Russia's captured almost as much territory in the last week as Ukraine did in their entire 2023 counteroffensive. The frontline is too dense with troops and drones to launch a major breakthrough right now, spreading the Ukrainians out and capturing as much territory as possible makes sense.
@@v4571-v8wRussia captured 520km2 between October 2023-April 2024 which is about the same territory as Ukraine captured between June-October 2023. These are tiny gains if we take into account the size of Ukraine. I think their goal in the north is to press on towards Kupyansk from the west as they've been struggling in that area for the last six months as they've been unable to cross the Oskil river.
Ukrainian anticipation of the reaction to their raids is not discussed. It almost seems like he is saying Ukraine does not need plans, because can rely on Russia to react in a way counterproductive to the interests of the Russian army.
@@v4571-v8w The land occupied is tiny in the strategic scheme of things. You are delusional if you really believe this is some kind of Russian master plan, or that the Ukrainians can be spread so thinly that a major breakthrough is possible. With the western supplies reaching the front in the coming weeks, resistance and even counter pushes where the Russians are weak will happen.
No edits, no cuts, just 14 minutes straight of valuable information from someone who really knows what he is talking about. We all thank you for your videos!
I agree, he talks about 14 minutes, but i disagree about valuable information. After 2 years of this war and he still hasn't understand the basics of it. I mean, he talks about not having massive troop concentrations at one point. Both sides stopped doing that after 2 weeks in the war, i don't think i have to explain why this is to anybody but him. The rest is basicly he doesn't know whats going on and therefore its most likely a bad plan from the russians. I wasted 14 minutes of my life for this nothing.
It would be unusual otherwise. Local TV can't be experts on everything, nor can they devote most of their brief time to one particular narrow topic of interest,
@@wyskass861 I don't mean the local municipality news or neighborhood newspaper. I mean the local national tv stations in my country, which have much more resources and experts available, than this channel has (I updated my post to write national news tv stations). Truth is that they show a few minutes about the Ukraine war, like missile strikes hit in the capital and killed x people, but they would never explain so much as this youtube channel does about a particular subject in the Ukraine war. Is it lack of resources? No, it's just not being prioritized over everything else they show in tv like tv shows, entertainment, sports. They could if they wanted, they have experts and plenty of money - they just don't do it.
If this is good info i feed bad about your news channels. He basically said nothing in the entire video except that Russia has a bad plan. He could have said that in 7 seconds. Ofc zero proof of anything is being offered, which is typical of news channels.
@@mrsubrange BS. It's a lack of resources and people like you failing to understand how this works. While it's true they have a lot of resources in the absolute terms, they have to cover the planet and produce 24/7. TV shows, entertainment and sports are there to pay the bills. I assume you're American because that is how cable news must operate to stay on air. If you want broad and deeper news you have to take the profit motive out, there are state funded but independent outlets like BBC, Al Jazeera, DW. There are English versions of local news like the Kyiv Independent. The best content isn't on TV or UA-cam, it's in written reports or from NGO. You can also read the press releases from the relevant government departments. Go to multiple outlets. Anders and small/specialised outlets exists in a completely different model. Ander puts out a video maybe once a week within his very narrow specialisation. He isn't RFU map reading daily or Jake Broe compiling the news and fundraising. tl;dr you are complaining about not getting Sirloin steak at McD.
Looks like an internal security problem. In order to win, it would be better for the top brass to work together. But for Putin to avoid being deposed, it would be better if they didn't.
Why would he be deposed, I wonder. You gonna keep you zombi biden since he is a genius of some mysterious kind. Why would we want to get rid of Putin who is our true leader?
You are exactly right. It seemed like the generals were all working together to fight Ukraine, until one of them took a drive to Moscow. Now it is probably a death sentence for two generals to have an unsanctioned meeting.
The number of 3-month old accounts showing up to yell at Capt. Nielsen for daring to suggest that the russian army is anything but invincible is going to EXPLODE in a few minutes 😆 Excellent video, as always.
It is disappointing to see that happen to the discussion on this channel. For a while it was a community of comments akin to Perun's. Nothing lasts forever, I guess, and here come the ruski trolls ...
@@squireson Much agreed. However distasteful we find it, their spoiling tactics works. While the russians are fairly inept at many things, information warfare isn't one of them.
Always good analysis. I'm a retired USAF Lt Col, and much of what Anders has to say resonates with all the training I had over the 21 years of my career. The idea that Russian simply might not have a coherent plan meshes quite well with other analysis I've been observing, and given the mafia style mentality prevalent in the Russian government I would give extra credence to this line of thought. Thanks again for another well produced video.
It is never a bad plan to use your manpower advantage to overextend an enemy that you know has undermanned and exhausted forces. The Russians are aware that many Ukrainian Brigades are understrength and haven't been able to be pulled off the line for rest, refit and reinforcement. Also in this war no one has been able to concentrate forces for "Big Arrow" Offensives because of the prevalence of real-time ISR that make any large grouping of forces a sitting duck for accurate artillery, drone, missile and air strikes. So saying the Russian plan is bad because they aren't concentrating there forces in operational groupings to focus on operational objectives like Pokrovsk is somewhat misleading as neither side has really been able to do that. The Russians are trying to force Ukraine to overextend in the hopes of more breaches like at Ochertyne that either over time add up or might be able to be exploited for operational gains if Ukraine lacks the ready reserves to plug the gap, because there are only so many times you can rush the 47th Mech. into the breach and have them lose a third of their tanks blunting the Russian advance.
Very interesting. This is consistent with my comment above, which is basically from the ISW posting on X at 9 PM today. Again, here is part of what they said. “ Russian forces likely hope to make an operationally significant penetration anywhere along the frontline but will likely prioritize the Chasiv Yar area, where Russian forces have the most immediate prospects for an operationally significant advance, and the front west of Avdiivka, where Russian forces have been able to achieve tactically significant gains in recent weeks.” They go on to say that Ukrainian forces have been sent to the north potentially allowing an operational success in the east. (I’m summarizing heavily.) Thank you for your comment.
That isn't a plan. They have been pressing the entire line for months, what they have actually done was move where the pressure is. The problem for the Russians is this isn't economical. Russian lives are cheap, and used even more cheaply, but there are limits and consequences. This lack of value means they can't exploit any potential operational breakthroughs as they don't have the means, the training, the cohesion, the leadership to do rushes like at the start of the full scale invasion. Without that ability, they have to use far more crude methods. Russia had a golden opportunity to make big gains during the Ukrainian shell famine, yet, no operational breakthrough and barely able to follow through on tactical breaks despite poor Ukrainian defensive preparations. More ISR doesn't explain it. It tells you they have goals, but no plan. Rush and attack isn't a plan.
Russian leaders seem to like fighting wars of attrition over and over again through history and then wonder why Russia has a huge problem of demographic decline over time. Not very bright.
@@oohhboy-funhouse I wouldn't say the Ukrainian arty ammo shortage was a golden opportunity for advances. At Zaporizhia the Ukrainians had parity (6000 to 6000) with Russia in artillery fires and still couldn't get anywhere. And while the Russians did have a fires advantage of 5 or 6 to one it was for a total daily expenditure of 2000 Ukrainian rounds to 10,000-12,000 Russian shells and not the 30-40,000 shells per day the Russians were using at the outset or when they took Lysechansk. What the shell hunger really did is likely made Russian relative losses lower and Ukrainian losses higher during the period but given all the other ways an advancing tank or IFV could die, ATGMs, FPVs, mines, RPGs, Recoilless rifles, other Tanks and IFVs, it wasn't like the Ukrainians were defenseless in this phase of the war. Russian force quality is definitely an issue, but the Russians do know how to mass forces, we saw that at Avdiivka in October, and we also saw how attacks like that get mauled because of real-time ISR and defender entrenchments. So now the Russians are trying to cause Ukraine to overextend her defenses so the next assault like that has room to move, and my guess is it will be two pincers towards Pokrovsk.
Summarising your short lecture, all I remember is quite a long list of 'maybes', that is a list of hypothesis that, unfortunatelly can't be falsified because of insufficient empirical data. So that the final result is that you delivered a lecture about the present discourses of the so called 'military experts' about the Russian Kharkiv offensive in Ukraine and not about the realities of this offensive and the realities of the Ukrainian reaction. Well, 'maybe' they are wrong, 'maybe' they are not. I understand that should you had been in general's Lapin shoes, you have taken different decisions, according with what you name 'basic principles of the military theory'. 'Maybe' Russian high command is using a different paradigm, in which what Lapin did makes sense. But, what about producing a lecture about what is really happening there. It's a bit harder since you need to collect the necessary empirical data, but I'm sure you will get a better result than most other 'specialists'.
I see where the confusion comes from. Tactical is lower than operational in military terms, but the other way around in civilian terms. Hence the misunderstanding. Frankly, I was making the same mistake until this video and my own search through the internet.
Getting a coherent story on what is happening north of Kharkiv has been difficult with my more usual sources. They do make things sound more dramatic, but I guess that is part of their job. Thanks again, Anders !
the official narrative of msm has been to "enlighten" the citizens. The unofficial(and true) intent is propaganda. Be aware whenever you notice your feelings making you make choices instead of intellect. That's how propaganda works.
@@tellyboy17what their objective is was the subject of the video; it can’t do much more than divert scarce resources, but that applies to both sides. Unless they have hidden forces somewhere, or hoping to force a concentration of Ukrainian troops where they are easier to target, the number of committed resources is insufficient for anything strstegically significant in the region.
It's refreshing to see other compatriots trying to stay informed on this tragic war with other sources other than our ridiculously inadequate mainstream media. Regards from N. Italy.👋🙂
One thing is for sure, the rush'n army is a total joke. If they have less land today than they did 2 years ago, that's bad. Rusha basically losing in slow motion.
@@dpelpal I think this is the one think people don't understand: current performance of gains in style of Blackadder (outside of undefended gray zones), and WW1 style casualties, the russia underperforms so much they're actually going much worse than in Afghanistan, which they lost, and they had lower casualties than locals there, which isn't the case in Ukraine if you even take a cursory look at Oryx.
