Was Bakhmut worth it? - Reaction to Michael Kofman
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 чер 2024
- Did Ukraine undermine their own counteroffensive by fighting stubbornly in Bakhmut? Michael Kofman has been making this argument, but I think he misses some important nuances.
0:00 Intro
0:34 Who is Michael Kofman?
1:10 The Battle for Bakhmut
1:42 Kofman's argument
1:58 Unfavorable attrition
2:52 Russia was running out of steam
3:16 Undermined preparations for counteroffensive
3:52 Problems with Kofman's argument
4:11 Timeline for convicts
5:09 Russia was attacking everywhere
5:40 Ukraine eliminated Wagner
7:21 Academic competition
Link to the mentioned podcast:
ZOOMING OUT ON UKRAINE’S OFFENSIVE, Michael Kofman and Ryan Evans, War on the Rocks, 3 August 2023,
warontherocks.com/2023/08/zoo...
The reality is that, if Ukraine had just given up Bakhmut, the SAME battle (a strong Wagner v a strong Ukraine) would be happening in Khasiv Yar, or Kramatorsk etc. In other words, that battle HAD to happen somewhere. Wagner had to be stopped and destroyed *somewhere.* So better Bakhmut than the next town or the next...
I wholeheartedly agree. Ukraine could not afford to, as Michael Kofman loves to say, "Kick the can down the road".
The destruction of Wagner and their subsequent mutiny was a strategic victory for Ukraine 🇺🇦
And Wagner was destroyed in Bakhmut ?? Western brainwashing has experienced catastrophic proportions.
You are right, Wagner had to be stopped somewhere and Bakhmut was ideal. It is still a killing ground, and continues to draw hapless Russian reserves away from other parts of the front.
I think the counter to that argument would be that wagner meat waves are an effective tactic in urban fighting. It is not an effective tactic outside urban areas.
And Russians did take Bahkmut in the end. And there reward for capturing the city, is to find out how difficult it is to defend.
I wouldn't call this a "reaction video", it is a well thought out counter-point and discussion.
correct ... in reaction to someone else's analysis and commentary
Definitely not some semi-considered "hot take" video.
"Response" or "reply video" is the usual term I've seen for this.
Anders cannot be half-measured.
Anders claims Russia sustained more casualties in Bakhmut without any reliable, credible substantiation.
This alone makes most of his arguments fallacious.
I have no evidence for this but my gut feeling is that without the battle for the city Wagner probably would not have had their mutiny. They needed that to push them togis point and remove them from the warzone.
The Mutiny was all about political ambition and none about "oh, my poor guys".
Seriously, Prigozin recruited these prisoners as cannon fodder and never thought twice about any of them ... if there is anything in your argument it is that his hand might have been forced by an order to return to the front, which, after the post-Bakmut break, would have deleted the rest of wagner and thus he had to act while he could.
Oh no don't get me wrong I don't think it was about the soldiers. But it was probably easier to get those soldiers to make that choice if they felt under valued and damaged pulling them off the frontline was also very important.
Without that they probably would not have been as easy to motivate to drive to Moscow
The mutiny was about Prigozhin saving his ass. And his ass was in danger because of poor results in Bakhmut. If they did great, he would have been hailed as a hero.
@@undsoftYou are wrong. He is praised as a hero, especially in Sout Russia. In Rostov and Krasnodar people like them a lot and W behaved top notch, spending a lot there. Probably that was an issue for Putin.
@@aenorist2431 As benallen947 says, the Wagner soldiers would not have blindly followed had they not felt the suffering first hand.
They were not Marching against Moscow because it sounded like a fun weekend trip or because they expected loot.
Great analysis as always. The stubborn defense of Bakhmut has always been a great dilemma for the Ukrainians, but it may indeed have been worth it... and probably they were even hoping for a bigger collapse on the Russian side, which was another theoretical possibility...
And it almost happend with the Wagner march on Moscow.
@@BjornSeverinLarsen Are you drunk?
@@BjornSeverinLarsen Ukraine could hardly have predicted _that_
@@BjornSeverinLarsen Exactly -- Ukraine kept up the defense of Bahkmut because they could see that cracks were forming in between Pregozhin and the MOD.
Wagner wasted huge amounts of soldiers and resources to capture Bahkmut only to have the Klepto MOD take all the credit, with the MOD forcing state TV to not report on Pregozhin... leading to a showdown between Pregozhin and the MOD... MOD demanded that all the Wagner soldiers had to sign contracts with the MOD, and Wagner felt they deserved special status and standing because they were the only Russian forces to have any kind of success last winter.
Cut to Wagner launching an armed mutiny and easily rolling across thousands of kilometers of Russian territory, to within striking distance of the Moscow regime...
But, what pro-Russian people are not willing to admit... the truth is Putin doesn't want a capable military, a military with pride, because such a force would pose a threat to his dictatorship.
So Putin agreed with Shoigu and Gerassymov - Wagner had to be excommunicated from the Church of Klept, if not disbanded then exiled.
@@seancidy6008Maybe not, but there are people who have argued that some kind of revolt/rebellion/sivil war/mutiny would happen sooner or later, and that it might start with one of the many private military armies in Russia. Konstantin (Innside Russia) said this quite often in the time leading up to Wagner marching towards Moscow.
