- Hubert Walas
Full pool.
A stalled operation - this is the shortest way to describe what has been happening on the battlefield over the past several days. The character of the fighting more and more resembles a positional than a maneuver war, which the Russians wanted. From the Russian point of view, the only solution that could move the entire war campaign forward is mass mobilization. Will the Kremlin resort to this ultimate move?
The main concertation of troops and efforts of the Russian military remains the same - it is the southeast of the country and the line of Izyum, Volnovakha, Mariupol, Kherson, and Mykolaiv. In the Donbas region, the Ukrainians are in danger of encirclement. Sending reinforcements to defend Mariupol is probably impossible. The nearest Ukrainian forces are 100km away, so the relief of the city would involve great effort. On the other hand, after the 6th successful attack on the Chernobabjivka airfield near Kherson, Russian forces began a retreat from Nikolaev towards Kherson. The attack resulted in the death of the 6th Russian general, but this time the highest-ranking one - 6th Army General Andrei Mordvichev. The Russians are losing a lot of high-ranking commanders in this war. This is due to the superiority of the Ukrainians in real-time reconnaissance, aided effectively by the use of a fleet of unmanned drones and the support of NATO, whose reconnaissance aircraft patrol the west and south of Ukraine.
Local tactical battles are being fought across the country, with the Russians are focusing primarily on reinforcing their own positions and replenishing losses, but supply convoys continue to be successfully attacked by Ukrainian forces.
Many independent experts tend to believe that as a result of very high human and equipment losses the Russian forces have lost their offensive capabilities. The Russians are unable to push forward effectively, while the 'strategic pause' has continued for another day in a row. Replenishing losses is a very big problem for the Russians, which is why breakneck ideas such as pulling in Syrian mercenaries are coming up. Besides, the Russians recruit, among others, on portals resembling ‘craigslist’, where they offer attractive salaries for participating in military exercises. The broke fools who do not understand the gravity of the situation will be sent to the front as cannon fodder. Further, the Belarusian forces have not joined the fighting. Although the probability of their involvement in the Pinsk or Kyiv direction is growing. However, there is no shortage of opinions that such a move would be the beginning of the end for the regime in Minsk. Forced to fight, the poorly trained Belarusian troops would suffer heavy losses and have a tendency to desert or even go over to the enemy side. Thus, the Belarusian legions would grow in strength, and later on, they could become an armed element, necessary for the overthrow of Lukashenka.
The depletion of Russian offensive power is the consequence of a fundamental error in calculation and planning. Russia began this war with an unfavorable ratio of attacking to defending troops. According to classical military art, for an attack to have the best chance of success, there must be a minimum of three attackers per one soldier of the defending forces. In this case, not only is Russia not even close to such a ratio, but in practice, at the time of the attack, the Russians had fewer forces at their disposal than the Ukrainians. Roughly speaking, we can say that there were 300,000 Ukrainians waiting for 200,000 attacking Russians.
Plus they were much more determined and ready to defend their country. Moreover, the disproportion in the number of soldiers, which is unfavorable for the Russians, is growing in real-time - apart from the number of losses, the Ukrainians are conscripting more reservists into their ranks, as well as soldiers of the Foreign Legion. For some of them, this is not just a fight to defend Ukraine's freedom, but potentially a fight for the freedom of their home country. This is the case, for example, with the Belarusian troops.
The initial Russian advance due to the element of surprise, superior firepower, and general thrust pushed the Ukrainians back in the first days of the war, but after 2 weeks the initial Russian advantage had worn off. And if the army is unable to sustain the advance, it must go on the defensive while keeping the logistical lines open. Logistics, as we have pointed out in previous material, remains the queen of the battlefield. Whoever can best secure their own lines and harass the supply lines of the enemy - wins.
Trent Telenko, a previously cited expert on battlefield logistics, even hypothesizes that in late April and early May, the Ukrainian army will be able to counterattack in any operational direction, because the Russian fleet of supply trucks will become inoperable - not only as a result of Ukrainian attacks but perhaps most importantly as a result of its dire technical condition. The Ukrainians, of course, suffer from this as well, but it is much easier for them as they operate on shorter lines of communication and in their own territory, and the local population is helpful to them.
The topic of a NATO peacekeeping mission in western Ukraine remains open. The issue was raised by the Polish delegation during the only foreign diplomatic visit to war-torn Kyiv so far. Poland will officially propose the measure at a NATO meeting in Brussels on Thursday. Unofficial reports say that 7 NATO countries - Poland, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Denmark have tentatively expressed support for the idea. Of course, the most important will be the position of the U.S., which is the only country with sufficient capabilities to provide comprehensive anti-access protection to western Ukraine. Nevertheless, this would be seen as an escalation, so making such a move would require strong political will in Washington.
Against the Поэof events on the front, the topic of peace negotiations recurs. In recent days, we have received information about a potential "breakthrough", which was supposedly approached by both sides. However, there is no indication of this. All the moves that Russia is making contradict the alleged breakthrough. Moscow's soft approach to the peace talks is primarily aimed at deterring Western sanctions.
Moscow's political goals, given the mediocre outcome of the war campaign, to say the least, must be changing - from an initial plan to seize Kyiv and completely subjugate Ukraine, to perhaps the annexation of the southeastern part of the country or even just the recognition by Kyiv of Crimea and the separatist republics as part of the Russian Federation and some political concessions.
However, little is known about how exactly the Ukrainians are negotiating. Is it all about the cessation of hostilities at any cost and pricy concessions to Russia? There are growing indications that this is not the case and Kyiv is playing for the full stakes. This may be suggested by two statements, by one person - Oleksiy Arestovich. An adviser to President Volodymyr Zelensky. The first statement is over two years old and is worth listening to in its entirety, because of the prophecy it carries.
