Tag: russian army

Ukraine special forces footage appears to show Bakhmut battle

Post By World , , , , ,

Ukraine has released what it says is helmet-camera footage from its special forces clearing a Russian position in Bakhmut. Kyiv says it has stopped the enemy and pushed it back, with President Zelenskyy telling his people the Russians are mentally prepared for defeat.

Ukrainian military commanders said on Friday that their troops had recaptured more territory from Russian forces at the scene of the war’s longest and bloodiest battle, for the eastern city of Bakhmut, but it wasn’t clear if this marked the start of Kyiv’s long-expected counteroffensive.

In a separate incident, two-long range Ukrainian rockets hit what Russian described as administrative buildings of two defunct enterprises in Russian-occupied Luhansk in the east.

Russia’s Defence Ministry, meanwhile, said Ukrainian forces had stepped up attacks north of the Bakhmut region while denying speculation by Russian military bloggers that the Kyiv forces had achieved “defence breakthroughs.”

The two kilometres of territory that Ukrainian forces south of Bakhmut retook this week represent a significant gain and will protect an important supply chain, according to commanders of Ukraine’s 3rd Separate Assault Brigade, a special forces unit that led the attack, releasing what it said was helmet camera footage from one its soldiers.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he met with the top military commanders on Friday, noting that Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi reported his forces “stopped the enemy and even pushed him back in some directions.”

In his nightly address to the Ukrainian people, Zelenskyy praised his troops and noted the low morale of the Russian forces.

“The occupiers are already mentally prepared for defeat. They have already lost this war in their minds,” he said. “We must push them every day so that their sense of defeat turns into their retreat, their mistakes, their losses.”

In a statement on Telegram on Friday, Deputy Defence Minister Hanna Maliar confirmed that Ukrainian forces gained ground around Bakhmut, reiterating statements from military commanders earlier this week.

In Washington, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said the US has assessed that Bakhmut remains contested territory.

“Ukrainians have not given up their defence of Bakhmut and the Russians haven’t given up their attempts to take Bakhmut,” Kirby said. “Every single day, the lines change back and forth. I mean, sometimes block by block.”

The US maintains that Bakhmut has limited strategic value but that Russia has absorbed an enormous loss of troops and weaponry in the battle for the former salt-mining town that has been grinding on for eight months.

Yevgeny Prigozhin, the millionaire owner of Russia’s private military contractor Wagner who is a frequent critic of the Russian military, slammed it again for losing ground around Bakhmut and exposing his forces battling for the city.

In a video statement Friday, Prigozhin mocked the Russian Defence Ministry’s report claiming that its forces regrouped to take more favourable positions, saying they effectively fled and “our flanks are crumbling.”

He warned that the Ukrainian forces have reclaimed key heights around the city and effectively unblocked the key supply link to Bakhmut. Prigozhin again accused the military leadership of refusing to provide sufficient ammunition to Wagner.

“You must immediately stop lying,” Prigozhin said, addressing Russia’s military leaders. “If you fled, you must prepare new defensive lines.”

Prigozhin – who seems to use harsh criticism to pressure the Kremlin for more support and improve his stature – alleged the Defence Ministry’s failure to protect Wagner’s flanks amounted to high treason and could result in a “great tragedy” for Russia.

Apparently denying Prigozhin’s claim of abandonment, Defence Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said Russian airborne units are still supporting ground forces to “stop the attempts of the Ukrainian armed forces to counterattack on the flanks.”

The Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, explained the spat as being “reflective of increased panic in the Russian information space over speculations about planned Ukrainian counter-offensives.” This indicates increased concern among leaders of Wagner and the Russian Defense Ministry as well as “reflecting Kremlin guidance to avoid downplaying Ukrainian successes,” it said.

Ukrainian military officials have dismissed speculation that the fighting and forward movement in Bakhmut signalled that its anticipated counteroffensive was underway. Zelenskyy said in remarks broadcast Thursday that Kyiv was delaying the campaign because it lacks enough Western weapons. Some saw the comments as designed to keep Russia guessing about Ukraine’s next move.

