can withstand any further attacks by Russian forces, but not really enough to make major gains.

      Would a settlement on the current front line be a win or loss for Russia?

      I would say a loss. Finland and Sweden in NATO. Ukraine indisputably part of the west. Massive deaths, especially for Russia. Residual distrust of Russia within Europe for the next two or three decades.

      • Going into Ukraine was always a l”osing” situation. But it beats gong in/not going in later, when the russiaphobic ultra nationalism is more entrenched, more russian Ukrainians civilians have been persecuted, the army is larger, better rmed and more entrenched, the Nato mafia flag is flying over them, and Nato is putting its “defensive” shield in place threatening the nuclear detente and putting Moscow under its sights.
        Even after asking to join Nato, Russia have been asking and asking and asking all century for Nato to stop pushing its warty cock closer in its face, but as Simon Tisdall of the Guardian admitted last week “it’s always been about war, with Russia, as an enemy.”

        Imagining this outcome of all outcomes – which will be Russia holding all current territory, and Ukraine otherwise intact, disarmed and neutral – is Russia losing just shows how tiny your mind prison is.

      • Wayne, I have suggested previously that you check out WW1 and other wars of attrition. Mobility and territory count less than casualty rates, industrial capacity etc. Collapse comes, but it takes time. Russia has time on its side but won’t take the political risk of high casualties. Where we disagree is the casualty ratios, following reputable sites I have previously mentioned, 5 to 1 in Russia’s favour is likely.

        On the distrust of Russia in Europe I’d note that successive elections in Europe have resulted in losses for pro Ukrainian leaders. A more apt question is does Russia need Europe with their decisive swing to BRICS and Asia? Then ask how can Europe which imports all of its energy and raw materials survive without Russia? I’m inclined to be optimistic and see Germany in particular putting its welfare above US demands, and Russia keeping a little back from reliance on China.

  4. “Ukraine remains on the defensive, focusing on using long-range missile fire and air attack to make Crimea untenable. It does not waste manpower in the land campaign.”

    I think that’s pretty much where they need to stay. No use squandering Ukrainian lives on mine fields. Husband their resources and maximize the kill ratio.

    Keep degrading Russia’s air defence capability ahead of the F16s arrival, destroying supply lines and make Crimea’s occupation untenable because it is politics that will win this war and Putin losing effective control of Crimea is a political defeat.

  5. ⚡️Colonel of the Spanish Army Reserve Pedro Baños: I just received information that I cannot confirm, I asked for confirmation and they told me that it is accurate. These are sources that I have known for many, many years, 30 years, and they are usually very reliable.
    So, the Russians carried out an attack on Odessa, which killed 18 members of the British Special Air Service and injured 25 more. And they tell me that French soldiers died. These are not mercenaries who are French, no, these are soldiers of the French army. They were killed in large numbers, I was told that the number was greater than in Algeria.
    These are scary numbers because we are talking about NATO countries. And, obviously, special operations forces are always the first to act in such scenarios. And it has also long been known that there are special operations forces, which, among other things, are used to guide, for example, missiles, to illuminate targets, and not only missiles, but also drones. Because it is part of their mission, in addition to advising and conducting all sorts of disruption operations, to train special operations forces on the ground.
    https://x.com/simpatico771/status/1815469285638099042

    Since Feb 2022, how many names have been added in memoriam at the chapel in Papakura?

    • Well if Colonel of the Spanish Army Reserve (retired) Pedro Baños says it, then that’s good enough for me, especially as his sources are usually very reliable.

      I would have thought 18 people missing in the mess at Hereford may have been noticed but I guess not.

    • Not scary. Beautiful. Every one of those dogs deserved it. Just like the criminals who executed the Operation Burnham massacre. Turns out fighting a first world army is a little harder than murdering Afghan villagers. Soon the chickens will come home to roost.

    • Utter nonsense. Do you really think that France or the UK could disguise such deaths. That their families would say nothing. Could Ukraine keep such a large attack on Odessa secret?

      • Secret from whom? From an entire establishment bent on “victory over evil imperialist Russia?”
        The entire Western world is keeping secrets of omission daily. Just like planes go down and trucks overturn in the Western military all the time.
        THIS is the secret getting out right here. Not on the front page of whatever.

        • Gerrit is a puffed up NATO groupie who writes a lot to spin absolute bullshit ,,, and leaves out half the story.