I've listened to a lot of Kofmans arguments and I find him quite self assured and not as willing to admit uncertainty as I would think is reasonable. A decent analyst (thanks Anders!) should be raising potential counterpoints.
Agree … and that was my own read on him from quite early on. That said, judging analysts on personality traits rather than methods is always a fraught endeavor. While it's absolutely true that those more willing to acknowledge uncertainty are also often more rigorous at interrogating their own positions … there's plenty of counter examples to be found. The truth is, I don't know that much about how Mr. Kofman arrives at his conclusions. So I can't really judge them based on method. I can only judge the conclusions themselves. Fortunately Anders and others who are, clearly, very deliberate when examining their confidence level in their own conclusions provide usefuI context to help with that.
Really? I feel like most of his points, at least in the WorR podcast are hedged with statements uncertainty.
If anything, imo he's too reluctant to make predictions that would allow me as a third party to evaluate whether he's accurate or not.
@@sharpe3698typical. He is hedging so nobody can say he was wrong. Kofman is an academic, not a soldier. What he has to say is not worth listening to.
One of his catch phrases is literally "it's contingent". I don't see how he doesn't acknowledge uncertainty when relevant.
I don't think Kofman is pro-Russia exactly, but he has a very Moscow-centric approach to his analysis. Russia is the focus of his academic life, his best sources are likely in Moscow, etc. So he tends to approach things with the underlying subconscious assumption that Russia is the Great Power here, that their decisions are most important, and that states like Ukraine are basically unimportant parts of Russian sphere of influence.
Can’t wait to see your colab with perun!
I'm looking forward to that coming out too. I think it was a really good conversation.
@@anderspuck Perun is awesome, can't wait to see the conversation
Always an intelligent, knowledgeable and balanced contribution. Thank you, sir. Much aporeciated.
The people expecting Ukraine’s counter offensive to deliver instant results are nuts. They’d need ten times the tanks, artillery and troops to crush Russia so quickly. The West must offer Ukraine far more resources Urgently.
The amount of mines requires engineers to remove them. Tanks isn’t the solution it’s demining that’s the issue. There needs to be more thought given by our greatest minds on how to overcome these obstacles quickly as it’s an incredibly hard problem.
It's not even about tanks and artillery, it's about crossing those super dense minefields that the Russians managed to put in right under Ukraine's nose.
@@MusicalMemeology The West is complicit in allowing the Russians nearly a year to build up the defense lines.
I swayed 70% in hopes it would happen fast. But I also watch more objective (yet still pro UA) channels, so I wasnt totally devastated that it didn't happen. But at least I got a "realty check".
@@MusicalMemeologyWhich means that the current focus on logistics (including all Ruzzian shipping in the area) is the right thing to do now. If the orcs are starving, they can't fight.
Guess I never really thought about the fact that Wagner isn't actively operating in Ukraine anymore, and they were the only ones able to accomplish anything. Likely making a BIG difference.
Off-topic; been enjoying the background greenery in the latest videos.
I think "only ones to accomplish anything" is an overstatement, but if you look at the results of the last few months it's not THAT MUCH of an overstatement. Russian troops have been making mostly futile advances here and there, they've conducted successful defenses in numerous places and certainly caused some Ukrainian units to lose personnel and equipment... but on a strategic level their accomplishments are almost all in the realm of defending rather than attacking and they haven't prevented Ukraine from slowly advancing.
@@julianbrelsford What the Russian are mainly doing all along the line now is a scaled up version of what Ukraine was doing in Bakhmut, according to Anders, eh?
@@seancidy6008correct, and the longer this war continues the more it benefits Russia and the higher the likelihood Russia begins taking territory from Ukraine.
The situation is obvious, but the level of misinformation and propaganda coming from western intelligence and military really has the population believing Ukraine is capable of retaking east Ukraine and Crimea.
@@seancidy6008Except in Bahmut, the Ukrainians were killing more Russians and destroying more Russian equipment. Now Ukraine is continuing to incur more Russian loses than Ukraine is taking, while continuing to advance, along a wide front. If Russia is trying to do what Ukraine did, they aren't doing a very good job at it. I'm kind of embarrassed for your guys honestly, how does it feel to have the second best army in Ukraine?
The Russian military literally took a nuclear power plant and made a land bridge to crimea but ok. I didn't see Wagner laying tens of millions of landmines and digging vast networks of trenches. Go away lol
Spot on. We agree with all you said. Eliminating wagner was crucial for the counteroffensive. 🇺🇦staying on in Bakhmut led to that. The counter-offensive's issues are a matter of russian preparation, lack of F-16s and the missiles they bring, and lack of short range air defence.
The counteroffensive is more akin to a siege, than maneuver warfare.
Ukraine simply doesn't have the necessary artillery and air capabilities to succesfully engage the entrenched Russian lines.
Just an opinion, of course.
AJHamada it does look like a siege, and sieges are sometimes entirely successful.
Russian supply lines are being targeted, and Russians on the front lines are being pressured to use the ammunition they have WHILE Ukraine takes steps to block resupply, especially at all the bridges that Russia has been using to move supplies through Crimea to the front.