@@a.brekkan4965 Kyiv is not losing and Russia is not winning. More western weapons coming. Eventually, air superiority will force Orcs back to their own territory. Unlike the ruzz generals, the West has a plan, and knows what it is doing. And no, that information isn't in the public space.
@@a.brekkan4965 Jesus Christ, imagine trying to flex that the largest country on Earth that formerly was considered the 2nd strongest power controls 20% of the bordering second poorest country in Europe (after losing more soldiers in 2 years than the USA lost since 1946) and that it's not the other way around.
Another suggestion for the new frontline could be that it is much harder to concentrate forces on the eastern frontline without being focussed by GMLRS and ATACMS, but since Ukraine couldn’t target targets inside Russia it was the only logical place to amass forces without danger of precise MLRS that was also close to a large Ukrainian city. Thus it would make sense that the US reaction seemed to allow(or not directly deny)for attacks within Russia now.
US directly disallowed the attacks inside russia. Their speaker and Pentagon repeated that, again. I assume Blinkin was hinting at Ukraine breaking the conditions set, like Israel always does... and gets away with it. As Terry Pratchett wrote: “if you ignore the rules people will, half the time, quietly rewrite them so that they don’t apply to you.”
Hi Anders, Video content suggestion for you. Make a video of trustworthy channels that covers other aspects of the war than your channel. Example: the "Inside Russia" which appearently covers the internal Russian intriques related to the war. It seems trustworthy, but to be honest, I don't know. So,... an overview of trustworthy channels would be great.
Spreading out your forces makes sense if your enemy is low on artillery, manpower, and supplies since statistically they will not be able to hold every single position. Russia is probably going to push into Ukraine in many new vectors of attack and see what "breaks" and leverage that position. I really don't know where your criticism against spreading forces out comes from. As long as you are "bigger" than your enemy, this has been a viable strategy throughout all of history.
adding to that, large concentration of forces is not really a thing in this war because drones have mostly removed the fog of war along the front line. both sides are obliged to keep resources relatively dispersed to deny the enemy opportune targets for artillery and missile strikes, so the absence of a large Russian concentration somewhere doesn't necessarily reflect anything other than this reality. put another way, 30,000-50,000 is a relatively large concentration in this war so 🤷♂️ moreover, the days of big maneuvers are long gone. it's not 2022 anymore. both sides are waging an attritional battle, so reading anything deeper into Russia not pursuing large maneuvers seems, generously, like a fraught exercise
The next wave of arms from the west is trickling in, which includes more Patriots. AFU is doing great focusing on logistics and high end targets up to and inside the Russian border. Airpower is not far behind. Remember, this is an existential war for Ukraine and Eastern Europe, it is not for Russia, and yet they do not value (meat offensives) soldiers lives. Russia is a broken society.
My point exactly, glad someone else has already made it. It isn't as much a diversion as it's a tactic to speed up the rate at which the Ukrainian military gets exhausted. Manpower is starting to become a problem, and increasing international material support is going to be a months long bureaucratic process. If the strategy is - as rumored - to exhaust and collapse the Ukranian military this summer, you'd expect Russia to open additional fronts to increase the rate of attrition right about now.
His naval academy job is literally to communicate with journalists and the public. This channel is pretty much "I'm going to answer the questions that SHOULD have been asked". Classic case of "Fine, I'll do it myself!".
It is very problematic that the journalists, who try to make the information about the war accessible and understandable for the public are struggling to comprehend military topics. This results in a completely askewed perspective and wrong presentation, sometimes as targeted disinformation. I am very glad we have people like you, who try to present this topic soberly and objectively. Thank you kindly for your efforts!
And this is not just a problem with war journalism. I know that science journalism is at least as bad, and I suspect that the same is probably the case in most other fields too.
There's nothing the dude is trying to say. Self pleasing wishful thinking. Ukraine has really run out of manpower. Why would Macron be having chronic diarrhea if Russia was not achieving it's intended goal. Some of us we don't pretend to know much but the the reality on the ground is " self evident", even for my grandmother's ASHES, six feet deep now!!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Journalist understand the importance of perceptions though, and how are the Russians going to be persuaded to stop if as a result of tactical victory they think things are going well. strategically?
According to the MSM one day the Russians are so incompetent they cant tie their shoes, the next day they're so fearsome they're about to take Europe, the narrative they give depends on the purpose of the lies they need to tell you.
It is obvious that the Russians noted that there was significantly more straw growing in the fields around Kharkiv than in other areas. If you are going to clutch at straws you are better off doing it in an area with significatnt straw.
So Avdeevka was operationally significant? About buffer zone and moving Russian artillery closer to Kharkov - why don't you mention Ukrainans also shelling of Belgorod? Buffer zone would move tubed artillery and MLRS away from Belgorod. 9:07 you need razor sharp concentration of forces for succesfull offensive - lol, looks like he missed 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive. By the way, if you read this comment few weeks later probably RF already took back Rabotino, which was only significant Ukrainian gain in 2023
2:00 Not criticizing just clarifying the pronunciation, the "y" in Sumy is и/ы like the first Y in Sydney or Lynch. So closer to Soo-meh than Soo-mee. I know you have great pronounciations otherwise! The russians can't pronounce that city's name either. Despite russian having a word that sounds exactly like it (сумы - bags).
@@brianrasmussen2956 Indeed. The war went well for him whilst he let the competent commanders make decisions. It stated going downhill as soon as he took over making all the decisions himself. Some people never learn.
Professor William Spaniel suggested one other motive that actually makes some sense, namely that Kharkiv produces a very large portion of Ukraine's GDP. So (in my words) think of a long war, hitting the economy makes sense. A bit like when Russia hit the Ukranian grain exports. But this was sort of presented as a motive on the side. I think William Spaniel's reasoning pretty much ended up with no sensible suggestion of a motive. You are both excellent scholars and analysts, and you make me I inclined to think there isn't much of a plan at all behind this renewed Russian push against Kharkiv.
The ruzzian "military lens" is dictated by the political(!) "military lens" of Putin. There is no functional military training school like the West-NATO has [ like a West Point, Sandhurst as examples ]. This is due to the fact such trained officers could be used against the dictator, putin and or the fsb. Couple this with the 1,000+ years tradition of citizens not as human beings but as cannon fodder for meat wave attacks and you have the explanation for this result.
Fake Ukraine contractors didn't prepare any defensive lines, the supplies and dragon's teeth are just sitting where they were dumped. They stole all the money and took off. This guy is a huge word salad. What a joke! 😂😂😂
Хомячки - это мило, но невежливо :) И таки да, не помнит что говорил или очень хорошо притворяется. В одном интервью он так искренне удивлялся откуда брались оценки неспособности российской армии, которые точь-в-точь он же и распространял. Пойми этих аналитиков после таких финтов ушами...
The analysis looks biased. If you are discussing the possible explanations, then why are you considering only the pro-Ukrainian ones? Don't underestimate your enemy.
I disagree. The video has a simple structure. It discusses the situation in the media around the offensive. It then lists 3 main possible goals Russians could have and quickly moves on to saying that Russian plan is probably bad. The rest of the video lists the possible explanations for the possibly bad Russian plan. The message is clearly biased. When analysing such a situation, you should always try to play the devil's advocate, put yourself in the enemy shoes, and give him some respect. What if it's just a reconnaissance attack? What if it's just the first wave that's meant to establish foothold for future operations? What about the Ukrainians talking about Russians preparing an offensive on Sumy? This video creates a limited picture of what's going and it's a shame. I would love to hear a more detailed analysis from the author.
Perhaps it is not a good plan. I hope so. But maybe, in current Russian government terms, it is still worth it: Russian command does not seem hesitant to sacrifice many humans to gain even small advantages. Like little diversion in the south and east. An indication for this could be the fact, that we do not see the use of much heavy equipment in the north. So they are loosing "only" soldiers. They seem to have some different values compared to us.
Hi, Russian civilian is there. Totally agree with the point about Kharkiv assault - no way to proceed it with such insignificant forces. From my perspective there are two main reasons for this offense: 1. To push Ukrainian army out from Belgorod - large Russian city near border, which has been bombarded heavily by Ukrainian’ tube and reactive artillery for the last six months. Previous weekend about 20 civilians there were killed - huge blow to the official image of “everything’s going according the plan”. 40 kilometers would be enough to stop massive artillery bombardments. So no need to take Kharkiv. 2. To increase tension on Ukrainian logistic lines and reserves and by this - intensify internal problems. Assumption: Ukrainian army is bleeding - understaffing is a problem for them. Inscreasing length of frontline will force to recrute more people in cities, despite the fact that it has already increased negative attitude to the government. OFC both points could go wrong for Russia, we will see.
I dont think the force this elaborate would make for reasonable push if we are considering your point 1. It can be among secondary contributing factors in overall reasoning, definitely. Do you know what troop quality is overall in the attack force? Regulars, veterans, raw recruits... that information may be a good hint
It is also interesting that you mentions the parsing out of resources to various generals to keep them happy. That was not a weakness I considered simply because the Russian forces out number the Ukranian forces. This makes me wonder which army has the greater logistics problem. In the beginning the Russians had a clear advantage in logistics but attacks by Ukrainian drones may have whittled down that advantage somewhat.
They have lost like 12,000 trucks/logistic vehicles. Those things are cheap but they are constantly losing them and often the things on them, it should be causing some delays. To say nothing of bombing on the rear and home front.
What is the situation at the moment? The Ukrainian troops are far too few in number and are worn out at the front and are therefore losing more and more combat power. Now Zelensky has passed the law far too late, which could potentially lead to more conscription. There are now two options. Either the newly conscripted troops are given a crash course for a few days and sent to the front as cannon fodder. This would relieve the strain on the worn-out troops but would lead to high losses for the poorly trained new troops. Or the newly conscripted troops are properly trained in the hinterland for months. This means that the worn-out troops have to continue fighting at the front for longer and are therefore further worn out. So things are not looking good for Ukraine because they were not able to mobilize enough people in time to defend the country. And the question is how motivated the new conscripts are who have been doing without for two years.