          1) Neither the Baltic or Black sea is blocked to Russia by NATO ,,,, No ships are being stopped …. NATO are not as thick as Gerrit to attempt this act of war ,,, If NATO goes into a full on MAD war with Russia then why is Gerrit wanking on about trade corridors.

          2) Poland can easily have a nuke dropped on it by Russia if they decide to invade
          Kalinggrad ,,,, would the Usa or Britian do a MAD sacrifice of themselves to defend Poland invading Kalinggrad??, . … put another way, are they as stupid as Gerrit? …. I doubt they would, or that they are.

          3) Ukraine cut off/Blocked the water flowing to Crimea since 2014 when the damn existed ,,, defeating the Ukraine military will fix this wank blockade ,,, the land bridge which Ukraine failed miserably at cutting,, and the numerous ports and ferries which exist and operated before the Kershe bridge means that ‘cutting of Crimea’ is a Gerrit smoking the NATO copeium

          4) Russia does not need to use Nuclear weapons to defeat Ukraine ,,,, If Russia fights NATO directly,,, then both have the doctrine to use nukes should they face defeat … , where the loser takes all/everybody down with them ,,, Gerrit is to daft to mention this MAD situation.

          5) Gerrit does not say how wide is the Tumen river is ,,,, but apparently it is very wide and related to his next statement that “China is now just 350 KM from Vladivostok” ,,,, Do tell Gerrit ,,, Also Gerrit, China knows that the Usa see’s them as an enemy and next on the chopping block,, both they and Russia know who is their real threat.

          6) Russia is encouraging the Yuan to be used in trade ,,,, its the best bet for encouraging more nations to drop the usa dollar ,,,, that and the fact the west have proven they will steal your money if it’s in dollars and euro’s

          7) The usa/NATO are into using Muslim extremists/terrorists AGAIN ,,, Russian soldiers/fighters from Chechnya are some of their best and proudest https://www.bitchute.com/video/7v76PrTQiulj ,,,

          8) Arse about face Gerrit ,,,, it’s Ukraine who can not impose it’s will upon the Russian military ,,,, and NATO who desperately need to ramp up weapon production and restocking Ukraine ,,, From Syrsky’s mouth (heard of him Gerrit?), ‘Russian tanks not only outnumber Ukrainian ones by several orders of magnitude but have grown from 1700 to 3500? Artillery has tripled while Russian armored personnel carriers went from 4500 to 8900? Weren’t they just gaslighting us that Russia is running out of tanks and IFVs, producing only 50 barrels a year, etc.? ‘ https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F90394494-18e3-4a16-b1e1-fb4749b4932e_976x525.png

          Russian army Manpower ,,, from that Sryskys mouth (in the above link) ,,’ the Russian Army is on pace to hit nearly 700,000 (690,000) troops by the end of 2024′

          Ukraines military is going in the opposite direction … Ukrainian economist Danil Monin “dismantled the expenditures of the (Ukraine military budget for 6 months of 2024, the conclusions are striking, and most importantly confirm the figure of 400 thousand dead and wounded military personnel. It turns out we spent twice as much money on payments to the dead than on providing the living military!”….

          … ” in reality we know Ukraine pays nearly nothing to actual wounded, so any budgetary constraints would likely stem from dead or severely wounded only.

          Here’s a recent video of a crippled AFU veteran who literally shows his government pay outs to his account on his phone—it comes out to $36 per month:
          https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sitrep-72424-general-syrsky-shocks?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2

          I could go on as Gerrit does not get any better with his remaining ‘facts’ ,,,

          ,,, So I’ll finish by saying he should have a word with that Syrsky fella,,, and tell him the ‘facts’ from planet Gerrit…. P. carren will vouch for both his facts and genius.

          ‘Russias got nothing’ :0

  6. Too late for Russia to now try and offer a peace deal when strategically and geopolitically, they have not been able to achieve a single objective.
    1- Install a puppet regime in Ukraine to make them subservient to Russia as is Belarus (will the Belarusian people want to stay within the Russian sphere, once their Moscow puppet has gone?).
    2- Stop NATO expansion to the Russian border (the buffer zone). Finland and Sweden joining NATO now means a far longer border with, and sphere of influence by, the very people Russia tried to distance themselves from. Thinning the now very much longer Russian defense line. Places the port of Murmansk under potential treat from NATO.
    3- Create a land bridge across the top of the Crimean peninsula and to eastern Europe (see 6- below).