Addressing the nation Friday evening, Zelenskyy said more arms were coming “to defeat the aggressor and restore peace.”

The territorial gains occurred near the Siversky-Donets canal, between the villages of Ivanivske and Kurdiumivka, according to a commander of the 1st Assault Battalion of the 3rd Separate Assault Brigade. He spoke on condition he be referred to only by his call sign of “Rollo,” in line with Ukrainian military protocol.

“This was the enemy’s bridgehead, which they intended to use in their future attacks along the canal, in the direction of Kostiantynivka,” he said. “We had to neutralise the enemy and push them to the other side of the canal.”

Another commander and a military spokesman corroborated his account.

Kostiantynivka is part of an important logistics chain that leads to the city of Kramatorsk.

Rollo said the gains followed other successes, including one that secured an access road near Khromove, north of Bakhmut, and another that allowed Ukrainian forces to reclaim lost positions in the Industrial College inside Bakhmut city.

The assault south of Bakhmut was followed by a reported increase in Ukrainian offensive actions near the city of Soledar on Thursday, Russia’s Defence Ministry said. Russia repelled 26 Ukrainian attacks carried out by over 1,000 soldiers, the ministry said, adding that up to 40 tanks were involved.

The slow and grinding fight for Bakhmut has been costly for both sides, with Ukraine seeking to deny Russia any territorial gains despite its marginal strategic significance. Ukrainian forces are stationed in the city, while Russian troops are attacking from the north, east and south.

In other fighting, at least two people were killed and 22 injured elsewhere in the country since Thursday, according to figures from the Ukrainian President’s Office.

Donetsk Gov. Pavlo Kyrylenko said a Russian strike hit Kramatorsk, where some Ukrainian military units are based, destroying a school and residential building. Russian shelling hit 11 cities and villages in the region, killing 12 civilians, he said.

Source link

#Ukraine #special #forces #footage #appears #show #Bakhmut #battle

The anticipated Ukrainian counter-offensive: When, where and how?

Post By World , , , ,

The Ukrainian military has been talking since late last year about plans for a major counter-offensive.

The Pentagon documents, if they are to be believed, indicated that the offensive was planned to start on 30 April.

In late March, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy noted that the Ukrainian Armed Forces were not yet ready for large-scale operations. And Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal indicated in mid-April that a counteroffensive could be expected in the summer.

When will the operation start?

Western experts are more inclined to the prime minister’s position: late autumn, or even early summer.

“They want good weather conditions so that they can conduct offensive manoeuvre operations,” said Robert Cullum, Lecturer in Defence Studies, King’s College London.

“They’ll be trying to generate and sustain their own forces, but they’ll also be trying to get ahead of Russian attempts to dig in and fortify their own position. So they’ll be trying to balance those three things off. And I think the kind of window of opportunity is within the next one to two months. So April, May, into early June.”

But even before that, there is no doubt that the Armed Forces of Ukraine will conduct battlefield reconnaissance and limited-scale operations to identify weaknesses in the Russian defence.

Possible plans by Kyiv

Ukrainian politicians and military officials say the ultimate goal should be the liberation of all Ukrainian territory, including the annexed Crimea and the territory of the separatist republics in the east of the country. But this is unlikely to be done in a single operation in the near future.

Zaporizhzhia

The most obvious target of a Ukrainian offensive, according to experts, could be a strike in the direction of the Sea of Azov, in the Zaporizhzhia region, around Melitopol. This could split the occupied territories in two, cut the land routes to Crimea and the Kherson region, and allow artillery to bombard the Crimean peninsula, the naval base in Sevastopol and the Crimean bridge. This is the scenario most often discussed by politicians, the military and experts alike.

But the problem here for Kyiv is that this strike direction is also obvious for Moscow. It has been repeatedly reported that Russian troops are seriously reinforcing their positions in the region.