Wagner is a light infantry formation with an expendable component of irregulars, they are specially designed for advancing through heavily fortified and mined urban areas. Russia is currently standing on the defence, which requires regular units with heavt weapons and engineers. Moreover, Wagner in Belarus is necessitating a diversion of Ukraine's troops from the east and south.
@@seancidy6008which dose not work since they have been grinded down 😊. They need at least 200k to do anything from the north
More than anything, it's the minefields.
😃😃😃A very good analysis. Balanced, even handed, but based on complete logic. Well done Anders
Due respect to experts, but many seem to ignore Ukraine's lack of airpower. I don't know how they expect NATO style tactics when Ukraine lacks NATO level equipment. Thanks for your balanced viewpoint.
What is Russia's excuse for not having air power over the battlefield or the rest of Ukraine? It's an artillery/missile/drone war.
@@cloudpoint0russia can launch from farther back than ukraine can. It makes a difference.
@concernedrabbit9075
They can't hit targets from a safe distance, just harass. Ukrainian fighters report Russian air as a minor nuisance. Like the 15 missions that Ukraine flies over the battlefield daily to the Russians. They just don't matter. Each side's artillery is a problem. It's the only thing that matters on the front and land mines, according to the fighters there. I think attack helicopters might be a minor concern, but the fighters don't seem to agree.
💯. Move 100km through multi defence layers of trenches and mines. Without the air arm, making combined arms strategy impossible, yet with the people's expectations of it.
Only 15% of the requested mine clearing equipment given.
Quite frankly our supply has been rubbish. Slow and lacking.
If Ukraine loses... It's our fault.
@@clarkeorchard2304
It's not impossible. What expectation do you have? I know success is inevitable.
The purpose of defensive lines is to discourage or at least slow down any attack. But if an army ignores the warning and attacks anyway, the defensive lines will eventually fail. They always do.
No defensive lines exist that can stop a large enough determined army no matter how badly equipped they are. The price paid is the only question but the alternative is existential for the Ukrainians so they will pay whatever price is needed to reach their objective. Ukraine's army is not a death-averse army like the ones that NATO countries field who want to conduct war from the skies and not get bloody.
Ukraine will need more equipment to keep the Russians from returning once removed. It's coming. Probably with NATO membership.
Also remember, it's not a race, it's an objective. Ukraine will achieve their objective before winter sets in, which is a reasonable achievement compared to most large counteroffensives. Especially one without air superiority and having so many land mines in the way. And winter is a good time to be fighting in Crimea.
Examples of Offensive / Counteroffensive Durations
WWI Somme Offensive 1 July - 18 November 1916 - 140 days
WWI Monastir Offensive 12 September - 11 December 1916 - 90 days
WWI Hundred Days Offensive 8 August - 11 November 1918 - 95 days
WWI German Gorlice-Tarnów Offensive in Poland 2 May - 13 July 1915 - 72 days
WWI Russian Brusilov Offensive in Ukraine 4 June - 20 September 1916 - 108 days
WWI German Verdun Offensive 21 February - 18 December 1916 - 301 days
WWI Romania Central Powers Offensive 22 July - 3 September 1917 - 43 days
WWI U.S. Meuse-Argonne Offensive September 26 - November 11, 1918 - 46 days
WWI German Spring Offensive 21 March - 18 July 1918 - 119 days
WWII Japanese Winter Offensive Late November, 1939 - Late March 1940 - 121 days
WWII Dnieper-Carpathian Offensive 24 December 1943 - 6 May 1944 - 134 days
WWII Normandy (Overlord) Offensive 6 June - 30 August 1944 - 85 days
WWII Baltic Offensive 14 September - 24 November 1944 - 71 days
WWII East Prussian Offensive 13 January - 25 April 1945 - 102 days
Vietnam U.S. Counteroffensive 25 December 1965 - 30 June 1966 - 187 days
Vietnam Tet Counteroffensive 30 January - 1 April 1968 - 62 days
Vietnam Easter Offensive 30 March - 22 October 1972 - 206 days
Iraqi Mosul Offensive against ISIL 16 October 2016 - 20 July 2017 - 277 days
“The Ukrainian counteroffensive is slow, deliberate and it is achieving the results that Zelenskyy and his generals are looking for.” - Jonathan E. Sweet, former military intelligence officer. July 2023.
The Wagner mutiny was partly the result of Bakhmut. The infighting between MoD and Wagner was due to tension related to that battle and trying to take credit for it. MoD also made dumb moves elsewhere in the front to get a win of their own and failed.
Ukraine was hardly formulating its strategy with the idea of causing Wagner to mutiny, otherwise they would have been ready, waiting and able to take instant advantage of it.
@@seancidy6008 Not specifically that mutiny, but make no mistake that any army would seek to cause disorder and instability in the opposing army.
No, it didn't have anything to do with Bakhmut. It was all about Prigozhin's political ambitions.
Great update not a reaction but a cogent meta analysis of some voices making assertions about the progress of the war and its causalities. Great stuff as always thank you for the great work!
