Ben Morgan: Russia takes Avdiivka, what next?
After months of fighting, Ukrainian troops are withdrawing from Avdiivka. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s campaign to engage Russia at sea and in depth continues with more drone attacks on oil infrastructure and another Russian ship sunk. In the US, Senators agreed to pass the Whitehouse’s emergency funding Bill to Congress. A step towards the US being able to release another US$ 60 billion of military aid to Ukraine.
Avdiivka
For four months Russia has been trying to take Avdiivka, a small town held by the 110th Separate Mechanised Brigade. This unit’s strength is approximately 2-3000 soldiers supported by about 30 tanks and 100 other armoured fighting vehicles. Since October 2023, the brigade has defended the town against relentless Russian attacks and on 13 February 2024 started to withdraw, supported by the elite 3rd Assault Brigade. This unit conducting spoiling attacks to slow down Russian pursuit letting the 110th Separate Mechanised Brigade ’break contact’ and withdraw.
This battle is interesting to study because it ‘pokes a pin’ in arguments that capturing ground means Russia is winning the war. The battle required Russia to keep a force of about 50,000 soldiers in the area. Conventional military wisdom is that an attacker needs at least a 3-1 advantage to be successful attacking defensive positions. In this battle, success required approximately a 20-1 advantage. An extremely high ratio that may demonstrate the impact of new technology; or simply poor Russian training. The ratio is important because it demonstrates how difficult it will be for Russia to take larger towns like Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, let alone a city like Kharkiv.
Further, the Centre for European Policy Analysis estimates that approximately 20,000 Russian soldiers have been killed, and 500 tanks destroyed during the battle. Ukrainian casualties are hard to estimate because they are not reported or published in open-source forums.
Avdiivka was always likely to fall, it is on a salient so can be engaged from three sides and Russia has over-whelming manpower and more artillery ammunition. However, Pyrrhic victories like Bakhmut and Avdiivka slowly attrit these advantages, they also indicate that Putin’s army is currently too small and poorly trained to capture a large Ukrainian city.
The wider campaign
Ukraine continues to defend against attacks along the whole front line, and is especially heavily engaged in the north-east near Kupiansk. Russia has a large force concentrated in this area and is aiming to capture the town as a prelude to either pushing west towards Kharkiv, or south towards the two remaining uncaptured cities in the Donbas; Kramatorsk and Sloviansk.
Last week, Caesar Kunikov a Russian amphibious ship was sunk by Ukraine near Altup on the southern tip of the Crimean Peninsula. The ship is a large landing ship and exploded immediately killing everybody on board indicating that it was carrying ammunition. The Russians have been using the Black Sea Fleet’s amphibious warfare ships to resupply their ground units. Tempting targets for Ukraine’s maritime strike assets.
Further, Ukraine’s attack on Russian oil infra-structure continues including attacking oil depots in Moscow and Kursk on 15 February 2024. The effect of these attacks is hard to judge but Ukraine’s ability to hit these targets demonstrates the weakness of Russian air defence.
Ukraine’s military leadership changes – Be ready for surprises
Last week we discussed President Zelenskyy’s removal of General Zaluzhnyi as commander of Ukraine’s armed forces. The new commander, General Oleksandr Syrskyi was born in Russia in 1965 and served in the Soviet army, fighting in Afghanistan. After the Soviet Union collapsed, he decided to remain in Ukraine and has served in the nation’s army, including fighting against Russia in 2014.
General Syrskyi, is often described as the natural successor to General Zaluzhnyi because of his competence and experience. He is renowned for detailed planning and for being a tough task master. News reports circulate that some Ukrainian soldiers describe him as a ‘butcher’ because of his willingness to sacrifice soldiers to achieve tactical objectives. He masterminded the defence of Bakhmut, that although successful in causing Russian casualties also meant accepting many Ukrainian casualties.
He appears to be a product of the Soviet military system, willing to accept casualties and focussed on the operational level of war. Sources describe his ability to mass artillery and use surprise to achieve fire supremacy. Likewise, the Kharkiv offensive demonstrated a Soviet style use of operational level surprise (i.e. drawing attention towards Kherson before attacking by surprise from Kharkiv) and tactics like envelopment. Accepting casualties is also a feature of the Soviet way of war.