    Problems for Russia
    1- Russia bargaining position is very weak for they no longer control access through the Baltic and Black Seas. Means they have no warm water ports at all and require land corridors to export goods through. NATO controls those waterways and seas.
    2- Russia cannot defend the Kalinggrad oblast and Poland can easily retake this. The construction of the Vistula canal means Poland does not need to access the Danish Sea, from the Vistula delta, through Russian territories anymore.
    3- The Crimea will be an agricultural waste land without Ukraine rebuilding the dam (so thoughtfully destroyed in a strategic blunder by Russia) on the Dnipro river to divert water there. Ukraine has no need to co govern Crimea, just let it die a natural death and Russia will beg them to “take it away” to save having to pour rubles into there to keep it as a holiday destination. New long range NATO weapons means the ability for Russia to keep the Kerch Bridge intact will require huge amount of constant defensive expenditure.
    4- Russia cannot use nuclear weapons for the instant retaliation from the 12 USA, 6 UK and 3 French nuclear armed Submarines in the Baltic and Mediterranean Seas will destroy the two targets Russia cannot afford to see destroyed (St Petersburg and Moscow). Never mind the hundreds of nuclear armed aircraft and cruise missiles deployed throughout NATO.
    5- Russia has “given” sovereignty off the Tumen River in eastern Siberia to China. China is now just 350 KM from Vladivostok, a region once held and governed by China. Also places the only rail link for Russia, to their very good friend in North Korea, under Chinese control.
    6- Except for North Korea, Russia only has fair weather friends in China and India. They will milk Russia for every advantage. Indeed China want to pay for Russian oil in the Yuan, not Rubles. Weakening the power of ther Ruble and forcing Russia to spend tha tmoney only in China.
    7- Russia is losing their hard line grip on the Muslim “stan” nations to their south and in the Caucasus. Heard from Chechnya lately? Even Georgia is sabre rattling. Not hard to see countries like Azerbaijan saying “thanks but no thanks” to Russia.
    8- Russia cannot impose its will to contain the Ukrainian armed forces with any success (be the buufer zone). It has no moral nor legal power to do so. Ukraine is a sovereign state and its people can do whatever they need to do to defend themselves from a rearmed Russia in the future. Basically Russia wants time to rearm itself without Ukraine being able to do so. Not going to happen.
    9- The west is buying oil from Russia but it is through intermediates (like India and China – Russia’s fair weather friends). Russia is not gaining the full price it could get by having to go through third parties to sell their oil.
    10- Due to Russian depopulation in Siberia, China is gaining control of the region through the simple convenience of suitcase imperialism. Nothing Russia can do about the settlement of Chinese nationals in Siberia.
    11- Russia faces huge reconstruction expenses in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Money the poor people living outside of St Petersburg and Moscow would not mind seeing in developing Russian hinterland.
    12- The Russian hinterland has produced most of the 500K+ troops killed in the war so far and this burden is causing resentment there. The two large Russian urban cities are to a large extend “protected” from the devastating effect of the war in regard conscription.
    13- Putin has no successor so at anytime Russia will become leaderless as a potential new leaders struggle to gain control. How keen will Putin’s successor be to continue to be isolated from the whole world through fighting an unwinnable war?

    Just a few considerations to mull over. This peace is a long way away. Only a total cease fire and withdrawal of Russian imperial forces from the Ukraine, will start a peace process. Remember each European countries border is in the Ukraine. The Dutch, German, Polish, Finnish, Swedish, French etc. borders are in the Ukraine.

    • An interesting point about Crimea is that there was genuine resentment there towards the government in Kyiv because they didn’t spend any money on it. Of course they didn’t have any money to spend coupled with a massive amount of corruption siphoning off what money there was (not unusual in a number of these ex iron curtain countries).

      So when Russia moved in and began spending money people were happy. As you say though, now Russia needs to keep spending money there because people can be fickle that way.

      • Yep, the post-Soviet corruption and underinvestment in Crimea was chronic.
        Russia would have been loathe to reclaim it, bar the geo-strategic and cultural-ethnic ramifications of leaving it under the control of a hostile ultra-nationalist Russophobic regime being patronised by Nato’s “defensive” mafia.

        • It really must have kept Putin up at night as he wrestled with his conscious about reclaiming it, but ultimately he is a good man and will always do the right thing.

          Shame that his Navy can no longer use it, but I’m sure that was never a consideration any way.

    • Point for point absolute fabulist fiction assertions.
      You’ve been in the Russia is wrong/on its knees crowd from the start and have never been proven right.
      No chance of starting now.