“The problem then is the availability of forces because they have then two open flanks, one in the west towards Crimea, one in the east towards the Donbas, and they have to cover these two open flanks against Russian counter-attacks against both sides,” said Gustav Gressel, Senior Policy Fellow, European Council on Foreign Relations.

“So the deeper they go, the more forces they will need to just cover the flanks and push the offensive forward that might slow them down and that might also sort of swallow a considerable amount of forces.”

Experts consider a more realistic objective for Kyiv would be to advance 30 kilometres into the Melitopol area, so that Russian supply routes are in the range of Ukrainian artillery.

Flanks: Kherson and Luhansk

Vladimir Putin’s visit to the occupied regions of Kherson and Luhansk, which was announced on 18 April, is also linked by many experts to the preparation of defence in these directions, the flanks of the Russian grouping.

In the event of an offensive in these directions, Kyiv will have to worry less about securing its flanks, but in each case there are disadvantages.

In the Luhansk region, Kremenna, Svatove, Severodonetsk and Lysychansk could be the focus of Ukrainian strikes. Fighting in this area has been going on with varying success for a long time. However, the terrain there is wooded and rugged. Heavy Western equipment would be difficult to use in these conditions.

An offensive in the Kherson region could be the shortest route to Crimea for Ukrainian troops. But in order to do so they would have to cross the Dnieper River. The most difficult aspect, according to experts, will not be the formation operation itself, but the need to preserve and hold the crossings and bridges – which will undoubtedly become the most important target for Russian aviation and tactical missiles. Russian strikes against them could cut off and isolate the advancing Ukrainian grouping.

Air and artillery superiority

In theory, one important factor in a successful offensive should be air superiority. The advancing group, and its supply lines, must be protected during the operation.

Kyiv has repeatedly spoken of a shortage of both combat and air defence aircraft. If the same Pentagon documents that have surfaced online are to be believed, Ukraine will run out of missiles for “Soviet” long- and medium-range air defence systems by May, that is if used at the current rate, even without taking into account a possible offensive.

But this is about protection against Russian strikes on cities. For the front, according to experts, it is not such a serious problem.

“Yes, they don’t have air superiority, which is, of course, not ideal. But on the other hand, most of their reconnaissance is not done by aircraft,” said Gustav Gressel. “And also most of their strike missions are not done by aircraft like it’s done in NATO. It’s done by artillery, just like in the Russian army.”

“It’s been a very artillery intensive war,” said Robert Cullum. “Both sides have used artillery and artillery ammunition in enormous quantities, both on the attack and the defence. So another problem they have to overcome is the supply of artillery ammunition, which is a key enabler of military success in this war.”

Still, the lack of “frontline” air defence assets could significantly reduce the chances of the AFU if the Russian army makes extensive use of aircraft to counter the Ukrainian offensive, and here the West will not be able to provide significant support.

On the intelligence side, Kyiv has the advantage of access to U.S. and NATO information, as well as information from guerrillas in the occupied territories.

Pentagon leaks

However, the leaks of secret Pentagon documents could be a disadvantage for Kyiv.

“The American point of view is that the Russians now know how deep and with what means the American intelligence services can look into the Russian planning and Russian command and control structure, and they might adjust, for example, their codes or the encryption to prevent that,” said Gustav Gressel.

“ If that happens, and if Western intelligence at a time of the counter-offensive is less precise than it used to be, that would be a bad thing for Ukrainians.”

How can Russia counter the Ukrainian counter-offensive?

According to Western intelligence, Russia is fortifying almost the entire front line on Ukrainian territory, some 800 km long. These strips, according to media reports, consist of several lines of anti-tank trenches, trenches, barbed wire, obstacles and all sorts of fortified firing points.

The quality of these barriers has been questioned by Western experts; nevertheless, even in this form they will be a serious obstacle for the attackers if they do not have sufficient artillery and engineering support.

As stated above, Kyiv will need many forces to support its flanks to develop deep breaks; these forces will inevitably be redeployed from other directions, which the Russian army can take advantage of to launch counterstrikes in weakened areas.