General Syrskyi has stated that he intends to transition into defence on land, aiming to ‘exhaust’ the Russians. Many commentators interpret this statement and his appointment as evidence that Ukraine is settling into a defensive posture awaiting the outcome of the US election. However, if I was a Russian staff officer, I would be concerned about offensive action sooner because General Syrskyi has brought through a hand-picked team of young, battle-tested field commanders with him. Specifically, the following:
- Brigadier General Andriy Hnatov, former commander of 36th Marine Brigade, a unit that distinguished itself at the battles of Mariupol and Bakhmut. If is also the unit that led establishment of the Ukrainian bridgehead on the east side of the Dnipro River.
- Brigadier General Myhailo Drapaty, Joint Forces commander of the Kherson Sector. He distinguished himself by leading the initial defence of Kherson and Mykolaiv and then Kherson city’s eventual recapture. It is likely that he has a close relationship with Hnatov because they were both deeply involved in crossing the Dnipro in 2023.
- Brigadier General Ihor Skibyuk, Commander of the 80th Air Assault Brigade, an elite unit that traces its lineage to a Soviet-era unit. He fought against the Russians in 2014 and the 80th Air Assault Brigade was one of the units that stopped Russia’s 5th Guards Tank Army near the Siviersky-Donetsk River, inflicting heavy casualties 2022. The 80th then led the successful Kharkiv Offensive in September 2022.
- Colonel Vadym Sukharevsky, famous for taking command of the 59th Motorised Brigade, near Kherson in March 2022 and rebuilding the unit’s morale and combat capabilities. Earlier he served in Skibyuk’s 80th Air Assault Brigade. Sukharevsky’s 59th Motorised Brigade pioneered the use of strike drones especially in the counter battery role.
- Colonel Pavlo ‘Hunter’ Palisa, in America at Staff College in 2022, he returned to Ukraine and fought in the Donbas. Initially serving in the 5th Kyiv Assault Regiment before transferring to the 93rd Mechanized Brigade. During his tenure the 93rd Mechanised Brigade spent months defending Bakhmut.
Studying the careers of these officers, it is apparent that they are likely to have known each other and all played pivotal leadership roles in the land campaign. Further, we see innovation for instance the 5th Kyiv Assault Brigade’s use of innovative infantry assault tactics, drones being used to hunt and kill Russian artillery by 59th Motorised Brigade or the crossing of the Dnipro River by 36th Marine Brigade. Additionally, Ukraine’s military is sometimes weakened by corruption and General Syrskyi and his young commanders are reported to have high integrity. It is also interesting that the commanders publicly reported are all from the army, the service that has currently suffered a significant setback. It may indicate that the performance of air and maritime commanders is seen as producing good results, meaning there is no need for leadership changes.
However, a group of young, battle-tested and innovative leaders, promoted and brought together under a new leader should be exciting interest on Russian staff planning teams. Being trained in the Soviet-era, General Syrskyi will understand maskirovka, the Russian term for strategic deception. So, we need to treat statements about committing to defence cautiously, especially when he is building such a capable group of young leaders around him. General Syrskyi may have bigger plans on land than many people appreciate.
Ring trading, how the White House continues to support Ukraine
Ukraine’s emergency aid is still stuck in the US political system, the Senate approving the emergency aid bill for congressional debate last week. Congress is currently on its two-week winter recess and when it returns, must immediately debate stopgap budget legislation to make sure that a shutdown of federal government is avoided. The politicking is dangerously up-productive as partisan political chauvinism trumps common sense. Many commentators are concerned that the emergency aid bill will die in Congress. I still optimistic but think the politicking will continue for a few months yet.
However, Ukraine, will not collapse in that time. It still has ammunition, expending approximately 2000 rounds a day in a rationed programme to conserve ammunition. And, the White House is furiously using the President’s ‘excess defence articles authority’ to procure military supplies for Ukraine. This piece of legislation authorises the President to ‘write off’ surplus military equipment. The equipment can then be traded to a 3rd party, in exchange for that country providing equipment to Ukraine. For instance, Ecuador recently agreed to supply Ukraine with military equipment in exchange for replacement with more modern US equipment. A process called ‘ring trading.’
‘Ring trading’ started with Germany trading modern equipment to Greece, Czech Republic and Slovenia in exchange for them giving old equipment to Ukraine. The US will be able to provide enormous support using this system, a point reinforced by Vladimir Putin’s furious reaction to the Ecuador deal.
