Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Sweet and Mark Toth
Repeated Ukrainian drone attacks in and near the Russian capital of Moscow and cruise missile strikes against bridges connecting the Crimean Peninsula to the Ukrainian and Russian mainland are undermining the Kremlin narrative of success in the war with Ukraine.
Vladimir Putin’s propagandist, Olga Skabeyeva, did not help matters much when she announced on her television show last week that “284,000 obituaries” of soldiers were found on Russian social media, acknowledging, “These numbers frighten and shock me.” If accurate, that number exceeds Ukrainian estimates of Russians killed in action — considered by many as grossly inflated — by nearly 34,000. Shockingly, Skabeyeva says there could be far more.
Innovative, adaptive, and extraordinarily resourceful, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his generals are taking the fight to Putin — in Russia, in Crimea, and in the Black Sea. These strikes are largely being conducted without the use of U.S.-made weapons.
National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby reminded Kyiv of Washington’s policy in June. He told reporters, “We have made our concerns about strikes inside Russia very clear to Ukrainian officials, they have acknowledged that we have, and they have assured us that they won't use U.S.-made equipment to strike inside Russia. We don't want to see the war escalate and there are no apologies for that.”
However, as Putin is finding out, Ukraine will not be told how to fight this war. While adhering to the U.S. policy of “no strikes inside Russia” using American weapons, Kyiv is making use of innovation and assistance from European partners who are “determined to help Ukraine win an unambiguous victory” to nonetheless take the fight to Russia.
This is forcing Ukraine to fight with the army they have. Without close air support, engineering assets to counter anti-personnel and anti-tank minefields, and limited deep strike capabilities, U.S. and NATO tactics have been mostly unsuccessful. These missing ingredients to a combined-arms offensive are forcing Ukraine to alter their tactics away from NATO doctrine.
Consequently, Russia is finding that Kyiv is shifting toward a strategy of attrition and condition-setting. This means locating and destroying Russian artillery, isolating and destroying the ability to sustain combat operations, and bringing the horrors of war to ordinary Russian citizens’ doorsteps.
Russia is also finding its artillery, counter-battery radars, and ammunition storage facilities under heavy assault from Ukrainian reconnaissance UVAs, armed drones, and HIMARS.
Artillery is the linchpin in Russian doctrine and the single-highest producer of Ukrainian casualties on the battlefield. With this capability significantly degraded, coupled with Russia’s inability to command and control and sustain it, then with U.S.-supplied dual-purpose improved conventional munitions (DPICM), trench lines can be cleared, minefields breached, and breakthroughs of Russian defensive lines obtained without the persistent threat of indirect fires.
Russian forces and staging bases are also being targeted by Ukrainian-made aerial drones, surface and subsurface naval drones, along with Storm Shadow and SCALP air-launched cruise missiles provided by the United Kingdom and France. Moscow is finding its troop formations, supply lines and headquarters under attack as Kyiv sets conditions for battles to come in the conflict’s most decisive terrain: the Crimea Peninsula.
The Kremlin soon will have to fear the German Taurus cruise missile making the Crimean Peninsula untenable. Taurus provides another precision deep-strike capability with a bigger punch. According to Fabian Hoffmann, a doctoral research fellow at the University of Oslo in Norway, it has a “slightly improved warhead design” that makes it a better weapon for targeting bridges, freeing the Storm Shadow to hit “other targets” of opportunity.
Ukrainian deep strikes have not been restricted to Crimea. Moscow and surrounding areas are also on the receiving end. On Wednesday, a massive explosion rocked the Zagorsky Optical and Mechanical Plant in Sergiev Posad, some 43 miles from Moscow. The plume cloud towered above the plant and the concussion from the explosion could be felt for miles. Industrial accident, or a Ukrainian strike? Either way, the resulting mushroom cloud had Moscow on edge.
A police officer secures an area outside a damaged multi-story apartment building after a reported drone attack in Moscow on May 30, 2023.KIRILL KUDRYAVTSEV/AFP via Getty ImagesConsecutive drone strikes in Moscow in late July and early August must be creating a growing sense of insecurity in the capital. Message received: The war has come to the Russian heartland and there will be no sanctuary for Russia’s elites.
There is one notable difference between Russian and Ukrainian deep strikes. Ukraine’s deep strikes into the Russian interior are against legitimate government and military targets and Putin’s ability to wage war — and not against civilians.
Consequently, as Putin’s “all is well, nothing to see here” storyline on the war crumbles, he and the Kremlin are setting about creating new counter-narratives. These have ranged from threatening the global supply of grain, conventional military escalation against NATO, more strikes on civilian targets and — yet again — nuclear escalation.
In June, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko agreed to store Russian tactical nuclear weapons in Minsk and brought Wagner Group mercenaries into his country to train his military. Shortly afterward, he announced during a conference in St. Petersburg alongside Putin that they wanted to “go on a trip to Warsaw and Rzeszow.” The mobilization of Belarusian forces along the Polish border, threats to the disputed Suwalki gap, and cross-border incursions by Mi-8 and Mi-24 helicopters has heightened tensions.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, chasing a new storyline for Putin and hoping to drive a wedge between Ukraine, Poland and NATO, was quick to piggyback off the tensions when he stated on Aug. 9 that “Poland is planning to form a joint Polish-Ukrainian military unit ostensibly for security, but with the ulterior motive of occupying western Ukraine.”
In July and August, Russian missiles struck Ukrainian grain silos in Odessa and the ports of Reni and Izmail along the Danube River, precariously close to NATO member Romania.
Putin’s scrambling to find new narratives is being accompanied by the usual nuclear rhetoric by the likes of former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. Pugilistic as ever, he declared the “Kremlin would unleash a ‘global nuclear fire’ if Ukraine were to prevail in its ongoing NATO-backed counteroffensive.”
Nonetheless, the war grinds on.
New Russian propaganda narratives notwithstanding, wars are fought at the strategic, operational and tactical levels — and Ukraine appears to be making progress on all fronts.
Ukrainian troops continue their slow advance south toward Crimea. Recent reporting indicates they may have crossed the Dnipro River near the village of Kozachi Laheri and advanced upwards to a half-mile. Thus, establishing a foothold on the south side of the river while maintaining momentum is the challenge.
Putin’s message is being put to the test. Ukraine’s documented successes are playing out in the media, on social media, and in the front yards of Russians in Moscow to see firsthand. The question is, how many more Russian obituaries will Skabeyeva need to find before Putin’s false war narratives finally fall apart in Moscow?
Jonathan Sweet, a retired Army colonel and 30-year military intelligence officer, led the U.S. European Command Intelligence Engagement Division from 2012 to 2014.
Mark Toth is an economist, entrepreneur, and former board member of the World Trade Center, St. Louis.
No comments:
Post a Comment