Agree. For me it stayed (wisely) away from the reaction space and was more accurately a debate of ideas.
So much respect to your analysis Anders!!
Respect from Finland 🇩🇰🇫🇮😂👍
Found you through Perun and your upcoming collab. Crazy how ive been following Perun (who is also brilliant) from the other side of the globe, and I necer found you that is basically my neighbour... And what a find, you are a gem.
Salutes from Sweden, always nice with rational voices having an outlet.
Wonderful stuff, subscribed!
Love your thoughtfulness on this topic. I am not into military stuff, but you make me listen amongst those who - in my opinion - lack the broad and objective way of looking at it. It has no propaganda touch at all, it is mere analytical talk. We need more of this, that in itself would lead to less war :)
Also take into account the amount of hardware and ammo expended at Bakhmut. One thing ppl also don’t talk about is the renaming of Bahkmut and the symbolism for Russia in trying to take it back to rename it back to its old soviet name.
One point that is not being brought up for some reason is the fact that, a withdrawal would result in the next towns becoming the frontline. Bakhmut was already destroyed, and economically, it made sense to keep the fight within a pile of rubble instead of fighting within or near still intact one’s resulting in them being destroyed as well
Kofman seems caught up in his own narrative, rather than observing and commenting on what's actually happening.
Bakhmut was an extremely long battle with different stages in which the focus and methods altered, at least on the Russian side, so it is not amenable to a single encompassing narrative. We are not talking about Hostomel airport
Dude, he does field studies. If anything, he's one of the people least caught up in his own narrative.
@@snikeduden2850 Dude
It was also important for Ukraine to demonstrate to its allies that it is both capable and prepared to take a stand in difficult circumstances against the aggressor. This commitment is a vital moral element to ensure that international contributions of military hardware materialise.
Academic competition is a very charitable way of saying these guys are letting their egos get in the way of honest reporting. Unless, it played a major role in preventing them from starting earlier toward the south, it clearly was worth it. Ukraine is continuing to work on an attritional model because of the lack of de-mining equipment like MICLICS, aircraft, etc.
Beware of talking heads...
Yes, Anders was being supremely diplomatic. He’s an excellent analyst.
@@philipmulville8218 As an active duty officer in the Danish armed forces (Denmark was red hot for Ukraine joining NATO), he cannot be rude about the Ukrainians, but Kofman is an easy target
@@seancidy6008Well and I don’t need to be diplomatic and I can bluntly say the guy is a dilettante. Even Snyder ie decent at best. Frankly for some of the most high profile “analysts” of this war, it’s clear they don’t do nearly enough research.
Refreshing to hear you again. Excellent video.
Thanks for your analysis. I want to add that we watching from a distance, we got to understand the ruthlessness, barbarism and much more of the Russian army.This lesson won't be lost. Richard
What about the Bandera's boys?
Since 2014...
Isn't it only speculation that the defense of Bakhmut resulted in a weakened counteroffensive? Meanwhile it is verifiable that Wagner is no longer conducting offensives in Ukraine. I think to call the defense of Bakhmut a mistake, one first has to make a more clear connection between the difficulties in the counteroffensive and the resources used in that defense.
Ukraine kept experienced troops to defend Bakhmut, and are now using western-trained, inexperienced troops in the counter-offensive. Aka giving western gear to inexperienced troops rather than the experienced troops.
@@snikeduden2850Source?
It seems to me Ukraine very carefully traded bits of the city for Russian casualties. To second guess that with way less information than the Ukrainian army has, seems to me a bit presumptuous. As usual, thanks for your great quality of information. Slava Ukraini!
Yes. Isn't it a bit early to be doing "hindsight is 20/20" analysis of the Russia-Ukraine war? And I don't see how you can do that with parts of it - such as the struggle around Bakhmut - without taking into account how that shaped and is still shaping the battleground everywhere else . .. and how events in other parts of the front shaped it in turn. Argument still rages over aspects of WW2 operations, especially as new information surfaces (or is declassified) -- and that all happened 80 years ago. Pronouncing on the validity of strategic decisions that happened 80 *days* ago in a still-active war??
The Russians mainly lost prisoners from the criminal justice system, they were regarded as worthless human beings that previously cost money to keep in prison. In reality to the Russian mind set it cost them nothing. What is tragic is that there were likely political prisoners in there: those that had spoken the wrong words
Fully agree with you ☺
@@lightcycler4806 that is a great quote 👍
To second guess Hitler with way less information than Hitler had seems a bit presumptuous. Actually, we have far more information now than Hitler ever did in his time. The same is true of this war, to a lesser degree. Your stance is just an anti-intellectual whine about how myehhh you weren't there!
Thank you for working with Perun. Its very valuable and important when channels like you and him "Team up". There is so much propaganda in the informationspace. People like you, Perun and General Bühler really make a difference. Thank you for that!
Thanks Anders, greatings from Croatia.
Great greetings 😊
In case you'd like to edit
Thorough analysis as usual. Thank you for enlighting the academical challenge.
I watched the video of Michael Kofman, think you give a great summary of his arguments. You also give some great counter arguments about defending Bachmut by Ukraine. Personally, I think most Russian prisoners died in the battle of Soledar. After the battle of Bachmut, Wagner was exhausted. Thx for your considered analysis!