‘Ring trading’ cannot provide the large-scale industrial support the US$ 60 billion aid package plans to but it does ensure that Ukraine is able to maintain its campaign in the short-to-medium term.
Summary
The war is entering its third year this month and although Avdiivka’s fall is a victory for Putin, it is a Pyrrhic victory that confirms the combat power Russia will require to take any larger city. If it takes 50,000 soldiers (roughly 10% of the 470,000 soldiers Russia has in Ukraine) and four months to capture a small town defended by a couple of thousand Ukrainian soldiers, then Putin has little hope of pushing deeper into Ukraine with his current force structure. Russia has 1200km of border to secure and Russian advances face fortresses like Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, twenty times larger than Avdiivka.
Essentially, Putin’s current force structure has culminated. It can maintain small local offensives but it is unlikely that Russia can take any larger towns or cities in the short to medium-term. Instead, it seems likely that Putin will focus on winning the election to create conditions for a larger scale mobilisation that puts more force on the ground around the US election. The Russian defence industry is mobilised, 40% of GDP is committed and now he just needs the manpower. So post-election, expect to see increased conscription and mobilisation of manpower in Russia.
Meanwhile Ukraine is hurting Russia, the drone attacks on its oil industry are incessant. The naval campaign is successfully driving the Russian’s out of the western Black Sea and allowing Ukraine to maintain trade revenue. On land there is a shake-up of land forces and promotion for a new generation of leaders. Ukraine still maintains a bridgehead across the Dnipro River, is successfully degrading Russian air superiority over Crimea and Kherson and new F 16s will start arriving from mid-year.
It may be optimistic but it seems that Ukraine may be creating the conditions for a transition to offensive operations on land sooner than many people expect. In fact, Ukraine may be forced to act aggressively because of the uncertainty created by the US election.
Ben Morgan is a bored Gen Xer, a former Officer in NZDF and TDBs Military Blogger – his work is on substack
Spin from Ben to cover up a catastrophic defeat. This will keep happening, rinse repeat. Does Ben want this to carry on to the last Ukrainian?
Putins support comes from Russia. Ukraine’s support comes from 16,000 kilometres away. Who’s in the defensive position again?
Or you to the last Russian?
Ben has been writing about the withdrawal from Avdiivka for months so you need to look up the definition of “catastrophic” since using it where it is clearly not applicable does not reflect well on you.
Bonnie, I don’t care. If you don’t double, triple check all reports and merely believe Ben that’s fine.
Yes, just like Zelensky does. There’s no doubt that Putin cares a lot more about preserving Ukrainian lives than these evil scum do.
Interesting that that the Azov motorized unit was used to cover the retreat. It seems quite plausible that Zelensky is trying to get as many nationalists killed as possible to reduce the chance that they overthrow/kill him after he surrenders.
‘There’s no doubt that Putin cares a lot more about preserving Ukrainian lives’ – One of the most deluded comments that I have ever come across.
NJ – you are just spinning hackneyed phrases. What is it that drives you to your misanthropic views? Why do human rights have no place in your vocabulary? And Putin’s latest atrocity will be explained with the constant whataboutism which you trot out ad infinitum.
Avdiivka, the last Ukrainian stronghold that for almost ten years, was regularly bombing its, formerly, own people in the Donbass – especially the Auckland sized Donetsk city. The locals can finally breathe a lot easier.
I think you’ll find Ecuador has reversed it’s decision
It’s astonishing really, how many people of low morals and low intelligence are duped by Putin’s disinformation. The kindest description of the man is a despot – no-one that pretends to enlightened values can support him.
The war has been allowed to drag on, and Putin has bet the house on a Trump victory. I hope someone in Europe is doing the math – it’s always cheaper to defeat your enemy before he crosses your borders.
I’m not at all keen on Putin
But I still believe Russia was threatened by increasing Nato encroachment and attempts to break Russia open for western plunder
I expect that Western and Russian plundering are arguments that need to be balanced by many of the small neighbouring countries. The process is different, and the Russian one leans toward more authoritarian local politics. Georgia, for example, showed some interest in joining the EU and presumably NATO, at least prior to the Citrus War. They presently have a Russia leaning leader, but he is encountering significant unrest over his position.