In six months or one year, Russia could relatively quickly shift troops to the already fortified Kharkiv enclaves recently taken villages/townsand with gathering of more and better intelligence, attack with a swift and bold prong. Since the United States is vacillating and not knowing whether to give aid to Ukraine or not and when (the last more than six months of floundering is an example of what I am taking about which gave Russia this window of opportunity) could be the real reason why Russia is doing what they are doing. In September Ukraine will/ may run out of military aid at $300 million dollars a day. This would be a good time to attack from the North. Hitler attacked Poland September 1, 1939 and Stalin followed soon thereafter More weapons and aid must be provided to Ukraine for resupply in August. Congress should have the next aid package passed by the end of July if not sooner America is getting a huge benefit from this small amount 4% of entire U.S. military budget to destroy Russia’s capability (very difficult typing on my phone). There it is
As I said Russia is getting 30,000 to 50,000 volunteers every month . More than enough men for any contingency . Russian plans are well thought out and very flexible
They are losing more than 30-50k per month. The "volunteers" will dry out and they are by and large Tuvans with 2 weeks of training. What good are they?
@@stream2watch you are talking crap . The pentagon put Russians deaths at 60,000 for the entire war . And you are saying they lose 50k a month without one thing substantiated . I’m so tired of fools
Ukraine lost permanently rich areas of their territory, the country is in complete chaos, infrastructure economically and demographically, they started today with the mobilization and the whole country looked like a ghost country, literally everywhere was empty, they are dragging people off the streets to join the army, the other European countries are already talking about deporting Ukrainians back to Ukraine to force them into the army, throwing people with almost no training to the war. I have to say if not because of the sad and devastating reality these poor people is facing it would be hilarious to listen to these "experts" who currently are still pretending Russia is in a bad position in this war and everything is looking good for Ukraine, but again, the sad reality of Ukraine makes this misguiding channels looking for likes and subscriptions extremely annoying since they hide the sad reality and just say what people want to hear.
"they hide the sad reality and just say what people want to hear..." How many people in the West want Russia destroyed! Marshal Zhukov correctly said: "We (the Soviet Union) liberated them from Nazism, and they will never forgive us for this"
It is obvious that you don't follow this channel and is just passing by to leave this comment. You would know that Anders do not paint a rose picture of the situation, in his predictions he saw that even in the best case scenario (where Ukraine would not have to wait as long for material support as they did) the UA would not be in a position to initiate an offensive in 2024. He states that the RA is at its peak right now and might be able to gain further ground (but mainly if the Ukraine aid had been entirely cancelled, not just delayed) so it does pose a threat.
So, the conclusion is, if we cannot see the idea behind the russisn plan it must be because there is no idea or a bad idea. Thats a pretty arrogant way of looking at it. Like in chess, you may not be able to understand the final picture if your opponent is ahead of you. That might also at least be a possible conclusion. This shows your own bias and therefor blindness
Russia is going into this area to stop the shelling from this area and it has been very successful. Russia is going every where they want to go in Ukraine with little to no resistance. Ukraine lost the war almost a year ago.
@@LutherusPXCs52 countries that only commit a small fraction of their total resources. And, particularly in the case of US, have their ability to help mared by internal politics.
Accurate, thougtful report, Anders! Thank you. By makinig the front line longer Russia hopes to aggravate Ukraine's manpower scarcity wihich fits to the RU doctrine that quantity is decisive in the end. Ukraine tries to parry that with a more technology intensive approach targeting RU vulnerabilities [like air bases, energy facilities or radar systems]. Apart from the mediocre level of RU coordination, you can only wage war as long as the economic base allows you to. In this respect I think Ukraine has a realistic chance of exhausting Russia economically in the next 12 to 24 months, assuming the West will continue its vital support.
Ukriane can’t outcompete Russia because they are not going to get another aid package from US and even the last American aid package sent less than 15 billion dollars of actual equipment (rather than promised equipment). And American and European weapons are much more expensive than Russian weapons, a FAB cost 22,000 dollars for Russia and a JDAM cost 36,000 dollars while carrying half the payload of a Russian FAB. A T-54, cost less than a hundred thousand dollars to brought out to the battlefield and a Leopard 1 or a 1990s abram cost a million dollars to brought out of storage and sent to Ukraine (also the us and eu include the cost of replace these in their aid numbers, which would make it 10 million dollars not 1 million in aid numbers) while achieving largely same results against drones and other weapons. (Tank warfare is almost non existent in the battlefield)
@@takeda64 Russia was systematically degrading Ukraine's forces' ability to fight, over the past couple of years. They were not intent on capturing territory, which will then need to be expensively held. People equate capturing territory with "winning", which is certainly not the case. Once the Ukrainian forces are sufficiently degraded, territory can be easilty mopped up later.
@@ak4939 yeah, it is a much more solid plan to lose half million of young people over 2 years than take Ukraine within 72 hours as they initially were planning.
Hallo Anders! I really enjoy your comments but this time I am afraid I am a bit more skeptical about your speculation here. If we agree that Russia has much easier time recruiting, especially due to impoverished and suppressed ethics minorities, than that would mean opening a new front relatively closed to a railway would be only to Russian advantage, would it not? Bedste hilsner Emir 😊
The best commentary out there, I think. Neilson’s conclusion is that the Muscovites have a plan, it’s just not a very good one. I hope he’s right. When he recorded this when Gerasomov was, obviously, still the defense secretary. He’s now been sacked in favor of a bean counter. The desire of the Muscovites, quite transparently, is to streamline the process of bringing men and material to the front. So when I see this plan of opening new fronts, what I see is the possibly the first moves of a strategy to overwhelm the Ukes along several easily supported routes, by continuing to pour forces into them, more and more and more. Very “Russian”. They no doubt reason that the West has shown itself to be timid and unsure, and worse, they note that Ukraine has failed to throw itself into a conscription effort. Till they do, Moscow, which has ramped up conscription, will have an increasing advantage in men, and, with an economy geared for war, they believe they can match whatever the faltering West has to offer.
I'm shocked... shocked! That you would suggest that the great military minds that thought Ukraine could be taken in three days, don't have a good plan!
@@ahmedvawda1282doesn’t really matter who said what, but it is blatantly obvious what Russia was trying to achieve, capture the capital in the first few days, get rid of Zelensky, and install a puppet government before the west could react. They failed miserably and here they are, over two years later, still trying to convince everyone that everything “is going to plan”.
I’ll never understand why western analysts almost always miss the forest for the trees.. perhaps the same hubris that made Russia think Ukraine would accept them as liberators. Enjoyed the presentation though, some good information..
Russia expected Ukraine to finally get to the negotiating table. They did but that made the US and UK unhappy so they promised "whatever it takes for as long as it takes". They thought that maybe the West would act rationally. That was a mistake.
A significant difference between Kharkiv’s location and the rest of the front is distance to the border with Russia. If the Ukrainian long range fires into Russia are causing significant pain to the Kremlin, and given the West’s restrictions on their weapons use into Russia, maybe the Kremlin is trying to draw down Ukraine’s deep attacks elsewhere. And as a side bonus, maybe Russia could make significant advances in the northeast. A bad plan in my opinion, though possible.
Zelensky is from a Russian-Ukrainian family, his native language is Russian. His job is to destroy the Ukrainian army and bring Ukraine to the Kremlin in Moscow. USA/NATO got punked and used.
Spreading out is maybe a better idea than one would assume, seeing as you can't concentrate forces in the same way as before. This increases contact, spreads forces, and increases attrition. Not saying it's brilliant, but it's not necessarily stupid.
Its strange that instead to be objective and neutral, military analyst try hes best to find only bad things in Russian army and to discredit any advancement or gains, and meanwhile be very silent on Ukrainians strategy and now for very long time been in defense, with very little prospect to start some offensive operations.
The Kagans uses a specific language to encourage ongoing war. Dont you get it. Your videos, I think, will be seen as statepropaganda in time because you allways have the same tone and negative tendency towards the russian operation and a positive on ukrain.
An invasion force which is depleting in terms of equipment and playing away from home field is viewed negatively. I'm sorry, if the US Army in Iraq had been forced back into Saudi Arabia would that be seen positively?
@@stefansekulic7903 According to Zelensky the Russians have gained between 5-10 miles along the northern border of Kharkiv. He says that Ukraine has lost 3/4 of its air defense. How I wonder?😉And According to John Holman a reporter with Al Jazeera the Ukrainian troops are outnumbered 7-1. You see the Russian plan is to stretch out the Ukrainian army, by forcing them to respond to threats say in Kharkiv, thin them out in areas that the Russians actually want to attack🤷♂️
Ehm. That is just wrong. He councils the danish state, who he works for directly. He is the most well-known analyst in my country on TV, since they do a daily "update" from Ukraine on the national news-channel. Anything he says here is public knowledge, if you know what to look for.
If you play chess, you understand "tactic" , initiative, and "strategy" and you understand why they are different animals. I assumed in military parlance they used these words like chess players do. But it sounds like not from your video. Having heard how you use "initiative" it is very clear you use it just like chess players, which I find fascinating. Im sure you know chess was invented in India thousands of yrs ago to try to stop war. The idea was a game where the principles of war could be played out on a board so real people dont have to die. So i find it interesting to hear you military people speak using chess terms. If a tactic is just something less than a strategy, then the beauty of chess reveals itself. Because in chess, a tactic is less than a strategy but it is also so much more. And, as in human war, a tactic can change the victor or change the strategy, as can gaining initiative. I find this fascinating. Btw, gary kasparov (who lives in the US) has spoken extensively on putin and this war. Biden , and all of us should listen to him.
If the Russians believe Ukraine has low resources (human and material) it makes a lot of sense to stress that as much as you can, which would include attack "everywhere" to deplete as much as you can. If you just see the published numbers of russian losses you can see that maybe thats the reason. Will it work? I hope not, but theres a logic behind this.
Yeh and a lot of the weapons and ammo still haven't arrived. Still I doubt they have a goal of capturing Kharkiv, maybe they'll surround it and try to cut off the roads to prevent resupply but a siege would be very costly for both sides.
But the same logic would also suggest concentrating forces for an attack as well - the more soldiers and equipment dedicated to attacking a single area, the greater the force required to resist it. I don't see that your logic necessarily leads to attacking on a broad front
Then it would be more tactically sound to push in 1 spot and force an over response where more soldiers and equipment are funneled to a single area where ranged weapons have the highest chances of inflicting casualties. Pushing aggressively on several fronts against defended positions in order to grind away is just flat out bad. Having a logic doesn't equate to good logic.