Your analysis of the dynamics around military analysis was ballsy and rang true.
Another factor is the morale boost that the russians would have had during their winter offensive. The fall of Bakhmut now came as their offensive had petered out and Prigozhin was already infighting with Shoigu and Gerasimov.
Sensible points. Also, the rule of "do something" applied. Better to have done something (and going home with some achievements, as they did), than nothing, which also could have gone bad in all so many ways. This is why leadership is a difficult job.
When Anders floated his first argument for why Ukraine was smart to keep the Russians occupied, I waited for Kofman to consider this possibility on War on the Rocks....and there was absolutely nothing. So I think that says something about his need to keep a narrative going.
Anders is awesome, but Michael Kofman is so big league he might not even know about Anders. Which is a damn pity.
It wasn't smart because Russia used that time to build their defenses and fortifications
@7secularsermons I thought that might well be the case too. But surely a "big league" guy with plenty of people around him (hes got his own podcast too and regularly gets name dropped) should have it all over Anders considering all possibilities.
Yeah apparently not.
@hmmm2564 yes more time allowed more defences but it also allowed for more Ukranian training, more attrition of Russian ammo, more time to bring storm shadow and Scalp long range missiles to bear and time for Wagner to throw great spanner in the RF works. No one really knows if it was the right call yet but based on some reports starting to trickle out across a range of issues, I think the UAF are probably more right than wrong to have waited
@@geopolitix7770 Ukraine doesn't have enough men. Have you kept up with the news? Ukraine is getting ready to mobilize 16-18 year olds. The government just forbid them from leaving the country
Great video, once more!
Really good arguments and I bet it would be a lot easier for Russia to enlist more men, if they had gotten a big Bakhmut victory for their parade and had kept Wagner.
very good point, thank you!
🇺🇦 Слава Україні! 🇺🇦
I'm sorry, Bakhmut was a Russian victory. Pyrrhic perhaps, but a victory boosting Russian confidence and morale nevertheless.
@@seancidy6008 Nah, had that been the case, Russia wouldn't have had to purge its officers and be so scared of doing another official draft.
They are enlisting tens of thousands of men a month
@@hmmm2564a number which barely covers their losses and is far from enough to get an upper hand.
There might be one other reason why it was worth it for Ukraine to fight for the city:
Russia may now have been taken in by the sunk cost fallacy. Now that Ukraine is on the offensive in that area, with at least the goal of attriting Russian forces on the flanks, and with all those "victory" medals having been invested by Russia - Ukraine's attrition efforts might be bearing more fruit now than they otherwise would have. I think there is evidence for this in the Klischivka direction at the moment.
RECENT EVENTS make this analysis seem even more on point. It may be fair to say that the internal conflicts caused by the battle for Bakhmut lead to the death of old Pre-go…..
Hi Anders. You are my number one analyst. Thanks
You are correct in all points in my humble opinion. What's really important is that Crimea has food and water for sixty days and all avenues for resupply are targeted. This was achieved during the fight for Bakhmut.
Very well thought out ...thank you
Great analysis. When your videos come out they are always the first ones I watch on the conflict. Also, I agree that in Michael's conclusion may have preceded his justifications.
On other recent news I heard that I would like to hear your analysis on is that the criminals that fought for Wagner that have returned to the their homes labeled as heroes are still seen as criminals in their community and are now somewhat "untouchable" because of their "hero" label. Are people seeing this as a problem that Putin caused or are they blaming others?
Thank you 💛 Anders. Wonderful analysis of the two of them. Have a great day. 🎉
Thanks, you make the best videos about this conflict by far.
Keep up the good job!
Thanks for your analysis
very insightful and balanced view, thanks so much for sharing
Very clever and calm analysis. Thank you. I watch a lot of videos about UA. But here its always very clear and more the view on the long run.
Good to hear you are back.
Wow! That’s a different perspective!
Godt brølt, løve. Som sædvanligt en rigtig god, objektiv analyse!
Hørt.
Thanks again Anders!
I am from Germany, first of all, the Tankes send here to train on Western tanks were experienced Commanders, 50 years old Major with his Battallion which was formed before the War he got to play with the L2A6.
Anotherthing just hit me: Ukraine doesn't have a large pool of experienced troops, especially Tank Crews.
Ukraine had around 500 active Tanks before the war, which means 500 Tank Crews and Reserves.
They have lost and replenished around 300 Tanks or even more, the loss rate on the Crews on Soviet Tanks is high. So with their reserves Ukraine has lost about 30% off their experienced Tank Crews, and those were needed to hold the line, but they still send their best to Germany and Poland to train on the Leopards.
The same goes for the Infantry, around 100k losses of a Force which constituted around 250k before the war.
Lot of Militias and reservists died as well, but Ukraine couldn't send away the experienced troops and need somewhere were they could train their volunteers.
This looks very bleak for Ukraine you may say, but Russia started with 3500 Tank Crews and lost now over 4000 Tanks, Russia started with an invasion Force of 250k + the Militias and Mercenaries, and Russia has around 250k Death and twice as many wounded.
