Ukraine: The Counter-Offensive is Countered

Geopolitical ambitions receive a dose of military and economic reality

[Image: a funeral service in western Ukraine. From the NYT report with photography by Brendan Hoffman.]

Published: 2023-06-22

Updated 2023-06-22: More sources. Ritter x 2.

Updated 2023-06-24: Added the latest interview between Napolitano and Col. Macgregor.

---

The Spring Offensive

The much vaunted "Spring Offensive" by the AFU (Armed Forces of Ukraine) finally arrived in summer and has fizzled into a nothing. Those who listen to rational military experts predicted this outcome from the get-go.

While various skirmishes along the line of contact and a protracted battle for the city of Artyomovsk/Bakhmut played out, Russian forces were establishing their defense lines for the long announced push. The already demoralized AFU was being equipped with many different types of artillery and mobile armored units (tanks, and personnel carriers). The training to use this varied collection of equipment was never going to be enough, let alone the logistics required to support them. Ammunition was in short supply, and dumps of it were being regularly destroyed by Russian forces during the lead up. The AFU were short on air cover, having almost no airforce and less and less mobile anti-air batteries as time progressed.

Russia's defensive doctrine is two or more lines of defense designed to inhibit vehicular movement; tank traps (dragon's teeth or ditches), mines etc.. In front of this lines an area of contention in which Russia's forward units, or the line of contact reside.

During the three odd weeks since the "offensive" began, around 7 locations have been probed. Russia has withdrawn from the zone of contention when required. The AFU's vehicles and thus personnel have been caught in the minefields and other traps and suffered heavily for these attacks. They have yet to reach and hold any point at the first major line of defense. The AFU have achieved nothing but the loss of men and equipment. Russia has also lost some of both, but less and they have more troops and reserves. They still hold the advantage in numbers, ammunition, logistics, air support and air defense.

The attacks were folly and have been shown to be so. So endeth the "counter-offensive".

Both Col. Daniel Davis and another high ranking ex-military interviewee on Judging Freedom described the encouragement of the US and the action instructed by the AFU leadership as criminal. The crime is commuting an insufficient number of troops who were insufficiently trained and equipped, lacking air support of cover to attack the Russian lines which were well prepared in a formation which the defensive forces have trained for years and years to understand and utilize. It was suicidal.

I believe it will also come to be seen as the turning point in this conflict.

Politics and Media

Before we get to that, lets look at the political and media dynamics which were in play in the lead up to this fatally flawed operation. To see the evil at play, return to the narratives deployed last summer when the AFU did have some success in Kharkiv and Kherson. In both cases the media portrayed these successful operations as "game changers". Thousands of square kilometres of territory previously occupied by Russian and allied militia forces were recaptured and the media crowed about the AFU successes.

However, more sober military analysts, and Col. Macgregor stands out, were declaring that the successes should be taken with some caution. In the north around Kharkiv, the lines were thinly held and not by regular soldiers but often by lesser trained forces like police or border defense units. When attacked they withdrew rapidly, while suffering some losses, and even abandoned equipment as they fell back to defensible lines. US intelligence had been used to identify the weaknesses and NATO combined arms tactics were used by the then well trained and equipped AFU. They got through the perimeter defense and caused the mass withdrawal.

What the Russians did was sacrifice land and some equipment to preserve their forces. The message from Macgregor and others was that land is only valuable if it gives you a tactical advantage. In warfare, what matters are your dynamic assets, those that can move and force an enemy to respond. These fall under the traditional names of forces, Army, Navy (at sea), Airforce, Marines etc.. While the AFU did retake these territories, they also suffered heavily for it, being exposed on the steppes and being attacked by artillery and from the air. They traded mobile assets for a static asset with little tactical advantage.

In the south, at Kherson, under the leadership of a new single Russian general responsible for the entire operation in Ukraine, Russia defended the capital city of the oblast for weeks inflicting horrible destruction on the advancing AFU forces. There was a risk, if the AFU succeeded in various areas that logistics for the resupply of Kherson City would become difficult and dangerous. The HIMARS attack on the bridge connecting the city with the left bank was a hallmark of this. The Russian general commanded a withdrawal, which the Russian forces executed effectively and efficiently, leaving the city devoid of useful equipment. This occurred after they had provided opportunity to residents who wished to also leave to do so.

Here the tragedy of a civil war is exposed where persons with strong connection to both their location or home and one side of the conflict are torn between the two; to stay and risk revenge being exacted upon them, as had happened repeatedly in other towns, or to leave with the Russian forces and abandon their homes.

The AFU did retake the undefended Kherson and the media again crowed about it with various photo-ops being run. More astute reporters also captured images of civilians being strapped with zip-ties to light posts, akin to being put in stockades in a medieval town's market.