Who published this losses? The side that does not publish their own loses or show numbers that looks absolutely strange? How can 40million country have lack of infantry with 31k dead + 200k wounded? This is absolute nonsense. Doesn't it looks like they publish miscalculated numbers of russian side losses for a reason? Not a propaganda? Cope harder
@@ThePurplePassage the logic that i see is this one: with few resources and manpower you can defend well a portion of the front but not all of it, and one thing that this war has shown is that a big concentration of forces in a single point isnt a smart idea at all. Ofc doesnt necessaruly leads to this but is a fair logic.
Or could it be a play on demographics? Where the Russians try to force more new Ukrainians to the front and they could get a long term advantage in manpower? With Ukraine passing the new conscription law that would be a possible explanation.
I believe Russia was preparing a much larger operation and was collecting resources for a while already, but because US and EU aid came unexpectedly, Ukraine got more weapons and the window of opportunity started to close... Russian hand was forced. THey had to attack before they were ready. Now they are just shifting the goalposts to make it look like it was planned.
That is a credible take. Ukrainian aid was blocked by the Republicans in congress, and it looked like the disfunction would continue until the September budget forced action. Or at least there would be months more of slow movement before another aid package. When it did happen, it was instantaneous (by legislative time scales) and there were very public statements that the deliveries were already pre-positioned. That message seemed intended to make the Russians act prematurely.
I agree completely, but even if they had double the force there, it would be impossible to surround (not even take, just besiege) Kharkiv even in theory... as in, even in best case scenario and super luck, they don't have enough manpower to do it. And the idea that Ukrainian forces are stretched more than russian because of Kharkiv is kind of debunked by basic geometry (inner circle is smaller than the outer).
The Ukranians had been backing cross-border raids by presumably Russian resistance troops in that area. For political reasons, it made sense to disguise their own special operations near the border by copying the little green men approach. I don't think the Russians have considered that by reopening this front to full-scale operations, if the Ukrainians manage to push them back, they are gonna have enough political support to cross the border w/o having to obscure that they are attacking Russia's territory. NATO capitals will be nervous about this type of escalation but it is hard to make an argument against pursuing the troops from this offensive across the border to destroy the men, equipment and staging areas. Since Russia is not committing a lot of man power to this front, the potential for pushing them back does exist if the UA decides to commit the resources. What started as a propaganda victory for Russia by achieving some low level objectives on this front could turn into a very embarrassing penetration of their own territory.
I sincerely doubt Ukraine will chase them into Russia, even with Russian Rebel groups. Anything worth walking into to destroy is deep enough in that they would risk being bogged down or encircled. Maybe if the Russians rout so hard they leave artillery batteries and vehicle staging grounds undefended...but all they gotta do to run away is back step a few miles and they're safe, so seems unlikely.
The 11-d chess would be this as bait: send insufficient troops that can be surrounded, but only by crossing into Russian territory. The goal is a home front propaganda victory of "Ukraine is attacking us, their troops are marching on moscow".
Here's another thought. This attack was to coincide with the assassination plot against Zelenskyy, Budanov and Malyuk. The communication in the Russian military is not good and the attack may have gone ahead because they didn't know the assassination had been discovered as it was an FSB operation. Now they are fighting with no actual objective.
If Russia wanted to destroy Zelensky and the company, they would have been dead long ago. I hope you don't really think that the Russian special services are not aware of Zelensky's every move, including the exact location of his bunker? If you really think that, it's time for you to stop watching low-grade comics
Except for the initial Thunder-Run -type inept attack on Kiev which was the first battle they lost, the way the Russians are fighting this war in Ukraine is a COMPLETE INSULT to everything we ever learned about military operations and military strategy at the War Academy. Nothing in Miliary History supports this campaign in Ukraine -- because it IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what the students are taught on the basis of thousands of years of human, and especially Roman and Western experience.
Hey Anders, I had some thoughts on the topic of a Russian military plan. From what I've understood so far, in regards to the russian operation, is that they don't have a clear strategic advantage. While it's always dangerous to undervalue the strategic capability of an opponent, I think you also recognized that the nuclear threat as a clear sign of weakness, or rather a sign of insecurity. From a more subjective point of view, more focused on the emotional aspect of leadership and conveying strength, I would suspect the russian military leaders allowed this assault as a hasty response to the US aid going through, and the clear ramping up of european support intensity. The assumed usefulness would then be precisely as a means of smoke and mirrors as a prelude to a summer offensive and strengthen the border regions based on a presumption of a cease-fire.
It has a theoretical chance of working if enough disinformation about the significance of the Russian advances were to reach the Western powers, so our politicians would wet themselves and push for a panic peace treaty or something like that. But that only works assuming enough misinformation is spread and enough spineless and/or just outright putinist politicians get in power.
"Just because they have a plan does not mean it's a good one." Is kold Anders.
Russia's captured almost as much territory in the last week as Ukraine did in their entire 2023 counteroffensive. The frontline is too dense with troops and drones to launch a major breakthrough right now, spreading the Ukrainians out and capturing as much territory as possible makes sense.
@@v4571-v8wRussia captured 520km2 between October 2023-April 2024 which is about the same territory as Ukraine captured between June-October 2023. These are tiny gains if we take into account the size of Ukraine. I think their goal in the north is to press on towards Kupyansk from the west as they've been struggling in that area for the last six months as they've been unable to cross the Oskil river.
@@v4571-v8w So Russia is spreading their troops out and that makes sense? Sounds like 2022 to me.
Ukrainian anticipation of the reaction to their raids is not discussed. It almost seems like he is saying Ukraine does not need plans, because can rely on Russia to react in a way counterproductive to the interests of the Russian army.
@@v4571-v8w The land occupied is tiny in the strategic scheme of things. You are delusional if you really believe this is some kind of Russian master plan, or that the Ukrainians can be spread so thinly that a major breakthrough is possible. With the western supplies reaching the front in the coming weeks, resistance and even counter pushes where the Russians are weak will happen.
No edits, no cuts, just 14 minutes straight of valuable information from someone who really knows what he is talking about. We all thank you for your videos!
You are gonna get the bots upset now.
Why do you think, that he knows what he is talking about?
@@amai2307 Because thirdies are directed and paid to comment here? If they fear him it is because he makes sense.
I agree, he talks about 14 minutes, but i disagree about valuable information. After 2 years of this war and he still hasn't understand the basics of it. I mean, he talks about not having massive troop concentrations at one point. Both sides stopped doing that after 2 weeks in the war, i don't think i have to explain why this is to anybody but him. The rest is basicly he doesn't know whats going on and therefore its most likely a bad plan from the russians. I wasted 14 minutes of my life for this nothing.
@@FabiusPolis What do you think is happening?
Always nice to see your videos on my feed, Anders!
Mange takk fra naboer i nord.
I was waiting for Anders to do a take on this offensive.
@@tazgecko same here!
...nettopp i denne timen vet vi hva frihet er
@@Antropoids vi vil ikke dø slik død!
I never paid attention in danish class but it seems like your saying many thanks from a neighbor in the north. Let me know if I’m wrong.
This channel gives me so much better information than my local/national tv news does, about the Ukraine war. Thank you so much for that!
It would be unusual otherwise. Local TV can't be experts on everything, nor can they devote most of their brief time to one particular narrow topic of interest,
@@wyskass861 I don't mean the local municipality news or neighborhood newspaper. I mean the local national tv stations in my country, which have much more resources and experts available, than this channel has (I updated my post to write national news tv stations). Truth is that they show a few minutes about the Ukraine war, like missile strikes hit in the capital and killed x people, but they would never explain so much as this youtube channel does about a particular subject in the Ukraine war. Is it lack of resources? No, it's just not being prioritized over everything else they show in tv like tv shows, entertainment, sports. They could if they wanted, they have experts and plenty of money - they just don't do it.
If this is good info i feed bad about your news channels. He basically said nothing in the entire video except that Russia has a bad plan. He could have said that in 7 seconds. Ofc zero proof of anything is being offered, which is typical of news channels.
@@mrsubrange BS. It's a lack of resources and people like you failing to understand how this works. While it's true they have a lot of resources in the absolute terms, they have to cover the planet and produce 24/7. TV shows, entertainment and sports are there to pay the bills. I assume you're American because that is how cable news must operate to stay on air.
If you want broad and deeper news you have to take the profit motive out, there are state funded but independent outlets like BBC, Al Jazeera, DW. There are English versions of local news like the Kyiv Independent. The best content isn't on TV or UA-cam, it's in written reports or from NGO. You can also read the press releases from the relevant government departments. Go to multiple outlets.
Anders and small/specialised outlets exists in a completely different model. Ander puts out a video maybe once a week within his very narrow specialisation. He isn't RFU map reading daily or Jake Broe compiling the news and fundraising.
tl;dr you are complaining about not getting Sirloin steak at McD.
Another good channel for information (not "news") is Perun. He creates a video once a week on Sunday nights on different diverse military subjects.
Looks like an internal security problem. In order to win, it would be better for the top brass to work together. But for Putin to avoid being deposed, it would be better if they didn't.
Welcome to autocratic regimes. You promote the least competent because the competent are a threat.
Why would he be deposed, I wonder. You gonna keep you zombi biden since he is a genius of some mysterious kind. Why would we want to get rid of Putin who is our true leader?
You are exactly right. It seemed like the generals were all working together to fight Ukraine, until one of them took a drive to Moscow. Now it is probably a death sentence for two generals to have an unsanctioned meeting.
Yep. William Spaniel‘s recent video takes a look at how Putin has to arrange his musical chair so that his inner circle doesn’t become a noose.
The number of 3-month old accounts showing up to yell at Capt. Nielsen for daring to suggest that the russian army is anything but invincible is going to EXPLODE in a few minutes 😆 Excellent video, as always.
It is disappointing to see that happen to the discussion on this channel. For a while it was a community of comments akin to Perun's. Nothing lasts forever, I guess, and here come the ruski trolls ...
@@squireson Much agreed. However distasteful we find it, their spoiling tactics works. While the russians are fairly inept at many things, information warfare isn't one of them.