With Finland’s entry to NATO, they may look to reclaim Karelia as Russia falls apart, and, to be sure there will likely be a rush of investors (disaster capitalists) that have not read their William Gerhardie, poised to descend on post-Putin Russia.
There is little doubt the current Russian administration is threatened by NATO. So too was Hitler as Allied forces closed on the German heartlands. In that case however, Germany came out of it rather well.
Everyone interprets history according to their own world view.
I admire a man who can adjust his world view without his own sense of self collapsing
Here’s Craig Murray, who’s come to view the SMO differently
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2024/02/putin-history-and-the-mystery-of-national-identity/
Not entirely approving of Russia’s actions , he shows a willingness to concede that action may have been justified in some respects
Less black and white than most of the zealots on view here
Craig Murray is a despicable running dog Putin apologist, with neither the sense to formulate decent analysis nor the moral capacity to understand that repeating the factually incorrect propaganda of a genocidal dictator is in itself a wrong.
You seem to suffer from the same vice.
Oh god Stuart /.You are like some kind of caricature with that language .Like something out of the Soviet Union, written badly on old newsprint
Craig is anything but.You will be saying Assange is a running dog traitor who needs to be strung up from the nearest lamp post next
Yes, Crag is antything but a reliable source – a poorly informed supine consumer of Kremlin dysinformatsia with no credibility whatsoever.
Oh the old fall back putting your prejudices in my mouth – a more promising strategy to be sure than trying to argue your indefensible support for Putin on his merits, but still ultimately unenlightened, and doomed – just like your authoritarian hero.
Quite so Stuart. Agreed.
No. Historians do not interpret the world through their own world view. Historians rely on primary source documents which are the most reliable sources available. Oral sources are far less reliable.
The Putin supporters do not understand proper historical method. They could not identify a reputable historian if they tried. Very few academics take the pro Putin line. There are some such as Richard Sakwa and the late Stephen Cohen who do but they can’t hold a candle to the powerful intellects of Timothy Snyder, Anne Applebaum or Mark Galeotti.
Never heard the statement that history is written by the victors?
Sigh, the kids these days
In which case PhuD you are by your own definition a piss poor historian.
THe ones of low morals and intelligence are the ones that support the side that is happy with killing.
Russia didn’t want dead Ukrainians and Russians. The US did.
Expert commentators were calling out the Nato ploy and inevitable Russian response a decade ago.
Meh – the Russians are happy to kill even their own. They wouldn’t blink at killing you.
Well said Stuart! They are of low morals and low intelligence! They obviously hanker for a strongman leader and I would wager that all of them would be for capital punishment. And they would be the first victims in a Stalinist state.
And right on Que here comes the clapping seal called Ovod
Crawl back to your hole FG. And wallow in your own stupidity.
Spoken like a true libertarian loser.
More pointless propaganda… When are the, so called “experts” in the west going to grow a pair, and report the truth..
Avdiivka is/was the most heavily fortified. and defended spot in that region, and as a consequence, the Russians have taken a methodical, and less damaging approach…
What I find rather disquieting, is the portrayal of what is a tactic designed to minimize casualties, on both sides, and that will be, and always was going to be, successful…
I grow weary of the delusional fairy tales we are being fed by our “experts”… So right now, my impression is of just another shill making the “correct” noises, and even after the war is lost, will continue to misrepresent what that actually means…
So I will tell you.. PEACE!!!! And when/if the Americans can shed the cloak of murderous psychopathy, the rest of the world will have a chance to resume a rational, evolutionary development…
Any bets on the yanks waking up before they are pushed aside, and consigned to the dustbin of history? That would be a sucker bet, as the yanks are every bit as bloody minded as the Pomgolians were/are, and therefore destined to do the stupid thing every time, and leave untold damage in their wake…
Ukraine is going to turn the tide any day. Any day now.
Meanwhile, here’s a report from someone who knows what he is talking about –
“The General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation managed to carry out the operation to capture Avdeyevka with minimal losses, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu has said.
Offensive operations after the liberation of the city continue to the west, 72 square kilometers have been liberated, the minister emphasized.