      • If they are fiction no doubt you will be able to counter each argument. Sometimes one needs to take a couple of paces back and look at the geopolitical and practical situation. Russia cannot “win” without taking over Ukraine and making it a “Belarus” type state aligned to Moscow. Is that feasible to occupy by force a nation of 40 million people? How much manpower and material will be required to maintain that subservience at the expense of controlling ones own territories? History tells us it is not a long term feasible objective that can last for any amount of time.
        I would think that smart Russian leaders would look at the collapse of the eastern bloc countries as an indicator of how powerless they really are.

        The demographics are not on Russia’s side either, as their imperialistic dream contracts inwards from their west, south, south east and eastern control. A wise Russian leader would consolidate their resources and try and rejoin the world. When your only friend (as opposed to fair weather friends) is North Korea, you really don’t hold much sway in world affairs or trade.

        • If I concoct a listen of assertions why someone is a pig-fucker in a numbered list,
          that does not suddenly make them not a propaganda fantasy that I have to waste time and energy engaging with.
          That is the quality of “thinking” on display.
          I’m not trying to change the mind of any deluded auto-bots. Or waste my energy on it. Just put a warning label on it for the unwary, where your fan fiction sits.
          It is merely a confection of the very worst and disproven takes and assumptions from all across the Nato fandom, and bears no relation to the facts on the ground or even the current discourse.

  7. Soberest appraisal of base facts ever from Ben.
    Yes, Russia’s offensive has slowed.
    Yes, the decision to push along the entire front and towards Kharkov has meant Ukraine still holds Chasiv Yar. The reason for that has been to push back on the aimless terror strikes Ukraine have been sending into Belgorod with Western long range munitions. Good job, Ukraine.
    That is just typical pragmatic principled Russian compromise. They will not overextend themselves because the Western propagandists go “waww, you didn’t get Chasiv Yar.” They still hold control over the campaign, time is entirely on their side. THere s no false illusions in Russia. Ignorant westerners might imagine Russis are trying to march though Russia and meant to get all Ukraine. But Russians full know that the West refused to lsten to them for decades and the coup in Ukraine was the red line, and the subsequent arming of ultra-nationalist russophobic Ukraine had to be confronted sometime. Leaving them to mass in force then try and act when the Nato “defensive” condom was thrown over it would have been far far worse for Russia, and the world.

  8. This article claims that Russia “offensive is slowing down” along the line of contact, including along the newly-opened front in Kharkov and that as “billions in arms start flowing” into Ukraine, Ukrainian forces will be given the opportunity to “counter-attack.” In reality, the 2023 Ukrainian military operation was soundly defeated by Russian forces who not only decimated Ukraine’s manpower, equipment, and ammunition stocks, but managed to bolster its own numbers and capabilities in the process.

    Ukrainian attempts to claw back territory it has recently lost in Kharkov will lead to the same fruitless conclusion its 2022 and 2023 offensives did, a questionable chance of actually taking the territory for a guaranteed severe cost in irreplaceable trained manpower and equipment.

    Today’s headlines across the West portending the tide changing in the fighting across Ukraine represent a now familiar cycle of encouraging Ukraine to fight on in what is otherwise an unwinnable conflict inflicting an immense and indelible cost on Ukraine in terms of territory, human lives, and economic prospects well into the future. But as has been pointed out many times before, feeding Ukraine into an unwinnable proxy war had been a US objective articulated as early as 2019 in RAND Corporation’s paper, “Extending Russia,” which stated: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3063.html

    Obviously, even in 2019, US policymakers realized Ukraine would not win a US-sponsored proxy war against Russia. The actual objective was to raise the cost of Russian victory high enough to undermine Russia’s economy, divide Russian society, and perhaps even eventually precipitate a Soviet Union-style collapse. While RAND’s predictions of Ukraine’s destruction amid such a proxy war have clearly come to pass, the supposed “benefits” of this policy have yet to avail themselves and do not appear even plausible at this juncture.

    Thus, Western rhetoric about Ukraine’s soon-to-be good fortune is not based on genuine analysis of the ongoing conflict, but is instead a point of propaganda aimed at encouraging Ukraine to fight on despite all actual analysis warning of the disaster awaiting in doing so.

    Only time will tell just how far this process plays out to where the US and its partners are no longer pushing Ukraine onto the battlefield and are instead taking to the negotiation table. In the meantime, the “billions in arms” flowing into Ukraine will continue to have the same impact they’ve had all along, ensuring “disproportionately large Ukrainian casualties, territorial losses, and refugee flows,” ultimately leading Ukraine “into a disadvantageous peace.”