Lots of vatniks behind the accounts eager to earn their potatoes and avoid earning their wives fur coats.
@@squireson then troll them.
Yet the Russians keep moving to the west ....
I s NATO giving you a nice stipend? Surely you know this ends however Russia wants.
Always good analysis. I'm a retired USAF Lt Col, and much of what Anders has to say resonates with all the training I had over the 21 years of my career. The idea that Russian simply might not have a coherent plan meshes quite well with other analysis I've been observing, and given the mafia style mentality prevalent in the Russian government I would give extra credence to this line of thought. Thanks again for another well produced video.
It is never a bad plan to use your manpower advantage to overextend an enemy that you know has undermanned and exhausted forces. The Russians are aware that many Ukrainian Brigades are understrength and haven't been able to be pulled off the line for rest, refit and reinforcement.
Also in this war no one has been able to concentrate forces for "Big Arrow" Offensives because of the prevalence of real-time ISR that make any large grouping of forces a sitting duck for accurate artillery, drone, missile and air strikes. So saying the Russian plan is bad because they aren't concentrating there forces in operational groupings to focus on operational objectives like Pokrovsk is somewhat misleading as neither side has really been able to do that.
The Russians are trying to force Ukraine to overextend in the hopes of more breaches like at Ochertyne that either over time add up or might be able to be exploited for operational gains if Ukraine lacks the ready reserves to plug the gap, because there are only so many times you can rush the 47th Mech. into the breach and have them lose a third of their tanks blunting the Russian advance.
Bravo! It's nice to find a realist once in a great while.
Very interesting. This is consistent with my comment above, which is basically from the ISW posting on X at 9 PM today. Again, here is part of what they said. “ Russian forces likely hope to make an operationally significant penetration anywhere along the frontline but will likely prioritize the Chasiv Yar area, where Russian forces have the most immediate prospects for an operationally significant advance, and the front west of Avdiivka, where Russian forces have been able to achieve tactically significant gains in recent weeks.”
They go on to say that Ukrainian forces have been sent to the north potentially allowing an operational success in the east. (I’m summarizing heavily.)
Thank you for your comment.
That isn't a plan. They have been pressing the entire line for months, what they have actually done was move where the pressure is. The problem for the Russians is this isn't economical. Russian lives are cheap, and used even more cheaply, but there are limits and consequences. This lack of value means they can't exploit any potential operational breakthroughs as they don't have the means, the training, the cohesion, the leadership to do rushes like at the start of the full scale invasion. Without that ability, they have to use far more crude methods.
Russia had a golden opportunity to make big gains during the Ukrainian shell famine, yet, no operational breakthrough and barely able to follow through on tactical breaks despite poor Ukrainian defensive preparations. More ISR doesn't explain it. It tells you they have goals, but no plan. Rush and attack isn't a plan.
Russian leaders seem to like fighting wars of attrition over and over again through history and then wonder why Russia has a huge problem of demographic decline over time.
Not very bright.
@@oohhboy-funhouse I wouldn't say the Ukrainian arty ammo shortage was a golden opportunity for advances. At Zaporizhia the Ukrainians had parity (6000 to 6000) with Russia in artillery fires and still couldn't get anywhere. And while the Russians did have a fires advantage of 5 or 6 to one it was for a total daily expenditure of 2000 Ukrainian rounds to 10,000-12,000 Russian shells and not the 30-40,000 shells per day the Russians were using at the outset or when they took Lysechansk.
What the shell hunger really did is likely made Russian relative losses lower and Ukrainian losses higher during the period but given all the other ways an advancing tank or IFV could die, ATGMs, FPVs, mines, RPGs, Recoilless rifles, other Tanks and IFVs, it wasn't like the Ukrainians were defenseless in this phase of the war.
Russian force quality is definitely an issue, but the Russians do know how to mass forces, we saw that at Avdiivka in October, and we also saw how attacks like that get mauled because of real-time ISR and defender entrenchments. So now the Russians are trying to cause Ukraine to overextend her defenses so the next assault like that has room to move, and my guess is it will be two pincers towards Pokrovsk.
Summarising your short lecture, all I remember is quite a long list of 'maybes', that is a list of hypothesis that, unfortunatelly can't be falsified because of insufficient empirical data. So that the final result is that you delivered a lecture about the present discourses of the so called 'military experts' about the Russian Kharkiv offensive in Ukraine and not about the realities of this offensive and the realities of the Ukrainian reaction. Well, 'maybe' they are wrong, 'maybe' they are not. I understand that should you had been in general's Lapin shoes, you have taken different decisions, according with what you name 'basic principles of the military theory'. 'Maybe' Russian high command is using a different paradigm, in which what Lapin did makes sense. But, what about producing a lecture about what is really happening there. It's a bit harder since you need to collect the necessary empirical data, but I'm sure you will get a better result than most other 'specialists'.
I see where the confusion comes from. Tactical is lower than operational in military terms, but the other way around in civilian terms. Hence the misunderstanding. Frankly, I was making the same mistake until this video and my own search through the internet.
When you do BI reports it’s always operational - tactical - strategic because operations are for the people on the floor executing business processes
Russia has far more reserves.
So they can divert miles more resources than Ukrainec and still succeed.
Exactly. They're tying up Ukrainian forces and shaping future operations. Russia has options, Ukraine doesn't.
Getting a coherent story on what is happening north of Kharkiv has been difficult with my more usual sources. They do make things sound more dramatic, but I guess that is part of their job.
Thanks again, Anders !
Nothing too dramatic I think, the Russians saw a poorly defended area and seized it. Target of opportunity?
the official narrative of msm has been to "enlighten" the citizens. The unofficial(and true) intent is propaganda. Be aware whenever you notice your feelings making you make choices instead of intellect. That's how propaganda works.
@@tellyboy17what their objective is was the subject of the video; it can’t do much more than divert scarce resources, but that applies to both sides. Unless they have hidden forces somewhere, or hoping to force a concentration of Ukrainian troops where they are easier to target, the number of committed resources is insufficient for anything strstegically significant in the region.
much appreciation and thanks from Italy for your no-nonsense, competent, calm commentary
It's refreshing to see other compatriots trying to stay informed on this tragic war with other sources other than our ridiculously inadequate mainstream media.
Regards from N. Italy.👋🙂
Maybe we need a new word: "calmentary"
Claiming that local "warlord generals" compete and decide when and where to strike IS non-sense!
“Different interpretations” is a polite way of saying they don’t have accurate idea of what they’re talking about.
One thing is for sure, the rush'n army is a total joke. If they have less land today than they did 2 years ago, that's bad. Rusha basically losing in slow motion.
@@dpelpal I think this is the one think people don't understand: current performance of gains in style of Blackadder (outside of undefended gray zones), and WW1 style casualties, the russia underperforms so much they're actually going much worse than in Afghanistan, which they lost, and they had lower casualties than locals there, which isn't the case in Ukraine if you even take a cursory look at Oryx.
@@dpelpal Actually, Moscow controls 20 % of Ukraine. Not the other way round. If Moscow is losing, what is Kiev doing, winning:)
@@a.brekkan4965 Kyiv is not losing and Russia is not winning. More western weapons coming. Eventually, air superiority will force Orcs back to their own territory. Unlike the ruzz generals, the West has a plan, and knows what it is doing. And no, that information isn't in the public space.
@@a.brekkan4965 Jesus Christ, imagine trying to flex that the largest country on Earth that formerly was considered the 2nd strongest power controls 20% of the bordering second poorest country in Europe (after losing more soldiers in 2 years than the USA lost since 1946) and that it's not the other way around.
Another suggestion for the new frontline could be that it is much harder to concentrate forces on the eastern frontline without being focussed by GMLRS and ATACMS, but since Ukraine couldn’t target targets inside Russia it was the only logical place to amass forces without danger of precise MLRS that was also close to a large Ukrainian city. Thus it would make sense that the US reaction seemed to allow(or not directly deny)for attacks within Russia now.
USA sends troops to wars they actually care about. Ukraine is a dumping ground for obsolete weapons and nothing more.
US directly disallowed the attacks inside russia. Their speaker and Pentagon repeated that, again. I assume Blinkin was hinting at Ukraine breaking the conditions set, like Israel always does... and gets away with it. As Terry Pratchett wrote: “if you ignore the rules people will, half the time, quietly rewrite them so that they don’t apply to you.”
In other words, Putin isn't very smart.
I have roughly the same hypothesis. If that is the case what are we likely to see next?
Ah so that's why the rules changed. Thanks for explaining
Thank you Anders for bringing this whole Kharkiv thing into a new perspective ❤️
Hi Anders, Video content suggestion for you.
Make a video of trustworthy channels that covers other aspects of the war than your channel.
Example: the "Inside Russia" which appearently covers the internal Russian intriques related to the war. It seems trustworthy, but to be honest, I don't know.
So,... an overview of trustworthy channels would be great.
Spreading out your forces makes sense if your enemy is low on artillery, manpower, and supplies since statistically they will not be able to hold every single position. Russia is probably going to push into Ukraine in many new vectors of attack and see what "breaks" and leverage that position. I really don't know where your criticism against spreading forces out comes from. As long as you are "bigger" than your enemy, this has been a viable strategy throughout all of history.
adding to that, large concentration of forces is not really a thing in this war because drones have mostly removed the fog of war along the front line. both sides are obliged to keep resources relatively dispersed to deny the enemy opportune targets for artillery and missile strikes, so the absence of a large Russian concentration somewhere doesn't necessarily reflect anything other than this reality. put another way, 30,000-50,000 is a relatively large concentration in this war so 🤷♂️
moreover, the days of big maneuvers are long gone. it's not 2022 anymore. both sides are waging an attritional battle, so reading anything deeper into Russia not pursuing large maneuvers seems, generously, like a fraught exercise
Absolutely !
This man is grasping at straws !
The next wave of arms from the west is trickling in, which includes more Patriots. AFU is doing great focusing on logistics and high end targets up to and inside the Russian border. Airpower is not far behind. Remember, this is an existential war for Ukraine and Eastern Europe, it is not for Russia, and yet they do not value (meat offensives) soldiers lives. Russia is a broken society.