The operation of the liberation of the city will be included in the textbooks of the Ministry of Defense, Shoigu noted.”
https://sputnikglobe.com/20240220/russian-general-staff-carried-out-operation-to-take-control-of-avdeyevka-with-minimal-losses-shoigu-1116891879.html
From Martyn (Bradbury) today – looks like Antforce & friends should go fuck themselves:
“I am Socialist Left as fuck and despise the American Military Industrial Complex, but I have never understood the spineless devotion of Putin apologists!
Putin is a fucking authoritarian thug whose unspeakable brutal violence marks him as a brutal dictator. His needless war with Ukraine is an abomination and he has assassinated anyone he likes.
Fuck Putin and fuck anyone defending him.
I don’t give a shit about the Donbas provocations, that doesn’t justify a war where he is minced up 370 000 of his own fucking men for a totally preventable war!”
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2024/02/21/the-liberal-agenda-can-jon-stewart-save-america-from-woke-millennials-trump-and-themselves/
A totally preventable war…you got that right.But apparently a neutral Ukraine and semi autonomy for Majority Russian areas like Donetsk and Luhansk (while remaining in Ukrainian borders )was such an abominable notion that 100s of thousands of young men had to lose their lives.
Apparently the likes of you are happy to sacrifice that many sons ,fathers and husbands
All I’m hearing is the moaning from a cotery of losers who have believed the bullshit Western supremacist propaganda for the last two years. Reality hurts. Throw some more invective.
President Putin and History..
well on historyinmemes President Putin contributes to a maths lesson –
https://twitter.com/historyinmemes/status/1760224589844820395
Bravo Lord Cameron – Putin’s Russia is where the Nazis are. Not Ukraine. Would the Quislings on this site keep supporting Putin if World War 3 starts? Would they risk incarceration?
That from PhuD this sites resident neo Nazi apologist. So fekkin boring.
Fo Knee Jerk
Two of the best Russian commentators on YouTube are: Vlad Vexler in UK and Konstantin Samoilov in Tashkent. I ally myself with them and my cousin in California feels the same. We are virulently anti-Putin, pro-Ukraine and pro-Russia. After all our fathers were born in Russia. The Putinists on this site don’t know Russia. They think they do but they are sadly deluded.
PhuD if your forefathers were slung out by the ghastly (and I mean ghastly) Soviets I’d suggest both parties were done a favour. WTF makes you think that they would want you back?
Welcome to Ovods echo chamber. There’s the issue right there confirmation bias from a “Russian expert. You have a profound ability to ignore Putin because of hatred without looking past the person and listening to the message with an open mind Kudos to Putin for warning the West for decades of their encroachment towards Russian borders breaking agreements to the contrary. PHD in Russian studies, yeah right. You fail degrees 101.
FG you have a very nasty chip on that shoulder of yours.
Avdiivka is the same size as Gisborne.
For all those Putin apologists, here’s Paul Street on Putin;
“I have nothing but contempt for the authoritarianism and corruption of Russia’s fascistic strongman Putin, a hero and agent of the fascist right across the world. (He just granted an interview to the leading United States neofascist propagandist Tucker Carlson.)
He’s a blood-soaked war criminal responsible for mass slaughter in Chechnya, Georgia, Syria, and Africa, and for brutal repression in his heavily policed home country.
He’s a loathsome tyrant running a crooked and revanchist oligarchy atop a savagely oppressive classist, racist and patriarchal sociopolitical order that ought to be overthrown in a new Russian socialist revolution.
The Russian coffins that have come back from Ukraine have been disproportionately filled by oppressed ethnic minorities, especially Mongol Buryats (from southeastern Siberia) and Tuvans (Turkic ethnic group indigenous to Siberia ) and soldiers from economically disadvantaged regions in Siberia and the Russian Far East. Soldiers from favored Moscow and St. Petersburg have been largely spared the role of cannon fodder in Putin’s invasion.
All of which is quite terrible.
Geopolitical “leftists” who think that there’s something radical and noble about post-Soviet Russia are despicable buffoons.”
https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/02/22/500000-dead-and-maimed-in-ukraine/
Even though in this article he puts the blame for the Ukraine mess squarely on NATO’s expansion and the West’s co-opting of the Zelensky government, there is still a serious argument to be made, and one that is made by a number of contemporary historians, that without Putin’s distorted view of history and his hubris over restoring the ‘great Russian Empire’, this war would not have happened.