Nuclear defence

The Kremlin has increasingly resorted to nuclear rhetoric in recent months, and at the end of March a decision was taken to deploy Russian nuclear weapons on the territory of Belarus. Experts doubt Russia would resort to a nuclear strike if the Ukrainian push proved successful.

Will the Kremlin decide to use nuclear weapons if the Ukrainian offensive is successful?

“Putin will definitely think twice or three times,” said Gustave Gressel. “To be honest, I don’t believe that he will do it for any region, maybe except for Crimea, because the price is very high and the recipe for success is dubious.”

Will the counter-offensive bring a decisive result?

Ukrainian politicians periodically claim that a decisive counter-offensive in the spring and summer could bring the war to an end before the end of the year. Western experts are very cautious about this, while paying tribute to the high morale of Ukrainians.

“If they’ve achieved significant success, and I think there will be, they’ll be in a position to force the Russians to the table and perhaps extract some kind of concessions, particularly if Crimea is threatened,” said Robert Cullum.

“Putin really won’t want to lose Crimea because it’s such a symbol of his regime’s success. If the Ukrainians haven’t achieved much success, then I think they’ll be facing a lot more pressure from their allies who are really at the limit of what they’re willing to give in terms of assistance and equipment. And so Ukraine will probably face a lot more pressure to find some kind of status quo ceasefire.”

Source link

#anticipated #Ukrainian #counteroffensive

How do Russia and Ukraine’s military capacities compare?

Post By World , , , , ,

After almost one year of fighting following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, how do the military capacities of the two countries compare? Exact figures and precise information are, understandably, hard to come by, but we do know that Western powers are supplying some heavy weaponry to Ukraine. Most recently, according to statements made in Brussels on 9 February, Ukraine is asking several Western partners for fighter jets. This follows an historic agreement to supply modern tanks by Germany, the UK and the USA, with lighter weaponry coming from France, Poland and other NATO members in Europe.

Will Russia be able to produce and purchase enough arms to continue its ongoing aggression or even simply to defend the occupied territories?

Is the Ukrainian military prowess sufficient to retake the occupied and unilaterally annexed territories, or is the principal task today – resistance to the Russian advancement?

“Ukraine critically dependent on Western supplies”

According to the Israel-based military commentator David Gendelman, Russia is not curbing its attacks. _”At the moment, Russia has the advantage in arms, primarily in barrel and jet artillery as well as aviation, and the Russian military industry allows for fighting at the current capacity. Russian consumption of artillery ammunition has significantly dropped compared to the spring-summer period, and that slows the Russian pace.” However, he says Russian forces are advancing, slowly but surely. “Nevertheless progress, albeit slow and in narrow sections of the front, is being made.”

Gendelman points out that the Ukrainian army is largely dependant on the western supplies of modern weaponry.

“Ukraine is critically dependent on Western supplies. At the moment the main task of the Ukrainian forces is defence. To think about significant counterattacks beyond local counterattacks is possible only with the receipt of significant quantities of Western weapons, which are promised, but not yet delivered.”

“Moscow trying to delay its inevitable defeat”

In the months following the Russian invasion, the world saw heavy losses of Russian military hardware, damaged and abandoned on the battlefield. The Kremlin appeared unprepared for the realities of full-scale head-on combat: a quick annexation of territories was allegedly planned by Moscow with the Rosgvardia, the National Guard Troops, expected to ensure territorial and public security on the ground in the first weeks of the invasion.

But that’s not what happened and the offensive may have caused damage to the Russian armed forces that will take a long time to repair, according to Pavel Luzin, a US-based expert on Russian foreign and defence policy:

“It is impossible to restore Russia’s military potential. The army was at the peak of its strength in 2020-2021, and it will not return there. But it is trying to stretch out its agony. Take ISIS: without aviation and with a minimum of armour and artillery, the Islamic State was able to resist a superior international coalition for almost four years. That’s how Moscow is trying to delay its inevitable defeat.”