      • From what I have seen with Stephen it is:

        Free Aoteroa

        Free Palenstine

        Free Russia

        I’m not really sure how the last one equates with the first two, but any way.

        • You don’t know how it equates because you’re in a mind prison about Putin and Russia, and what you think the “West” is.
          Which country has a national defense strategy of “global full spectrum domination?” For 20+ years?
          Not Russia.
          By refusing to respect Russia’s sovereign security interests, and the democratic ebbs and flows of countries like Ukraine, where they have an interest due to their agenda, US/Nato made a situation where Russia would be damned if thy do, more damned if they didn’t.
          Fortunately thy chose the former, because the racist power-hungry idiots running the West this century gobble up their own shit like its caviar. Ukraine is costly but necessary smack across the Mafia’s nose. Waiting much longer would have left Russia having to push back even harder, probably with a nuclear strike.

  9. Ssssh, don’t mention the genocide in Gaza

    “In war the moral is to the physical as three to one” Napoleon, as cited by Ben Morgan.

    Ben Morgan citing Napoleon, notes that the side that feels that it has moral high-ground, has a three to one advantage over a more numerous and better armed opponent, mentioning Vietnam, Afghanistan, as examples. Ben Morgan goes on to say this;

    “My key observation is that even with the incredible range of Open-Source Intelligence available now, external observers have limited insight into the realities of each side’s combat power.” Ben Morgan

    To which I would answer: ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see.’

    My observation, is that while Western milbloggers like Ben Morgan who studiously avoid mentioning the genocide in Gaza – is that open source intelligence, what everyone else calls social media, informs the whole world including the Russian people of the genocide being committed in Gaza which is supported and armed by the Western countries, the UK, the US, Germany, etc. this genocide so studiously ignored by Ben Morgan, tells the Russian people something about the Western powers that Putin claims Russia are fighting in Ukraine. That is Russia’s moral combat power which keeps them in the fight.

    • You are right Pat.
      And your next step is to ask if that moral negligence to the truth is some weird aberration regarding Gaza “cos Israel”,
      or does that same ethos apply anywhere their interests are under threat. Ie, when Russia, who has asked all century for its security interests to be respected, and signed the Minsk accords in good faith with duplicitous partners – sees a choice between defending itself with a limited incursion in Ukraine now and waiting some years time for a nato banner and missile sites to be planted in Ukraine,
      was that ever really a choice?
      That was the situation Nato/CIA planners have been devising all century.

      • Mythical next step into Kremlin conspiracy bullshit. I don’t think so.

        Russia like the US, like the UK, like France, like Germany are capitalist countries.
        Deny it all you like, and I would like to see you try. Russia is a capitalist country. And like all capitalist countries Russia is driven by the need for growth, growth or collapse.
        The imperialist impulse being worked out by the Russian Federation’s invasion of Ukraine is an expression of the need for limitless growth of all capitalist countries. The same capitalist impulse for limitless growth which invades and breaches the natural borders of the climate.

  10. RUSSIAN ISKANDER STRIKE DESTROYED DOZENS OF NATO MERCENARIES HIDING IN KHARKIV REGION

    On the night of July 23, Russian forces launched a devastating strike on a hideout of NATO military instructors in Ukraine. The successful strikes were first reported by unofficial military sources and they were soon confirmed by the official report by the Russian Ministry of Defense.

    A precision strike of the Russian Iskander-M missile was launched in the village of Dergachi in the border Kharkiv region. As a result of the attack, the point of temporary deployment of military instructors and advisers from NATO countries, including the United States, was destroyed.

    As a result of the strike, about 50 foreigners were killed.

    The Russian Defense Ministry is regularly reporting on the destruction of mercenaries from the United States, Great Britain, Georgia and other countries in Ukraine. According to the latest estimations by the Russian Defense Ministry, a total of 13,387 foreign mercenaries arrived in Ukraine during the war to participate in battles in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. At least 5,962 militants were eliminated.

    https://southfront.press/russian-iskander-strike-destroyed-dozens-of-nato-mercenaries-hiding-in-kharkiv-region/

  11. 100 % Stephen, Paul, Nick J and Seer ,,,,

    There has been a terrible toll paid in blood mainly by Ukraine but also by Russia,,, in a long planned war engineered and designed to be a “Bear Trap” by those who sacrificed and ruined Afghanistan for the same purpose in their long running ‘Great game’….