So giving their Soldiers a good basic training is more worth for Ukraine as to retrain their troops, statistical speaking Ukraine has already the better trained Troops in the Field. Theire reinforcements are way better trained then the Russians are.
Even the Elite Units off Russia struggle, of the 65k Elite and Veteran Units, like Marines and Paratroopers, about 50% is dead, which means battlehardened troops which fought in Syria have 2-6 year experience and training are gone.
Irreplacable for Russia right now. While fresh Ukraine Soldiers from 2022 may life long enough to gain this year long experience, i doubt that mobiks will reach this age on the front.
It seems that Russia is trying to mobilize another 500k men for this war, to hold the line and to counterattack next spring.
As always, a great analysis. Inflicting high losses on Russia in Bakhmut could have led to more resistance against the war within Russia ... when Wagner rebelled, it looked like that play worked. Unfortunately, there have been no major signs of uprisings since then.
I personally believe it helped push China further into the Ukraine camp, helped push some of Russia's vassals further away etc. Assarbadjahn recently shipped some de-mining vehicles to Ukraine, China engaged in peace discussions without Russia. One can only hope some vassals suddenly break free or China stops secretly shipping equipment to Russia etc. as they start to see the whole Russia is digging for all of them.
beersmuff, you need to watch some streams from the china show. Yes they're 2-3hrs long, but I guarantee you'll be rooted to your device within 10 mins of watching any one of them.
China is a nation of fraud and front, i.e., all that you see of that country is a façade, rather like it was with russia.
Great explanation, thank you!
Bakhmut was definitely very hard work, it still is, but it seems to have worked out very good for Ukraine.
Victory, Freedom, Full Reparations, and all of Ukraine's Land for Ukraine! 💙💛
So refreshing to see somebody opinion backed up with facts and reasons for forming them.
So sick of everybody today just making claims without anything to back it up and they just expect you to ride along and don’t question them.
I’ve ALWAYS been like this guy. I give my reasons, facts and why I feel that way.
I’m also known to always say “my opinion”, “I think but not certain”
and my favorite: “I’m 88, 75, 90% sure…….”
My friends don’t like talking to me sometimes, but everyone of them respects me and usually seeks my opinion to their problems.
An analyst that fails to consider all possibilities when presenting his analysis like Kofman is doomed to failure! That is why I watch an unbiased and detailed analysis by Anders. Thank you Anders for remaining to the point instead of attempting to defend an opinion. Thank you from Northern Ontario.
I agree with your analysis regarding defending Bakhmut and occupying as well as eliminating huge numbers of Russian/Wagner soldiers. Had Ukraine sent their more experienced soldiers to be trained in England, more inexperienced soldiers would have been needed in Bakhmut. By doing what they did, Ukraine now has battlehardened soldiers as well as highly trained soldiers. Regarding the counter offensive; not one person has yet to raise the one problem Ukraine military strategists face. Yes, we hear/read of clearing minefields. But the other issue is protecting the civilian Ukraine population still living on what is essentially the front line. Russia doesn't care about the euphemism 'collateral damage' or 'friendly fire' but I bet the Ukraine strategists take the danger very seriously.
That's a non-issue. All of those villages on or near the frontline are entirely deserted. The few people that were left were evacuated by the Russians 6 months ago in preparation of the offensives expected in those areas.
@nihluxler1890 so why are we seeing news items with Ukraine ladies in tears welcoming Ukraine soldiers? Yes, most villages have been evacuated but there are still people living there. I believe 74 in robotyne (excuse spelling)
Excellent analysis!
I love how 2 yrs ago it was considered absolutely impossible to have any type of victory over opponent 4x the size and 100x the military budget, now they argue how the underdog did something "wrong".
Thank you Anders.👍
On reflection I agree with your assessment not Michael’s
If Russia lost less in Bahkmut they would have more to stop the counter offensive.
Bakmhut is currently fixing a large number of Russian troops to defend it, since retreating after the propaganda of capturing it will be a major morale blow
Exactly. The key decision in this year of the war will be can Ukraine get to the Sea Of Azov and cut off Crimea. Russia's losses at Bakhmut improve Ukraine's chances. And its why Gerasimov's pointless offensive around Kupiansk is sheer incompetence.
@@AndyM_323YYY The offensive around Kupiansk is quite logical actually, just as most russian offensives it is incompetently done.
The push north is designed to draw away ukrainian reserves from the south thereby taking them off the board for the offensive there. Unfortunately for the russians the ukrainians have enough reserves allocated in that area to deal with the russian incursions in and of themselves especially since russia keeps hitting them with infantry that is backed up solely by artillery.
@@myonline1985 Ukraine will be happy to let Russia have Kupiansk if it helps them get Crimea back. Kupiansk will be easy to get back next year.
All of you are right.
🤺🪖😉
Very clarifying. Thank you.
I follow Michael Koffman and respect him but personally I think that you are much more balanced Anders. And I think the competition between O'Brian and Koffman is totally unhelpful. Both end up defending fixed positions, rather like the Russians are now! Keep up the great work Anders. You are very very much appreciated. ❤
Anders claims Russia sustained more casualties in Bakhmut without any reliable, credible substantiation.
