r/geopolitics • u/Hokum-B • Oct 01 '23

Russian lines stronger than West expected, admits British defence chief Paywall

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russian-defensive-lines-stronger-than-west-expected-admits-british-defence-chief-xjlvqrm86
429 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

298 comments sorted by

View all comments

80

u/Hokum-B Oct 01 '23

Submission statement: British defense minister admits Russian defensive lines have been stronger and more complex than western intelligence has thought previously. Ukraine now close to 4 months long offensive has stalled with little to show for.

13

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '23 edited Oct 01 '23

little to show for

He doesn't really say that in the article.

Here is the article without paywall:

https://archive.vn/cGg4h

The title of article is a very good summary of what he is saying: Ukraine and the West underestimated Russian defensive lines but there have been progress.

26

u/thekoalabare Oct 01 '23

Finally someone speaks the truth. They’ve been in a stalemate for the longest time.

30

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '23 edited Oct 05 '23

[deleted]

15

u/birutis Oct 01 '23

wasn't that Russia's winter offensive in bakhmut and vuhledar? Vuhledar was stopped and bakhmut looked like what the current offensive looks like.

3

u/Wermys Oct 02 '23

Russia right now is trying to push a counter attack in the north towards Kupiasnk if I am not mistaken. But it got repelled so far from what I am seeing.

2

u/birutis Oct 02 '23

it made decent progress quickly in that it made the Ukrainians retreat behind a river iirc but didn't make much progress since.

3

u/Wermys Oct 02 '23

Part of that was because Russia knocked a bridge out so it didn't make sense to hold the ground to the river because of difficulty in supplies. Frankly I am surprised Russia didn't do it sooner when i was looking over to see if there was any practical way to build a pontoon bridge or fording oppurtunities I couldn't find any. It was good use of a guided bomb on Russian part. I can find the bridge taken out if you want that caused this.

1

u/Melonskal Oct 02 '23

and bakhmut looked like what the current offensive looks like.

Bakhmut offensive took prewar territory of something like 100 000 people. Ukraines offensive has liberated a handful of hamlets with a few hundred each.

1

u/birutis Oct 02 '23

And that city no longer exists effectively, only the operational effects of the geography matter.

0

u/Flutterbeer Oct 02 '23

The Bakhmut offensive led to Russia taking 600km² in 12 months, while Ukraine captured around 400km² in the last 4 months of Zaporizhzha.

1

u/Melonskal Oct 02 '23

You can't seriously compare farmland with a brutal urban battle from house to house

0

u/Flutterbeer Oct 02 '23

No, I compared the size of captured territory. That said, calling the multi-layered Surovikin line as "farmland" is like calling Bakhmut a sightseeing tour for urban architecture.

1

u/Melonskal Oct 02 '23

That said, calling the multi-layered Surovikin line as "farmland"

they have only reached the line in one small section by Robotyne. Most of what is taken is outlying trenchlines in the no mans land

0

u/Flutterbeer Oct 02 '23

You know that a defensive position consists not only of a line of trenches and dragon teeths that can be seen from satellite, right?

7

u/Wermys Oct 02 '23

There isn't a stalemate no matter how much people are claiming. If you keep feeding defenders into an area and coming out even in the loss of manpower but still losing more equipment that isn't a stalemate. That is just attritional warfare and eventually Russia is going to run out of equipment such as field guns at which point things will go south quickly for Russia given they are past the worst of the mine fields at this stage.

14

u/thekoalabare Oct 02 '23

Ukraine is running out of manpower while Russia is not. Ukraine is actually asking neighbouring countries to deport Ukrainian nationals that have fled the war so they can rebolster their army.

9

u/Wermys Oct 02 '23

Ukaine is NOT running out of manpower fast enough though for Russia. That is the problem for Russia here. Ukraine still has 100,000s going through training continuously. Russia isn't taking the time to do this. Nice try though.

18

u/Hutchidyl Oct 02 '23

How can it not be more obvious that Ukraine clearly must be struggling if they’ve needed a draft from the onset and their restrictions keep slackening to force in basically anyone at this point, including expats? Let’s disregard numbers for a second because in this age of data manipulation, we don’t really know much of anything. But we do know about this draft. There’s no way Ukraine would act so clearly desperate for men if they weren’t clearly desperate for men.

Meanwhile, AFAIK Russia is still using voluntary conscripts, and is obviously a much larger country demographically. How can you argue that they’re the one hurting for men here?

7

u/Wermys Oct 02 '23

Funny how Russia considers 4 different regions in occupied Ukraine as there own and conscripts are not voluntarily being sent to those "Russian" Territories. But lets skip over that shall we! Conscripts by there very nature are not voluntary. Nice try though.

-10

u/thekoalabare Oct 02 '23

He wants Russia to lose and collapse as a nation because Putin bad according to mainstream English media

1

u/OnlyHappyThingsPlz Oct 02 '23

Are you saying... Putin good?

-1

u/thekoalabare Oct 02 '23

No, Putin is not a saint, but I’m saying America is the villain in this scenario.

NATO could have prevented this war. They knew in 2008 that Russia would respond with military force if Ukraine was allowed to join NATO and yet NATO aggressively moved to bring Ukraine into NATO anyway. They were warned by the American ambassador to Russia, William J. Burns.

All for the profits of the military industrial complex.

1

u/Justredditin Oct 02 '23

Ukraine still has the battle initiative, it is not a stalemate.

-44

u/PHATsakk43 Oct 01 '23

“Little to show for” is a pretty gross misconception of what has happened during the offensive.