My point exactly, glad someone else has already made it. It isn't as much a diversion as it's a tactic to speed up the rate at which the Ukrainian military gets exhausted. Manpower is starting to become a problem, and increasing international material support is going to be a months long bureaucratic process.
If the strategy is - as rumored - to exhaust and collapse the Ukranian military this summer, you'd expect Russia to open additional fronts to increase the rate of attrition right about now.
It comes from having studied military theory for his career.
Unlike you and me.
This video hasn't aged well.
😂😂😂
So you're saying the media doesn't know what they are talking about? 🤣😂🤣 Thats why I watch you Anders, thanks!
His naval academy job is literally to communicate with journalists and the public. This channel is pretty much "I'm going to answer the questions that SHOULD have been asked". Classic case of "Fine, I'll do it myself!".
Thank you Anders. Your channel is a great public service.
It is very problematic that the journalists, who try to make the information about the war accessible and understandable for the public are struggling to comprehend military topics. This results in a completely askewed perspective and wrong presentation, sometimes as targeted disinformation. I am very glad we have people like you, who try to present this topic soberly and objectively. Thank you kindly for your efforts!
And this is not just a problem with war journalism. I know that science journalism is at least as bad, and I suspect that the same is probably the case in most other fields too.
There's nothing the dude is trying to say.
Self pleasing wishful thinking. Ukraine has really run out of manpower. Why would Macron be having chronic diarrhea if Russia was not achieving it's intended goal. Some of us we don't pretend to know much but the the reality on the ground is " self evident", even for my grandmother's ASHES, six feet deep now!!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Journalist understand the importance of perceptions though, and how are the Russians going to be persuaded to stop if as a result of tactical victory they think things are going well. strategically?
@@seancidy6008 The Ukrainians and the West are trying to win the propaganda war and they're failing at that too.
Even our military experts are not understanding what's going on in Ukraine. The journalists are even worse.
AP Nielsen/Danish Defence Academy = Pentagon Propaganda
Cant wait to see this guy eat his words
You are a paid poster from where? Laos?
Excellent analysis, thank you sir. When I saw Russia's Kharkiv offensive called a "lightning assault" by the MSM, I knew it was hyperbole.
Excellent analysis is when you are neutral to the problem rather than literally one sided. It’s an excellent propaganda.
@@yeti5857 lol sure it is comrade Vatnik, sure it is...
@@nozhki-busha you have nothing to contribute learn how to use your brain
@@nozhki-busha mindless comment
According to the MSM one day the Russians are so incompetent they cant tie their shoes, the next day they're so fearsome they're about to take Europe, the narrative they give depends on the purpose of the lies they need to tell you.
It is obvious that the Russians noted that there was significantly more straw growing in the fields around Kharkiv than in other areas. If you are going to clutch at straws you are better off doing it in an area with significatnt straw.
😂😂😂😂😂
🌻🌻🌻 also grow there
So Avdeevka was operationally significant? About buffer zone and moving Russian artillery closer to Kharkov - why don't you mention Ukrainans also shelling of Belgorod? Buffer zone would move tubed artillery and MLRS away from Belgorod.
9:07 you need razor sharp concentration of forces for succesfull offensive - lol, looks like he missed 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive. By the way, if you read this comment few weeks later probably RF already took back Rabotino, which was only significant Ukrainian gain in 2023
Naaa, Ukraine is just fine !!! Super fine ! They winning biggly every day , yea, yea ..
Absolutely no clue what he’s talking about, just look his past videos, pure emotion driven propaganda
Thank you for the great analytical work!
2:00 Not criticizing just clarifying the pronunciation, the "y" in Sumy is и/ы like the first Y in Sydney or Lynch. So closer to Soo-meh than Soo-mee. I know you have great pronounciations otherwise! The russians can't pronounce that city's name either. Despite russian having a word that sounds exactly like it (сумы - bags).
I've actually been thinking along similar lines: Maybe it's the genius Putin himself who has taken over the war planning.
Has he lost trust in Shoigu and Gerasimov? Maybe Prigozhin is sabotaging them?
He's replaced a general in charge of the army with a banker. Why? Perhaps he's figured out that war needs, first and foremost, MONEY!
Hmm, Interesting, wasn't there some Austrian painter who did that some years ago??...
@@brianrasmussen2956
Hurr durr everybody is hitler 🥴
Except for azov of course. They're democratic heroes 🤪
@@brianrasmussen2956 Indeed. The war went well for him whilst he let the competent commanders make decisions. It stated going downhill as soon as he took over making all the decisions himself. Some people never learn.
Looking forward to your next video! Your information is always so clear and useful. Greetings from Kharkiv. We are strong!
Russia has an advantage when fighting in the Kharkiv region because NATO does not allow Ukraine to fire in to Russian territory.
Delusion and denial. 😅
Professor William Spaniel suggested one other motive that actually makes some sense, namely that Kharkiv produces a very large portion of Ukraine's GDP. So (in my words) think of a long war, hitting the economy makes sense. A bit like when Russia hit the Ukranian grain exports. But this was sort of presented as a motive on the side. I think William Spaniel's reasoning pretty much ended up with no sensible suggestion of a motive.
You are both excellent scholars and analysts, and you make me I inclined to think there isn't much of a plan at all behind this renewed Russian push against Kharkiv.
thank you for your amazing content Anders
The ruzzian "military lens" is dictated by the political(!) "military lens" of Putin. There is no functional military training school like the West-NATO has [ like a West Point, Sandhurst as examples ]. This is due to the fact such trained officers could be used against the dictator, putin and or the fsb. Couple this with the 1,000+ years tradition of citizens not as human beings but as cannon fodder for meat wave attacks and you have the explanation for this result.
Fake Ukraine contractors didn't prepare any defensive lines, the supplies and dragon's teeth are just sitting where they were dumped. They stole all the money and took off. This guy is a huge word salad. What a joke! 😂😂😂
Будет смешно, когда автор в очередной раз обосрётся. Но разве хомячки помнят, какую чушь он нес раньше? )))
Хомячки - это мило, но невежливо :) И таки да, не помнит что говорил или очень хорошо притворяется. В одном интервью он так искренне удивлялся откуда брались оценки неспособности российской армии, которые точь-в-точь он же и распространял. Пойми этих аналитиков после таких финтов ушами...
Thank you for your explanation. It helps to confirm my opinion that the Russian military is as organized as a herd of domestic cats! 😸
The analysis looks biased. If you are discussing the possible explanations, then why are you considering only the pro-Ukrainian ones? Don't underestimate your enemy.
He clearly considered Russian narratives...
I disagree.
The video has a simple structure. It discusses the situation in the media around the offensive. It then lists 3 main possible goals Russians could have and quickly moves on to saying that Russian plan is probably bad. The rest of the video lists the possible explanations for the possibly bad Russian plan. The message is clearly biased.
When analysing such a situation, you should always try to play the devil's advocate, put yourself in the enemy shoes, and give him some respect.
What if it's just a reconnaissance attack? What if it's just the first wave that's meant to establish foothold for future operations? What about the Ukrainians talking about Russians preparing an offensive on Sumy?
This video creates a limited picture of what's going and it's a shame. I would love to hear a more detailed analysis from the author.
@@eugen3857 how could it be a "reconnaissance attack?"
So you ignored the whole message to go on a tangent. Look up other analytics. I'm not wasting my time on this.
@@eugen3857 You call that a tangent? you're the one who said it...
Perhaps it is not a good plan. I hope so.
But maybe, in current Russian government terms, it is still worth it: Russian command does not seem hesitant to sacrifice many humans to gain even small advantages. Like little diversion in the south and east. An indication for this could be the fact, that we do not see the use of much heavy equipment in the north. So they are loosing "only" soldiers.
They seem to have some different values compared to us.
There are fewer and fewer men eligible for military service in Ukraine.
That will be the problem!
Hi, Russian civilian is there.
Totally agree with the point about Kharkiv assault - no way to proceed it with such insignificant forces.
From my perspective there are two main reasons for this offense:
1. To push Ukrainian army out from Belgorod - large Russian city near border, which has been bombarded heavily by Ukrainian’ tube and reactive artillery for the last six months. Previous weekend about 20 civilians there were killed - huge blow to the official image of “everything’s going according the plan”. 40 kilometers would be enough to stop massive artillery bombardments. So no need to take Kharkiv.
2. To increase tension on Ukrainian logistic lines and reserves and by this - intensify internal problems. Assumption: Ukrainian army is bleeding - understaffing is a problem for them. Inscreasing length of frontline will force to recrute more people in cities, despite the fact that it has already increased negative attitude to the government.
OFC both points could go wrong for Russia, we will see.
Does the average Russian know that equipment left on russia side is closer to 20 prosent ? Tanks, artillery ,armored cars.
I dont think the force this elaborate would make for reasonable push if we are considering your point 1.
It can be among secondary contributing factors in overall reasoning, definitely. Do you know what troop quality is overall in the attack force? Regulars, veterans, raw recruits... that information may be a good hint
Agree. This was clearly stated. Also reality on the ground indicates just that
@@machinetradereurope7853based on what? So you do not need worry about anything, right? So far those shovels and laundry machines do the job
@@machinetradereurope7853 Every average Russian knows exactly where the fabulous idiots live
thanks for the update!
It is also interesting that you mentions the parsing out of resources to various generals to keep them happy. That was not a weakness I considered simply because the Russian forces out number the Ukranian forces. This makes me wonder which army has the greater logistics problem. In the beginning the Russians had a clear advantage in logistics but attacks by Ukrainian drones may have whittled down that advantage somewhat.
They have lost like 12,000 trucks/logistic vehicles.
Those things are cheap but they are constantly losing them and often the things on them, it should be causing some delays.
To say nothing of bombing on the rear and home front.
What is the situation at the moment?
The Ukrainian troops are far too few in number and are worn out at the front and are therefore losing more and more combat power.
Now Zelensky has passed the law far too late, which could potentially lead to more conscription.
There are now two options.
Either the newly conscripted troops are given a crash course for a few days and sent to the front as cannon fodder. This would relieve the strain on the worn-out troops but would lead to high losses for the poorly trained new troops.
Or the newly conscripted troops are properly trained in the hinterland for months.