    ,,it’s tough to be a pawn but the price is worth it to those who set up and play that game ,,,, it’s also a shame for us that our Govt is so determined for us to be another pawn in this rotten game,,, It’s Dirty Dirty Politics with the mountains of lies spread by willing liars through which they are trying to con us into buying this shit sand-which.

    The amount of war propaganda palmed off as news in the NatoStan alliance nations (of which we are one), is a situation planned to make the uninformed dis-informed… This manipulation hides or (tries to) both the ill intentions of those behind it,, and the bad results it invariably brings ,,, truly showing that ‘war is Politics by another means’,

    The Russia-gate hoax is a good example of the absolute bullshit that gets said by anti-russian spin meisters,,, and it was spun despite the true state of affairs being that it is Israel that has proven undue influence and involvement in Usa Politics…. With Russia-gate keeping the public ill informed about Russia and uninformed about Israel it has proven useful for helping keep the two wars running that both countries are involved in ,,, two Wars that could not be fought without Natostan nations funding, arming and involvement ,,,.

    The political support for these wars becomes impossible at a certain level of public opposition/knowledge.

    So well done Nick J, Stephen, Paul and seer for good posts that will be shown to be correct and right .

    • Maybe all those named by and including your good self, can explain to us, the dis and mis informed just what the Russian “victory” will look like?
      Something am sure the Russian people are looking forward to.

      Worth a read; https://responsiblestatecraft.org/russia-ukraine-war/

      “The war that Russia is waging in Ukraine is thus a proxy for the Kremlin’s larger coercive strategy against the West, though it is not at all clear that conquering Ukraine will bring Moscow any closer to getting its desired concessions. The AFU’s collapse would certainly induce a state of panic in Western capitals. Yet it is difficult to see how this panic can be translated into a concrete willingness by the Biden administration and other Western leaders to strike the kind of grand security bargain Moscow seeks. “

      • Russa don’t need the grand security deal they have asked for all century. Not any more. The are preemptively crushing the attempt to menace their border and with the seal broken, will not hesitate if needed again. And while the Europeans say “anyone but Russia”, they will stay in their corrupt EU Nato clique, but then start doing what Turkey and now Hungary are doing: joining all the clubs. With China and OBOR at the centre, which is what will force them to deal with these groups. And they will have to hold their nose, because Russia will be right there beside China.
        That’s if the Anglo-Zionist globalists don’t shit the bed entirely with the collapse of their empire and do something worse than taking out their impotence by sponsoring the slaughter of the Palestinians.

    • Seer alongside other useful idiots, alongside the professional Kremlin trolls, strive mightily against reality to make us believe that Ukraine with NATO invaded Russia and not the other way round.

      The whole world recognises that the Kremlin is the imperialist aggressor, out to colonise Ukraine.

      “As polemical as their usage can be, colonialism and imperialism have explanatory power.” Professor Ronald Suny

      The Conversation

      https://theconversation.com/ukrainian-people-are-resisting-the-centuries-old-force-of-russian-imperialism-ukraine-war-at-6-months-188121

      The war being waged by Russia in Ukraine has been described in many ways – an attempt to recreate the USSR, a militant attempt to create a new Eurasia civilization, or a proxy war between Russia and the West. But whatever Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ambitions and aspirations were in the past, they have become ever more blatantly imperial and colonial as the fighting continues.
      A colonial war, like Russia’s in Ukraine, is one in which a self-styled superior people believes it has the right, even the duty, to do what it feels is good for its inferiors – which conveniently conforms to its own self-interest.
      “Colonial” or “imperial” are not just epithets thrown around casually, as are the now-familiar accusations of fascism and genocide, most recently used against Russia.
      As polemical as their usage can be, colonialism and imperialism have explanatory power…..

      Take Putin’s opportunistic and disingenuous use of the language of liberation, of preventing genocide and removal of Nazis as justification for his invasion of Ukraine. He uses that language in the way 19th-century imperialists did when they invaded, dominated and exploited other countries, claiming they were reluctantly undertaking the burden that white men had to bear to defend against barbarians and savages.
      Having failed to decapitate the Ukrainian government, the Kremlin retreated to taking territory savagely in the east and south of the country. The mythology of the Russkiy Mir – the supposed unity of the Ukrainian, Belarusian and Russian peoples – has been instrumentally deployed by Russia to justify the brutal attack on the very people who were supposed to be the brothers and sisters of the Russians.
      …..Contrary to Russia’s plans, Kyiv did not surrender. Ukrainians instead flocked to the struggle against alien rule. The result of the invasion has been the strengthened resolve of Ukrainians to resist a new colonialism, which they remember having experienced for hundreds of years under the czars and the Soviets…..