It was these "successes" which fueled the drive to re-arm and train new units of the AFU so that they may be victorious again. Therein lies the lie. Both of these victories were strategic withdrawals, one planned and the other forced. Neither had inflicted heavy loses in men or materiel on the Russian and allied forces. Meanwhile, on the line of contact, the AFU was losing at a ratio of between 4:1 and 7:1. A sober assessment showed that Russia had changed its military strategy and was encamped for a long attritional war after the failure to achieve an early political settlement due largely to US representatives, then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson first among them, demanding that Ukraine fight on.

But, why?

US Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin answered that for the world early on. This conflict in Ukraine was designed to weaken Russia. The other parts of the hybrid war strategies were the economic attack, largely launched by a bunch of brainless and ideologically driven Brussels bureaucrats, and the psyop designed to cause political challenges in Russia. Both of these hybrid tactics failed utterly. Russia's economy withstood the attacks, much to the surprise of their own analysts. Internally, Russia could see the war for what it was, a western installed and supported regime infested with a bunch of Nazi's who wanted to run a genocide in Donbas. Russia has a particular experience with fighting Nazis and was never going to either abandon their relatives in Donbas or turn against their political leadership who was opposing the genocidal Nazis.

A Triple-Failed Strategy

This meant that by the coming of the Winter, all that was left was the military campaign which Russia was winning via stabilizing it into a war of attrition fought largely with artillery. And this is exactly why you do not fight a land war with Russia. Tens of millions of artillery shells, still in storage from the Cold War era were trucked to the front lines. The AFU reported that the volume of artillery exchanges were 1:6 against them in an artillery war. Thus, the 1:4 to 1:7 loss ratioes.

All of this was hidden from the populations of the west who rely on the MSM for their information. Not only had the economic and social unrest campaigns failed, but the military one was too. This brutal truth was exposed in the US intelligence ("Spring Offensive-Gate") leaks which were authored at the end of the winter: huge loses, lack of air defense, low morale, weakened units etc..

But the political leadership kept banging the drum because the military contractors who fund them (in the US) were making plenty of dollars. Additionally, the Biden family are so up to their ears in corruption in Ukraine that any of that coming out would be politically disastrous. There are no doubt others in this category too. So, onwards with a losing war.

And now, that war is lost. They can't hide it anymore. As is often the case, it is economics which will end the conflict.

Economic Reality

As noted recently, Germany have said that not only can't they replace Leopard tanks lost during the failed offensive, but they also cannot afford to fund more of this folly. Macron may be an opportunist, but he can also see the writing on the wall. Poland and the little Baltic states can cheer on all they want, but they can't afford this either. The jig is up.

As I recently declared on the week 24 podcast, Ukraine will be defeated not by Russia, they don't have to. Ukraine will be defeated by Europe, a Europe of Germany and France facing the political reality which comes from the inescapable economic reality in which their people find themselves.

Sources

Col. Macgregor [from the interview below]:

What we can say with aboslute certain is that the Ukrainians have lost almost:

280 tanks, perhaps 300 - 400 armored fighting vehicles, as well as the 15 000 dead. [earlier he mentions at least that many, i.e 15 000, wounded]

That's absolutely certain. ... [Napolitano asks, just in the offensive?]

Yes, just in the offensieve."

Ukraine War - Is Moscow Lying？ w⧸Col Doug Macgregor, Napolitano interviews Macgregor, Judging Freedom, 2023-06-23

Western Officials Say Ukrainian Counteroffensive “Not Meeting Expectations”, Dave DeCamp, Antiwar, 2023-06-22

• No shit, CNN! And late to the party, as ever.

On The Failure Of The Ukrainian Counterattack, b., Moon Of Alabama, 2023-06-16

U.S. Admits Defeat In War On Russia And China, b, Moon Of Alabama, 2023-06-20

Ukraine Slow Offensive⧸ U.S. Retired Generals Delusional - w⧸SCOTT RITTER, Napolitano interviews Ritter, Judging Freedom, 2023-06-22

Ukraine’s Offensive： What’s Happened, What's Next？ Col Daniel Davis, Napolitano interviews Davis, Judging Freedom, 2023-06-19

Digging Up Old Graves to Make Room for Newly Fallen Soldiers, Megan Specia (photos by Brendan Hoffman), New York Times, 2023-06-19

Scott Ritter Interview： Ukraine Counteroffensive Analysis and More, Medhurst interviews Ritter, Richard Medhurst, 2023-06-22

• 00:18:45 for the start of the interview.

Culture

Roger Waters - The Gunner's Dream, Roger Waters, Youtube channel, uploaded 2021-01-18