Strengthening supplies to Ukraine in two main areas: armoured vehicles and artillery

Neil Melvin, Director of International Security Studies at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) suggests Ukraine is slowly gaining control over the situation, especially with the arrival of the modern armaments supplied by the Western partners:

“The war has really been going on since 2014 [and the Russian annexation of Crimea]. Going into this new round of fighting (which began in February 2022) both sides are already well equipped: Russia had a comprehensive range of capabilities and Ukraine had some significant ones, but lacked key armaments in certain areas.

“In the first phase of the war, when Ukraine managed to blunt the Russian assault first on Kyiv and then gradually grind down the Russian drive through Donetsk, an enormous amount of Russian equipment was captured and repurposed.

“The Ukrainians have taken control and then just sort of repainted and rearmed lots of this Russian equipment, which of course, they’re very familiar with. They now have pretty good air defences, which when going into the war were really very thin: mostly a few Soviet rather old systems. They’ve now got some of the most modern Western ones, which have been quite effective in taking out the Russian drones and missiles, although a few still get through.

How has the situation evolved since the early onset of tensions in 2014?

“What we see now is a push to provide the Ukrainians with modern armoured vehicles and to provide Ukraine with modern artillery and rocket forces. They have quite a lot of artillery. Actually, one of the largest artillery forces in Europe built up from 2014 primarily.

Four months into the war, the bombardment of Mariupol and the atrocities of Bucha (near Kyiv), the US announced the supply of long-range HIMARS systems to counter the Russian attacks.

“The range of these has been increased, particularly with the donation of modern artillery and howitzer systems. And most recently the United States has boosted artillery with a range of about 150 km  by modifying the previously supplied well-known HIMARS systems.

“With these new missiles, the Ukrainian forces from their current lines will be able to hit Russian forces in almost all of occupied Ukraine, not the southern and eastern-most parts of Crimea and not the eastern-most parts of the Donetsk region, but everywhere else will be within range.

“But they still lack the longer range, up to 300-km range missiles, the United States is denying requests to supply those and the Ukrainians don’t have modern NATO standard fighter jets. They’re still using Soviet era ones, the Russian ones. These are still essentially Soviet-era technology.

Since last summer dozens of countries have allocated military aid to Ukraine in the form of modern weapons systems and financial support. Melvin added:

“The challenge for the Ukrainians is to actually use all of this in a coordinated way to try and break through the Russian lines in what’s called combined arms operations: linking them all up. That’s the challenge.”

Russia “running short on advanced equipment”

On the Russian side, military capacity has also evolved, although not in the same way, according to Melvin. 

“Russia went into the war with massive armed forces in large numbers. They lost a lot of equipment. They lost a lot of men. But they’ve used the winter to somewhat reconstitute their armed forces.

“The Kremlin had a 300,000-man mobilisation, beginning in September of last year, who are now in place.

“They have a lot of Soviet-era equipment: there were huge stockpiles when the Soviet Union collapsed. They have a lot of artillery shells, they have a lot of tanks and armoured vehicles, not necessarily the most modern ones, but in large numbers. They’re unlikely to run out of that basic equipment.

Since his Munich declaration against NATO expansion into Eastern Europe in 2007, President Putin has been menacing the West with Russian military innovations: in 2018, we even saw an animation of a new secret missile seeming to strike US territory. These new cutting-edge systems, however, are not present in the war in Ukraine, despite what has been suggested. They remain largely lab models or virtual, rather than implemented, technologies.

“Where Russians are running short is on the more advanced post-Soviet systems of rockets and advanced armoured vehicles,” said Melvin.

“So the battle, I think, comes down to essentially a question of Russia’s going to try and use its overwhelming amount of resources, particularly its manpower, to break through the Ukrainian lines without necessarily much sophistication in linking up different parts of the armed forces.”

Source link

#Russia #Ukraines #military #capacities #compare