      Professor Ronald Suny, is professor of history at Michigan U.

        • Fuck you too arsehole.
          How about this Seer, point out anywhere that I have been dishonest, you won’t, because you can’t.
          The thing is Seer, I write under my own name so people can check my integrity against my reputation.
          Gutless individuals that hide their identities and reputation behind pseudonyms to spew their blood thirsty pro-imperialist propaganda are the dishonest ones.

          • “How about this Seer, point out anywhere that I have been dishonest, you won’t, because you can’t.”

            The first sentence you wrote is dishonest – “Seer alongside other useful idiots, alongside the professional Kremlin trolls, strive mightily against reality to make us believe that Ukraine with NATO invaded Russia and not the other way round.”

            I can’t be bothered finding more. In the past other commenters here have critiqued your postings.

            Someone putting their name beside opinions can be seen as someone with an ego.

            • As I wrote Seer, I stand by my record of opposing imperialism and war. A record that can be checked.
              I stand by my record. Can you say the same?
              You can’t because you are anonymous creep that hides their history. You deliberately conceal any identifying record or reputation that can be checked.
              No matter what you claim you are.

              The first sentence you wrote is dishonest – “Seer alongside other useful idiots, alongside the professional Kremlin trolls,….

              Really Seer, is that it? Is that the only statement of mine you could find, that you regard as dishonest?
              Ok then Seer, in your own words why don’t you tell us what you are?What are you Seer? ‘Useful Idiot’ or ‘Professional Kremlin troll, or sincere commenter, with some real provable record of opposing, racism, imperialism and war?
              You won’t because you can’t.
              No matter what you claim for yourself Seer, without proof, it can only be bullshit. Just like all the other vile pro-imperialist pro-war bullshit you anonymously spew in these columns.
              So come on Seer, I challenge you, tell us who you really are. Or remain an anonymous gutless creep with a hidden record.

  12. Gerrit, a Russian victory is to bring the USA into another SALT agreement. Otherwise we have Cuba v2 with the expansion of NATO and intermediate range Nukes on Russia’s borders.

    Locally a victory is to enable any blast that wants independence from Ukraine to be free of the neoNazis in Kiev. Secondary to this is Ukrainian neutrality aka don’t join NATO. I know there’s a dimwitted idea that nations should be sovereign to do as they please but this has limits. Imagine Mexico or Canada joining a defensive alliance with China… how do you think that the US would respond?
    Lastly a victory for Russia would be to leave Ukraine (minus the oblasts who wish to leave) as a burden to Europe, of no cost to Russia. It can remain the most lawless corrupt state in Europe, a den for extreme right wing nationalists. Blackrock and Guardian can own the place and attempt to make profits whilst the locals fight them. Pretty picture, and very realistic.

    • 1- SALT and the issue of intermediate range nukes is mute. Submarines and cruise missiles mean that one can be either very close (Danish Sea) or far away using B52’s, B2, F35’s, Tornado, etc aircraft.
      2- The point in regards Ukraine neutrality. It cannot be forced upon people not to be armed whilst their neighbour is free to re-arm and start another invasion. Not going to happen. Finland has a much longer border with Russia and will never be neutral. Ukraine neutrality makes no sense.
      3- If Russia were to hold elections in an occupied oblast, the result is a foregone conclusion (they have removed Ukrainians from there already). As is the result in a Ukraine one. How will neutral referendums be conducted and will each combatant abide by the decision made by the people?
      4- Whomever leads the rebuilt of the Ukraine is (like the Marshall plan after WW2) likely to hold the influence over the territory. Russia is in no financial or occupational state to be i9nvolved in the rebuilding of the Ukraine.
      5- Lawlessness in Ukraine is for the Ukrainians to sort, not Russia.

      • Gerrit,
        1. You entirely misunderstand the issue with intermediate range missiles. By moving NATO east the missiles are 6 minutes from Moscow. That leaves the Russians absolutely no time to decide if they are seeing a real launch or a flock of seagulls etc. The end result is a counter strike and everything goes up in smoke. An ocean won’t save the US, Russian subs are out there too.
        2. If your state next to mine is an existential threat it will get dealt to. As I said the US would not tolerate this.
        3. The people of those blasts were mainly Russian, after years of Ukrainian repression they won’t vote for Kiev, period.
        4. Yes let the EU and US fund the clean up, only issue is getting value without too much siphoning by Kievs corrupt kleptocrats.
        5. Again yes, why would Russia spend any time or money on Galician neoNazi psychos? Watch them become a problem to Europe.