This means that the worn-out troops have to continue fighting at the front for longer and are therefore further worn out.
So things are not looking good for Ukraine because they were not able to mobilize enough people in time to defend the country.
And the question is how motivated the new conscripts are who have been doing without for two years.
In six months or one year, Russia could relatively quickly shift troops to the already fortified Kharkiv enclaves recently taken villages/townsand with gathering of more and better intelligence, attack with a swift and bold prong. Since the United States is vacillating and not knowing whether to give aid to Ukraine or not and when (the last more than six months of floundering is an example of what I am taking about which gave Russia this window of opportunity) could be the real reason why Russia is doing what they are doing. In September Ukraine will/ may run out of military aid at $300 million dollars a day. This would be a good time to attack from the North. Hitler attacked Poland September 1, 1939 and Stalin followed soon thereafter More weapons and aid must be provided to Ukraine for resupply in August. Congress should have the next aid package passed by the end of July if not sooner
America is getting a huge benefit from this small amount 4% of entire U.S. military budget to destroy Russia’s capability (very difficult typing on my phone). There it is
As I said Russia is getting 30,000 to 50,000 volunteers every month . More than enough men for any contingency . Russian plans are well thought out and very flexible
They are losing more than 30-50k per month. The "volunteers" will dry out and they are by and large Tuvans with 2 weeks of training. What good are they?
@@stream2watch you are talking crap . The pentagon put Russians deaths at 60,000 for the entire war . And you are saying they lose 50k a month without one thing substantiated . I’m so tired of fools
@@stream2watch Intellectual primitivism makes you ridiculous and ridiculous
@@evgeniya7853 You should probably avoid the English language altogether, vatnik. It does not come out right.
@@evgeniya7853 What an ironic comment! Thank you for the laugh.
Thankyou for sharing your experience and providing needed clarity.
Ukraine lost permanently rich areas of their territory, the country is in complete chaos, infrastructure economically and demographically, they started today with the mobilization and the whole country looked like a ghost country, literally everywhere was empty, they are dragging people off the streets to join the army, the other European countries are already talking about deporting Ukrainians back to Ukraine to force them into the army, throwing people with almost no training to the war. I have to say if not because of the sad and devastating reality these poor people is facing it would be hilarious to listen to these "experts" who currently are still pretending Russia is in a bad position in this war and everything is looking good for Ukraine, but again, the sad reality of Ukraine makes this misguiding channels looking for likes and subscriptions extremely annoying since they hide the sad reality and just say what people want to hear.
"they hide the sad reality and just say what people want to hear..."
How many people in the West want Russia destroyed!
Marshal Zhukov correctly said: "We (the Soviet Union) liberated them from Nazism, and they will never forgive us for this"
It is obvious that you don't follow this channel and is just passing by to leave this comment.
You would know that Anders do not paint a rose picture of the situation, in his predictions he saw that even in the best case scenario (where Ukraine would not have to wait as long for material support as they did) the UA would not be in a position to initiate an offensive in 2024.
He states that the RA is at its peak right now and might be able to gain further ground (but mainly if the Ukraine aid had been entirely cancelled, not just delayed) so it does pose a threat.
Russia is in a bad position. Hence the turtle tanks, golf carts and motorbikes.
There are instances when one only needs tactical success to allow for strategic effects. This may be the case (if the Russians got smart).
propoganda
I'm always excited to see one of your videos posted! I really appreciate you sharing your excellent insights and analysis!
So, the conclusion is, if we cannot see the idea behind the russisn plan it must be because there is no idea or a bad idea. Thats a pretty arrogant way of looking at it. Like in chess, you may not be able to understand the final picture if your opponent is ahead of you. That might also at least be a possible conclusion. This shows your own bias and therefor blindness
"I don't understand how the Earth is orbiting around the Sun. So maybe it isn't"
That is the point of this video
We've been doing that since Vietnam. It was one of the lessons that we never learned because we could make up excuses.
@@alexchr380 If you directed the Earth to rotate around Jupiter instead, I would say it's impossible to understand what you are trying to do.
Russia is going into this area to stop the shelling from this area and it has been very successful. Russia is going every where they want to go in Ukraine with little to no resistance. Ukraine lost the war almost a year ago.
I tend to think this is the kind of wishful thinking that lasted throughout most of the Vietnam War.
🇺🇦🇩🇰
Reactions to this might also be geared to motivate Western countries to donate more aid to Ukraine.
That's what the Western press is for.
When Ukraine attacked on many fronts in 2023 the dude said it was a brilliant idea. Now he said it is a bad idea. Yeah dude keep coping
You clearly aren't able to listen properly, bot
This guy is Pro Ukraine. a biased post bye
Sounds like heavy copium. Which it is.
The generals aren’t competing, initially for the people, but for Putin.
Authoritarian leadership, fragmented structures designed to defend the leader.
The rush'n army is now the joke of the world lol.
@@dpelpal If it takes help from 52 countries just to keep up with them then their not a joke
@@LutherusPXCs52 countries that only commit a small fraction of their total resources. And, particularly in the case of US, have their ability to help mared by internal politics.
@@LutherusPXCswhile the dwarf sucks up to china.
@@vidarfe300+ billion dollars in redources and money is no small assistance
Accurate, thougtful report, Anders! Thank you. By makinig the front line longer Russia hopes to aggravate Ukraine's manpower scarcity wihich fits to the RU doctrine that quantity is decisive in the end. Ukraine tries to parry that with a more technology intensive approach targeting RU vulnerabilities [like air bases, energy facilities or radar systems]. Apart from the mediocre level of RU coordination, you can only wage war as long as the economic base allows you to. In this respect I think Ukraine has a realistic chance of exhausting Russia economically in the next 12 to 24 months, assuming the West will continue its vital support.
Ukriane can’t outcompete Russia because they are not going to get another aid package from US and even the last American aid package sent less than 15 billion dollars of actual equipment (rather than promised equipment). And American and European weapons are much more expensive than Russian weapons, a FAB cost 22,000 dollars for Russia and a JDAM cost 36,000 dollars while carrying half the payload of a Russian FAB.
A T-54, cost less than a hundred thousand dollars to brought out to the battlefield and a Leopard 1 or a 1990s abram cost a million dollars to brought out of storage and sent to Ukraine (also the us and eu include the cost of replace these in their aid numbers, which would make it 10 million dollars not 1 million in aid numbers) while achieving largely same results against drones and other weapons. (Tank warfare is almost non existent in the battlefield)
to think ukraine can win is total foolishness. russia has quality and quantity. The west? Russia has china, iran, africa and north korea
@@wakenyaskytv6937they no doubt have quantity, as for quality, are you suggesting they were holding off for the past 2+ years?
@@takeda64 Russia was systematically degrading Ukraine's forces' ability to fight, over the past couple of years. They were not intent on capturing territory, which will then need to be expensively held. People equate capturing territory with "winning", which is certainly not the case. Once the Ukrainian forces are sufficiently degraded, territory can be easilty mopped up later.
@@ak4939 yeah, it is a much more solid plan to lose half million of young people over 2 years than take Ukraine within 72 hours as they initially were planning.
Perhaps a little desperation in the general staff? They know the numbers that we can only guess at.
Hallo Anders! I really enjoy your comments but this time I am afraid I am a bit more skeptical about your speculation here. If we agree that Russia has much easier time recruiting, especially due to impoverished and suppressed ethics minorities, than that would mean opening a new front relatively closed to a railway would be only to Russian advantage, would it not? Bedste hilsner Emir 😊
Hahaha, what an incompetent commentator!
speaking of not-very-good plans, whose idea was it to invade ua in the first place?
The best commentary out there, I think. Neilson’s conclusion is that the Muscovites have a plan, it’s just not a very good one. I hope he’s right. When he recorded this when Gerasomov was, obviously, still the defense secretary. He’s now been sacked in favor of a bean counter. The desire of the Muscovites, quite transparently, is to streamline the process of bringing men and material to the front. So when I see this plan of opening new fronts, what I see is the possibly the first moves of a strategy to overwhelm the Ukes along several easily supported routes, by continuing to pour forces into them, more and more and more. Very “Russian”. They no doubt reason that the West has shown itself to be timid and unsure, and worse, they note that Ukraine has failed to throw itself into a conscription effort. Till they do, Moscow, which has ramped up conscription, will have an increasing advantage in men, and, with an economy geared for war, they believe they can match whatever the faltering West has to offer.
Exactly
Only thing is: We aren't faltering.
Failing is the only thing Poo-tin is proficient at.
Really, is that all you cams come up with smh
Ukraine: Temba, his arms wide/open
Russia: Shaka, when the walls fell
Media: Gramble, his throat slit by his mistress
Anders, you're brilliant ananalyst and you're incredibly good at terminology!!! Ukraine is winning!!! 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦
I'm shocked... shocked! That you would suggest that the great military minds that thought Ukraine could be taken in three days, don't have a good plan!
Whatever rusha attempts always ends in disaster and the world laughing at their "army".😂
Only the western media suggested that.
It was general Milley who said that. 72 hours he said.
Nobody from Russia said that
@@ahmedvawda1282doesn’t really matter who said what, but it is blatantly obvious what Russia was trying to achieve, capture the capital in the first few days, get rid of Zelensky, and install a puppet government before the west could react. They failed miserably and here they are, over two years later, still trying to convince everyone that everything “is going to plan”.
Yes that’s a general Miley quote and anyone still pushing that crap is ignorant or into propaganda
Also, good point about the assumptions around plans. You might well be right about the fragmentation. Well done, sir!
He is clueless, he admitted it few times. No idea what u people are so impressed with as he spent 15 minutes to say "russia has no plan'.
I’ll never understand why western analysts almost always miss the forest for the trees.. perhaps the same hubris that made Russia think Ukraine would accept them as liberators. Enjoyed the presentation though, some good information..
What exactly are you talking about?
Russia expected Ukraine to finally get to the negotiating table. They did but that made the US and UK unhappy so they promised "whatever it takes for as long as it takes". They thought that maybe the West would act rationally. That was a mistake.