This alone makes most of his arguments fallacious.
Very good meta-analyse, Anders!
Thank you very much for this explanation😊👍👍
Always good to listen to an independent thinker.
The fight was fought for "logistical" as well as symbolic reasons. There are roads that were central to bakhmut that the ORCS wanted
Great points!
Cmndr Nielsen, always great to hear your calm explanations. Thanks so much!
Very pertinente analysis.
I completely agree with these arguments. Also, the idea that UFA can be turned into a lethal combined arms unit, by just giving some Leo's and Bradley's to the brigades with frontline experience is ludicrous. These brigades were already depleted and exhausted from earlier battles. Furthermore, they have no aviation support. The whole concept of giving AFU some training and armour and then they will overrun the russian defences in a jiffy is stupid and insane and just creates unrealistic expectations. AFU command have been taking the correct decisions, time and again ever since the start of the war, given the resources available and the amount of opposing defenses. They have vastly more insight and judgement of the battlefield than anyone else. It is high time that western commentators shut up and western governments give Ukraine what it needs to win properly.
Thank you for sharing your ideas. You are a real professional who actually knows things and can express your ideas clearly. Please keep up the great work!
Congratulations on 115K subscribers
Great video! Refreshing to see a polite and balanced presentation style!
Thanks for validating my recollection of the battles that the Wagner convict wave attacks were limited to open fields in & around Soledar and the hills North of Bakhmut. The other advantage Ukraine gained from fighting a slow retreat from the river across Bakhmut is they had many defense lines built up over 2022 across the city. As they slowly exited the city they used that time to fortify Chasiv Yar which is a fraction of the size, but at least has high ground. That is why an exhausted Wagner stopped at the Western Edge of Bakhmut, not taking the strategic advantage it supposedly gave.
It’s very disingenuous to miss the biggest argument, the bakhmut front consumed a significant amount of resources, for 0 strategic purpose during the offensive operation, meanwhile the strategic fronts received less because of it
Excellent summary, thanks.
Great as always. I'm looking forward to your video with Perun....
Din analyse er udmærket som altid.
Bakhmut shielded Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, overall 250k people. And, before the decision to withdraw or not was to be made, it was already almost turned into rubble. Ukrainians managed to make people from Bakhmut (70k) flee in time, only a few very old (and stubborn) people remained. This evacuation would have been much more difficult for Kramatorsk and Sloviansk...
So not only military reasons, but maybe also humanitarian ones.
As long as you are right, Anders. Another razor sharp analysis.
Great commentary Anders. Kofman seems really self assured. In my personal opinion its typical for some Americans. Kofman though has an imprtant point that we should let the Ukrainans fight their way. But again thanks for your Great analysis. Please keep it up.
I first thing I thought as a non-expert when Kofman said that it wasn't worth it for Ukraine to carry on in Bakhmut was "wait... but Wagner's gone now because of Bakhmut" but I assumed I was missing something. If Wagner's presence in the war was as important as I've been led to understand, then Ukraine continuing in Bakhmut was definitely worth the effort I would think.
If you provide your enemy an opportunity to grind themselves down without paying a similar price, it’s worth it. It all boils down to the cost each combatant had to pay.
The front needed to be held and having those who know how to hold that line were needed. You can’t pull effective force to train. What do you plug into that hole?
Frankly, it is what it is. Academics don’t fight wars, warriors and soldiers do.
until I saw this video I might have been swayed by the arguments discussed by Michael but this is a level headed analysis and Wagner not being in Ukraine makes the battle more than just a lost city.
Hi, man. First time watching you. Just saw a video by Ukraine Matters, and he named you, so I thought I'd check you out.
About the video: No idea who Kofman is... first time hearing about him (tbf, also fist time hearing about that O'brien fellow). But as soon as you listed Kofman's 3 arguments, I paused the video and thought about them. Hit play again, only to see you reach similar conclusions as me... His arguments seem really one sided, and aimed at people that don't really know what happened, or what is happening. Main reason being: Wanger was THE only "capable" force russia had in Ukraine... and it got F'd up, and kicked out. And I say capable with a bit of sarcasm, because all they did was throw SO, SO many poor bastards at a meat grinder, that eventually the meat grinder got stuck.
I liked your video. No propaganda, no half-truths... just facts, and common sense. Having said that, I'm subscribing.
Greetings from Chile, and keep it up.
Great vid!
Bakhmut was used as the ultimate lure to set up a killbox for russian forces. That seems to be the gist of it. By withdrawing gradually and planned from Soledar and through Bakhmut, countless forces got drawn into the valley that Bakhmut is located in, while the Ukrainian defences on the hills surrounding the city have continued to hold.
Ukraine was able to shape every aspect of the battle while russia kept throwing more and more resources at what was ultimately just a very average city. We have all seen the russian losses throughout the battle, not just at Bakhmut, but also Vuhledar and similar regions, like the Svatove-Kreminna line.
Concentrating russian forces, keeping them focused single-mindedly on achieving some worthless objective, while inflicting maximum damage from advantageous positions seems to have been the entire goal of Bakhmut, and in that it absolutely succeeded.