  13. Overnight in response to Ukraine turning off a Russian oil pipeline to Slovakia and Hungary, the Slovaks are cutting electricity from Europe to Ukraine. The Magyars are holding defense funds required by Kiev as well.
    Great EU unity, lights out in Kiev.

    • WOW, no that electricity is still on. It is a treat according to Reuters just 2 hours ago, no lights were turned off in Kiev. Wort a read:

      https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/slovakia-hungary-threaten-ukraine-with-court-fight-over-blocked-oil-2024-07-24/

      But don’t let fact get in the way of a court case Problem is those former eastern block countries want to buy the oil via Lukoil but they are no in the deal to ship oil via that pipeline. Also payment to Ukraine for the use of that pipline are pending.

      “Transneft and Ukrtransnafta have a transit agreement on supplies via Druzhba. Other Russian companies, including Lukoil, are not a party to the deal, though Ukrtransnafta gets information on who supplies the pipeline.
      Exports via Druzhba have been suspended repeatedly over the last year because of the complex relationship between suppliers, pipeline companies and buyers. In 2022, supplies briefly stopped after sanctions left Transneft unable to pay transit fees.
      Ukrtransnafta raised fees several times during 2022 and 2023, citing the need to maintain infrastructure.
      Russian industry sources have said higher fees have made the Druzhba route one of the least profitable.”

      • There is definite power shortages in Kyiv. A friend there told me that they were down to 6 hours power a day at one point last week. But that is due to Russia’s humane destruction of the CIA/nazi power generating facilities, no doubt in a hopeless attempt to break the civilian population over Winter (not going to happen)

        But as you say, nothing to do with the court case you list above (although as that’s a MSM link expect to be told it’s just Western propaganda)

      • Gerrit, read the Rueters link carefully and you will note that the oil that transits Ukraine to Hungary and Slovakia partially fuels the 42% of Ukraines electricity that Slovakia and Hungary provide. You will also note that the commercial dispute is about increased transit fees and payments unable to be made under sanctions rules. Nice mess, end result Russia sells elsewhere, Ukraine gets depowered, Hungary and Slovakia buy elsewhere. Only one loser.

        • So no rolling blackouts caused by no electricity supply from Hungary and Slovakia then. More mis/dis information?. Only one loser, Russia. Hungary and Slovakia need to keep the Russians nowhere near their borders (Hungarians still remember the brutal soviet crushing of the 1956 uprising). Slovakia has no fond memories of being part of the soviet block for they could not have independence from the Czech Republic (only made possible in the last 10 years by mutual consent and a bloodless separation). As I said before; the European countries see their borders as being in the Ukraine.

          Will they sort out the oil and electricity supplies? Absolutely for they have a common enemy and the sooner they wean themselves off Russian oil the better (if Germany can do that so can any other state). Life is not easy and they will sort out a deal.

          Worse case scenario is Russia over runs Ukraine and cuts the oil pipeline anyway prior to the imperial expansion into the former eastern block countries. Hungary and Slovakia (plus Romania, Bulgaria, etc) will feel very exposed.

  14. ‼️ BREAKING: Kuleba in China said that Ukraine is ready to negotiate with Russia!

    “But negotiations must be rational and have practical significance, aimed at achieving a just and lasting peace,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Mao Ning quotes the minister as saying.

    The video shows a meeting between Kuleba and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

    Also Kuleba in China said that Ukraine supports the PRC’s position on Taiwan and will adhere to the “one China” principle.
    https://x.com/MyLordBebo/status/1816036355719168178

        • I believe the law was about negotiating with Putin (I know many people here seem to equate Putin with Russia for some reason but they are two quite different things)

          If I’m wrong about that I’m sure you can show me what the law does say.

          • Good old Google, Rueters Oct 2022 Zelenskiy signed a decree on Tuesday formally declaring the prospect of any Ukrainian talks with Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin “impossible”, but leaving the door open to talks with Russia.

            Couple of problems for Z. The Russians say he is no longer legally president. But if it does come to negotiations it will be with hard liners Medvedev and Lavrov.

            • Is that not exactly what I said? The law is about Putin not Russia as you originally put.

              And I get that Putin thinks that he has some say about what is legal or not in Ukraine, but alas he does not. So I’m not really sure that is a problem either.

Comments are closed.