A significant difference between Kharkiv’s location and the rest of the front is distance to the border with Russia. If the Ukrainian long range fires into Russia are causing significant pain to the Kremlin, and given the West’s restrictions on their weapons use into Russia, maybe the Kremlin is trying to draw down Ukraine’s deep attacks elsewhere. And as a side bonus, maybe Russia could make significant advances in the northeast. A bad plan in my opinion, though possible.
A month ago, bro was keep saying that Russia has no capability to launch offensive in Kharkiv 🤣🤣
We in the west really do seem great at misunderstanding Russian incompetence as 4 dimensional strategic chess-playing genius
Maybe the West could stop eating the chess pieces. Just because it is on a table, doesn't mean it is food. That is the only misunderstanding going on.
@@TruthProfit-vq4qg Did you think and write that yourself or you used GPT ?
@@TruthProfit-vq4qg Russian forces beat any country at Sucking
@@acajoom "Think and write yourself" -- what a concept for gullible western masses!
Zelensky is from a Russian-Ukrainian family, his native language is Russian. His job is to destroy the Ukrainian army and bring Ukraine to the Kremlin in Moscow.
USA/NATO got punked and used.
It's just a blood tribute to Putin's megalomania.
Spreading out is maybe a better idea than one would assume, seeing as you can't concentrate forces in the same way as before. This increases contact, spreads forces, and increases attrition. Not saying it's brilliant, but it's not necessarily stupid.
It worked for Brusilov in WW1 positional warfare.
Its strange that instead to be objective and neutral, military analyst try hes best to find only bad things in Russian army and to discredit any advancement or gains, and meanwhile be very silent on Ukrainians strategy and now for very long time been in defense, with very little prospect to start some offensive operations.
Benefit of playing with home field advantage.
A lot of common sense analysis.
The Kagans uses a specific language to encourage ongoing war. Dont you get it. Your videos, I think, will be seen as statepropaganda in time because you allways have the same tone and negative tendency towards the russian operation and a positive on ukrain.
An invasion force which is depleting in terms of equipment and playing away from home field is viewed negatively. I'm sorry, if the US Army in Iraq had been forced back into Saudi Arabia would that be seen positively?
What other tone to have against the Russian fascists?
Russia is good at not very good plans
Yet here we are...
Yet they’ve been gaining consistent ground for weeks on end. Cope
@@williamalexander9485And where are these gains exactly?
They are masters at this.
@@stefansekulic7903 According to Zelensky the Russians have gained between 5-10 miles along the northern border of Kharkiv. He says that Ukraine has lost 3/4 of its air defense. How I wonder?😉And According to John Holman a reporter with Al Jazeera the Ukrainian troops are outnumbered 7-1. You see the Russian plan is to stretch out the Ukrainian army, by forcing them to
respond to threats say in Kharkiv, thin them
out in areas that the Russians actually want to attack🤷♂️
Sounds quite logical. Though hopefully it wont disturb them to keep doing their mistake!
If Anders were a properly well regarded military analyst from those in positions of power, then his perspective wouldn’t be freely spewed on UA-cam.
Ehm. That is just wrong. He councils the danish state, who he works for directly. He is the most well-known analyst in my country on TV, since they do a daily "update" from Ukraine on the national news-channel. Anything he says here is public knowledge, if you know what to look for.
If you play chess, you understand "tactic" , initiative, and "strategy" and you understand why they are different animals. I assumed in military parlance they used these words like chess players do. But it sounds like not from your video.
Having heard how you use "initiative" it is very clear you use it just like chess players, which I find fascinating.
Im sure you know chess was invented in India thousands of yrs ago to try to stop war. The idea was a game where the principles of war could be played out on a board so real people dont have to die. So i find it interesting to hear you military people speak using chess terms.
If a tactic is just something less than a strategy, then the beauty of chess reveals itself. Because in chess, a tactic is less than a strategy but it is also so much more. And, as in human war, a tactic can change the victor or change the strategy, as can gaining initiative. I find this fascinating.
Btw, gary kasparov (who lives in the US) has spoken extensively on putin and this war. Biden , and all of us should listen to him.
Thank you very much. 👍
If the Russians believe Ukraine has low resources (human and material) it makes a lot of sense to stress that as much as you can, which would include attack "everywhere" to deplete as much as you can. If you just see the published numbers of russian losses you can see that maybe thats the reason. Will it work? I hope not, but theres a logic behind this.
Yeh and a lot of the weapons and ammo still haven't arrived. Still I doubt they have a goal of capturing Kharkiv, maybe they'll surround it and try to cut off the roads to prevent resupply but a siege would be very costly for both sides.
But the same logic would also suggest concentrating forces for an attack as well - the more soldiers and equipment dedicated to attacking a single area, the greater the force required to resist it.
I don't see that your logic necessarily leads to attacking on a broad front
Then it would be more tactically sound to push in 1 spot and force an over response where more soldiers and equipment are funneled to a single area where ranged weapons have the highest chances of inflicting casualties. Pushing aggressively on several fronts against defended positions in order to grind away is just flat out bad. Having a logic doesn't equate to good logic.
Who published this losses? The side that does not publish their own loses or show numbers that looks absolutely strange? How can 40million country have lack of infantry with 31k dead + 200k wounded? This is absolute nonsense. Doesn't it looks like they publish miscalculated numbers of russian side losses for a reason? Not a propaganda? Cope harder
@@ThePurplePassage the logic that i see is this one: with few resources and manpower you can defend well a portion of the front but not all of it, and one thing that this war has shown is that a big concentration of forces in a single point isnt a smart idea at all. Ofc doesnt necessaruly leads to this but is a fair logic.
Another very interesting video. Great job!! 👍
THE JOKER IT LOSING 🤡🤡 Zalensky NATO 🤣😂🤣🤡😭😭😭
Or could it be a play on demographics? Where the Russians try to force more new Ukrainians to the front and they could get a long term advantage in manpower? With Ukraine passing the new conscription law that would be a possible explanation.
I believe Russia was preparing a much larger operation and was collecting resources for a while already, but because US and EU aid came unexpectedly, Ukraine got more weapons and the window of opportunity started to close...
Russian hand was forced. THey had to attack before they were ready. Now they are just shifting the goalposts to make it look like it was planned.
That is a credible take. Ukrainian aid was blocked by the Republicans in congress, and it looked like the disfunction would continue until the September budget forced action. Or at least there would be months more of slow movement before another aid package.
When it did happen, it was instantaneous (by legislative time scales) and there were very public statements that the deliveries were already pre-positioned. That message seemed intended to make the Russians act prematurely.
I agree completely, but even if they had double the force there, it would be impossible to surround (not even take, just besiege) Kharkiv even in theory... as in, even in best case scenario and super luck, they don't have enough manpower to do it. And the idea that Ukrainian forces are stretched more than russian because of Kharkiv is kind of debunked by basic geometry (inner circle is smaller than the outer).
They also could've not attacked. It's not like they had to.
What is your belief based on?
Ukraine main issue is personnel losses. No new Ukrainians were shipped from the west 😅😅😅
Thank you for your very clear analysis!
The Ukranians had been backing cross-border raids by presumably Russian resistance troops in that area. For political reasons, it made sense to disguise their own special operations near the border by copying the little green men approach. I don't think the Russians have considered that by reopening this front to full-scale operations, if the Ukrainians manage to push them back, they are gonna have enough political support to cross the border w/o having to obscure that they are attacking Russia's territory. NATO capitals will be nervous about this type of escalation but it is hard to make an argument against pursuing the troops from this offensive across the border to destroy the men, equipment and staging areas. Since Russia is not committing a lot of man power to this front, the potential for pushing them back does exist if the UA decides to commit the resources. What started as a propaganda victory for Russia by achieving some low level objectives on this front could turn into a very embarrassing penetration of their own territory.
I sincerely doubt Ukraine will chase them into Russia, even with Russian Rebel groups.
Anything worth walking into to destroy is deep enough in that they would risk being bogged down or encircled.
Maybe if the Russians rout so hard they leave artillery batteries and vehicle staging grounds undefended...but all they gotta do to run away is back step a few miles and they're safe, so seems unlikely.
ukraine doesn't have the resources to push them back.The aid from the west is not sufficient to even stabilize the front.
The 11-d chess would be this as bait: send insufficient troops that can be surrounded, but only by crossing into Russian territory.
The goal is a home front propaganda victory of "Ukraine is attacking us, their troops are marching on moscow".
Wow. Massive wishful thinking on your part. You've described a highly improbable situation, but whatever it takes to make you feel better, I guess.
I agree 100% .
Here's another thought. This attack was to coincide with the assassination plot against Zelenskyy, Budanov and Malyuk. The communication in the Russian military is not good and the attack may have gone ahead because they didn't know the assassination had been discovered as it was an FSB operation. Now they are fighting with no actual objective.
If Russia wanted to destroy Zelensky and the company, they would have been dead long ago. I hope you don't really think that the Russian special services are not aware of Zelensky's every move, including the exact location of his bunker? If you really think that, it's time for you to stop watching low-grade comics
Except for the initial Thunder-Run -type inept attack on Kiev which was the first battle they lost, the way the Russians are fighting this war in Ukraine is a COMPLETE INSULT to everything we ever learned about military operations and military strategy at the War Academy.
Nothing in Miliary History supports this campaign in Ukraine -- because it IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what the students are taught on the basis of thousands of years of human, and especially Roman and Western experience.
Hey Anders, I had some thoughts on the topic of a Russian military plan.
From what I've understood so far, in regards to the russian operation, is that they don't have a clear strategic advantage. While it's always dangerous to undervalue the strategic capability of an opponent, I think you also recognized that the nuclear threat as a clear sign of weakness, or rather a sign of insecurity.
From a more subjective point of view, more focused on the emotional aspect of leadership and conveying strength, I would suspect the russian military leaders allowed this assault as a hasty response to the US aid going through, and the clear ramping up of european support intensity. The assumed usefulness would then be precisely as a means of smoke and mirrors as a prelude to a summer offensive and strengthen the border regions based on a presumption of a cease-fire.
It has a theoretical chance of working if enough disinformation about the significance of the Russian advances were to reach the Western powers, so our politicians would wet themselves and push for a panic peace treaty or something like that. But that only works assuming enough misinformation is spread and enough spineless and/or just outright putinist politicians get in power.