I don't think the loss of Soledar was planned; if they'd maintained their positions there, the Russians might be fighting for Bakhmut today. Holding their ground was still the right thing to do, though, and there's also the other fact we often overlook.
Bakhmut is a Ukrainian city with Ukrainian people. It's their land, and they've seen what the Russians do to those they conquer. For many of their soldiers, there's a very strong impetus to fight for every inch of territory.
😂😂😂😂😂
Soledar wasn't planned. Way too many weaponry got lost in the salt mine storage. It was very unfortunate for Ukraine.
Good analysis. I would add that there was always going to be 'a Bakhmut', somewhere.
But you base those opinions upon what? - The propaganda we receive on a daily basis? Russia makes the same argument about the “meat grinder” - but in regard to Ukraine. We won’t know the truth until long after this war is done. What we do know is that after all that time, Russia ended up possessing the city despite Ukraine’s constant reassurances it would never happen.
General rule of thumb:
Anyone commenting on complex issues with absolute certainty, be it economics, geo-politics or under a fog of war like in this case, either has an agenda or is a charlatan.
That is among the reasons why we all appreciate Puck Andersens honest and rational analyses so much.
Anders, you are without a doubt in my mind THE BEST military analyst covering the Ukraine war!! Many thanks for your great videos!! Robert Cullen
Exactly, Bakhmut was essential defensive strategy at that particular time. The Counter offensive is another realm altogether for a different stage of the war. Can’t have everything at once especially when your options are limited. Ukraine is vast and open so advancing is slow and on foot artillery, small arms on foot fighting. Going to be slow and attritional for a long long time unless logistics and manpower fade away. Stay strong Ukraine 🇺🇦💪
I really like the framing that Ukraine defeated Wagner in bahkmut… that makes it seem much more consequential
But ukraine lost against Wagner in Bakhmut.
@davidshapiro292 phyrric victory for Wagner which led to its elimination
@@stonem0013Wagner, a PMC kept ukraine busy the entire winter while the Russian army re organized themselves for the spring-summer AFU offensive, which they are winning right now, just like how they won in Bakhmut.
@@davidshapiro292 Hmmm, but saying Russia is winning atm is a VERY generous interpretation for Russia. And I assume we are both obviously supporting Ukraine, along with the whole world. Can you think of a way to rephrase it that puts more emphasis on the bravery and sacrifice of the Ukrainian people over the last year?
@davidshapiro292 Wagner were the only part of the russian forces with any real offensive capability. Now that they have been eliminated, russia has no options beyond relying on static defences and minefields. You may view Wagner as a weak PMC, but they were clearly more effective and competent than the russia army. And russia is still losing ground every day, along with somehow still inccurring a negative casualty ratio while on defence, so there really isn't evidence to claim they are 'winning'.
The Wagner coup also fatally and permanently damaged Putin's position and credibility. A very serious problem for him, as his rule relies entirely on a constructed image of strength and control which was severely undermined by Prigozhin.
I can't see how russia can possibly win in a wider strategic/economic/diplomatic sense now. And on the frontline, they are also doing fairly poorly, even if they haven't immediately collapsed as of this moment.
Exactly. Spot on. Also pinning class troops to Bakhmut and keeping Wagner busy was key so that preparation for coming offensive was maintained. Bakhmut is also a leaping off point to threaten Kharkiv and Dnipro. That could have affected the offensive preparations quite a bit if Ukraine had backed off or kept lighter forces there
Very insightful analysis. Just feeding the algorithm. Slava Ukraine!
Excellent analysis. Agree with Anders and actually believe Anders is “going easy” and being diplomatic as he takes apart Kofman’s idiotic argument. The elimination of 10-30K Russians, the withdrawal of Wagner from Ukraine, the mutiny/rebellion, grinding down the Russian winter offensive, and the resulting political circus in Russia were all priceless.
I quite disagree with Kofmans take but I think it's a bit strong to call it idiotic. I expect Kofman genuinely knows a lot more about Ukranian losses than most of us do so he's probably rightly concerned about UAF losses at a divisional level not being favorable during March/April/May.
I just think he's failed to see the bigger picture as painted well by Anders.
We have to stop giving credence to RuZZian lies. Their losses in Bakhmut were MUCH higher than the number you quoted.
@@geopolitix7770 How the fuck would Kofmans the septic Ukrainian losses know?
He is an academic used as a media talking-head - he will have zero insight into confidential info around the war and is probably relying on the same OSINT the rest of us are
this was actually piss-poor analysis. wagner didn't get destroyed in bakhmut. for an entire day people thought it was going to take the Kremlin. the only reason they're not still fighting is because putin destroyed it by attempting to subordinate it to the russian military and having that backfire
Takk for videoen. Jeg hadde ikke tenkt på det slik at Bakhmut var tua som veltet Wagners lass.
Another interesting video, thanks. I've heard you've had a chat with Perun, I'm very much looking forward to hearing about that.
I think your analysis is more on point that Kofmans!. Good job.
I listen to War on The Rocks as well. Very good osint.
Ukraine needed to attrit Russia and doing this while defending a city is efficient. If Wagner took Bakhmut Ukraine would have had to attrit them by IDF or by attacking.