In summary, President Zelenski's closest circle, or at least part of it, realized that a major war with Russia is inevitable and is the cost that Ukraine has to bear to ensure its independence in the coming decades. Otherwise, Russian annexation is only a matter of time. It is important to note that Arestovich says with great confidence and openness that war is far preferable to submission and must be won. This tells us two things - Kyiv has probably been quietly preparing for this war for at least 2 years. This would explain, in a way, why the Ukrainian army is putting up such strong resistance, being in a very difficult position. Secondly, Arestovich's statement gives us a picture of what the Ukrainians are fighting for - it's not just about stopping the war, regardless of the costs. The war has its value also for Kyiv - it's about breaking free from the Kremlin's leash and about a bright future for the next generations of Ukrainians, perhaps even for hundreds of years. This is a war that is supposed to be the real foundation of Ukraine's statehood. Therefore, this war cannot just not be lost, it must be won on Ukraine’s own terms. And despite the enormous cost to Ukrainian society, there seems to be a transnational consensus for such a course of negotiations.
And here a confirmation of this view can be found in Arestovich's second statement, this time from recent days, during the daily war briefing.
Ukrainians can stay calm, because the Ukrainian state will not recognize conditions worse than those before February 24. Kyiv wants recognition of the 1991 borders, and therefore together with Crimea, Donbas, and Luhansk. And it certainly will not agree to any form of dependence on Moscow. In a word, Ukraine is fighting for everything.
Meanwhile, the increasingly audacious attacks on civilian targets - such as the theater in Mariupol, or above all the centrally organized campaign in support of the war on Luzhniki in Moscow - indicates that the Russians are playing for time and mobilizing internally. Perhaps they are preparing the ground for a general mobilization.
How would it be received? Certainly not unanimously positive. There is no doubt that currently in Russia a large part of the public supports the war against Ukraine and actively engages in the Kremlin's propaganda. But on the other hand, it should be remembered that pre-war Levada polls indicated that 62% of the Russian public was afraid of war. One supports war differently when one sees it only on television, and differently when it reaches out to one's father, brother, uncle, or son. On top of that, there are already grotesque scenes of Russian cities where the local population is almost fighting over basic goods like sugar. Something that may be a return to the years of youth for the older generation of Russians, for the younger generation is certainly a shock. The fact is that with the invasion of Ukraine, the Russian leadership has thrown the life plans of the entire next young generation of Russians into the trash. And even the immediate cessation of hostilities will not change this, because the trust of international corporations and Western governments in the Russian Federation has hit rock bottom, and it will take another 20 or 30 years before they again regain trust in Moscow and want to invest their money on Russian soil.
Therefore, a great exodus of the young Russian generation is currently underway. Estimates say that it may already be as many as 200 000 to 500 000 people. As Peter Zeihan points out, this may not be considered many in a country of 140 million people, but these people are usually young, healthy, and qualified. Russia, on the other hand, is a country of old, unhealthy, and unqualified people. Thus, Russia is losing its perhaps most important resource - brainpower.
Of course, there remains the last direction to salvage the situation - China. If it were not for Beijing, many in Washington would already be opening champagnes to celebrate the resolution of the Russian problem. Nevertheless, China is wriggling in the current situation like an irritated dragon, trying not to stop supporting Moscow, and on the other hand, presenting itself to the West as a neutral state supporting peace. In the previous episode, we presented an analysis by the Chinese Hu Wei, which, logically presented the Chinese dilemma and a potential way out, that is cutting itself off from Putin, yet it is, unfortunately, unlikely to be realized. China is closer to the view published on Weibo by Chinese retired opinion leader Hu Xijin, as presented on Twitter by Han Yang, who also translated Hu's text.
Firstly, China and Russia share a perspective on Taiwan, Xinjiang, Tibet, and Hong Kong. Expanding on this theme, here is our insertion - we can say that they also share ideological issues of governance - thus authoritarian rule, without a sentiment for a single individual.
As Hu goes on to write, China is the main competitor to the US, not Russia. And the war with Russia gives China time to catch its breath after the brutal trade war initiated by Trump. As the U.S. sorts out Russia, it will return to a fierce rivalry with China. Two powers opposing US hegemony are better than one.
Here is our comment - no one should have any illusions that in Beijing, and even in Moscow, the current war is seen as a great proxy war for the order we have in the world. Specifically, it is a war against the United States, which is in practice the only guarantor of that order. Even Lavrov himself said this, quote: "This is not about Ukraine at all, but the world order. The current crisis is a fateful, epoch-making moment in modern history. It reflects the battle over what the world order will look like" This may be the only true sentence that Sergey Lavrov has said in recent months.
Hu Xijin continues in this vein. The strategic alliance between Russia and China is mutually beneficial and provides deterrence against Japan and Korea. If the U.S. manages to drive a wedge between Moscow and Beijing, we will return to the days when we were both anti-American and anti-Russian. Some ask why not repair relations with the US. The American goal is to make us a client state like Japan or Korea. So that we would be a source of cheap products. China will avoid direct conflict with the US but will use force to coexist peacefully. Russia is the most important partner to achieve this, so we cannot abandon Putin during this war, it is our long-term national interest. End of text.
In practice, this is what China thinks, so a breakthrough in relations between Moscow and Beijing is unlikely. At the same time, the Chinese will issue signals testifying to their supposed neutrality, but this is basically a cover-up to hide their real intentions, not to expose themselves to sanctions and the anger of democratic countries - primarily Europe and the USA. That is why we sometimes hear a pro-Ukrainian statement by a single Chinese diplomat or an unbiased war report in one of the communist state media. However, for internal use, the Russian side is always at the forefront and an anti-Western message is promoted, whereas Ukraine is regarded as a vassal state of the USA.