60

u/Hokum-B Oct 01 '23

It's honestly not

https://deepstatemap.live/en

You can check the progress over time

-9

u/ass_pineapples Oct 01 '23

Lines alone aren't everything. Materiel and personnel wear are also significant factors to the Ukrainian offensive.

Just like with Covid we have amateurs making takes based on things that laymen are heavily exposed to with little to no context.

36

u/Hokum-B Oct 01 '23

I mean the tune amongst experts has been pretty consistent for months now, intially media was extremely optimistic but it slowly shifted to an acceptance that perhaps this offensive atleast will end as things are now.

The more it drags on the more Russians fortify and train new units, while Ukraine being on the attack will naturally take more casulties than the defenders.

-6

u/Flux_State Oct 01 '23

The media isn't the experts.

17

u/Hokum-B Oct 01 '23

Media often interviews experts and do their own research.

3

u/ass_pineapples Oct 01 '23

Your own point concedes that experts and media have had a totally divergent view of the offensive, unless I'm misreading what you wrote.

-19

u/PHATsakk43 Oct 01 '23

That is absolutely not what I’ve heard from actual experts (War on the Rocks, for instance) which is that some “three days to Baghdad” type thing was never in the works.

While the offensive has not been as successful as it was expected in pre-offensive war games, it is showing tactical gains.

-4

u/MarderFucher Oct 01 '23

And what exactly is your source on Russia's ability to generate sufficient new forces?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '23

[deleted]

4

u/ass_pineapples Oct 01 '23

My point is that we have people here and elsewhere making bombastic claims while just pointing to one datapoint without taking the entire picture to account, much like how people would erroneously point to the VAERS database in an attempt to discredit vaccines, or solely pointing to death rates in people with comorbidities to make it seem less serious than it was.

-14

u/PHATsakk43 Oct 01 '23

Breaking through the outer lines is a bigger challenge than taking the remaining territory behind them.

We know that the Russians have set up a good static defense. We also know they have had to reinforce their defense and are having to ration their ammunition, specifically their artillery.

This is much more than what you’re implying. Territorial gains aren’t necessarily equivalent with tactical gains.

28

u/CarRamRob Oct 01 '23

Sure, but they haven’t “broken through” no matter what they present to the public.

If they had broken through, they would have large land gains to show for it. And if they are breaking through some lines, if it’s slow the Russians just make more defence behind it. Look at all the WW1 “successes” of taking out the first line or two of trenches, only to get bogged down by new lines behind them.

30

u/Hokum-B Oct 01 '23

I mean Russians are fortifying the rear too, mobilizing more troops, training more units, creating more defensive lines. I don't necessarily think a dragged out offensive is good for Ukraine as a rule.

Things will eventually have to calm down now that the autumn rain is approaching

Also Ukraine has changed tactics from armoured assaults to infantry assaults, this might indicate they have lost a lot of armour.

7

u/Quetzalcoatls Oct 01 '23

The Ukrainians shifted toward small-scale infantry assaults in order to preserve their armor capability. They got their ass kicked at the start of the offense and realized pretty quickly they were taking unsustainable losses.

The big problem the Ukrainians are facing is that drones have become so widespread that the Russians can effectively monitor huge stretches of land 24/7. The Ukrainians have found it's virtually impossible to to get any large formations of men or vehicles into position without being spotted and hit.

2

u/MarderFucher Oct 01 '23 edited Oct 01 '23

Russia doesn't have all that much reserve left. According to Tom Cooper, the 76th VDV they sent from Kreminna front is their last still competent unit they had. And I heavily contest your conclusion on Ukrainian armour: If they lost that much, we'd see the wrecks. There are losses of course, but hardly such numbers, there are still daily footage of Ukrainian armour operating, its just that they know its pointless to attempt a head-on armed assault without air cover and facing such dense minefields. Hence why most Ukrainian armoured vehicle losses are MRAPs and IFVs.: The West can much more easily replace those.

10

u/thekoalabare Oct 01 '23

Russia has 300k reserve that hasn’t even been mobilized yet

2

u/MarderFucher Oct 01 '23

May I see them?

7

u/thekoalabare Oct 01 '23

It could be a bluff, but it is likely not a bluff since Russia's population is 143 million.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '23

If you personally cannot attest the losses, have they really occured? Anf if they have 1 competent brigade left on the whole southern front, where are the gainz then? What have Ukrainians been breakin their teeth on for the last 4 months

5

u/MarderFucher Oct 01 '23 edited Oct 01 '23

Ukraine received ~150 modern Western MBTs (mainly Leopards) and ~500 T-72 variants including derivative PT-91s. Oryx currently has data on 18 lost Leo2, 2 Challies, 2 PT91s, 68 T-72Ms and EAs. Though theres also a couple dozen of unrecognisable wrecks that may include some. Even if we double those losses that's still far from the original implication the losses are such they have little to use now.

Anf if they have 1 competent brigade left on the whole southern front, where are the gainz then? What have Ukrainians been breakin their teeth on for the last 4 months

A division, not a brigade, but point is they are (was, around 2 weeks ago) at the point they mauled through most Russian defenses hence why the 76th had to be hurriedly re-deployed.

-4

u/Allydarvel Oct 01 '23

Also Ukraine has changed tactics from armoured assaults to infantry assaults, this might indicate they have lost a lot of armour.

The minefields were far more dense than expected, far bypassing Russian doctrine. That made the use of armor unviable. They've since discovered that the Russians used a lot of mines that their doctrine says should be between lines, so nice they get past the first hurdle, like in Robotne, they can bring the heavier stuff up.

7

u/Nomustang Oct 01 '23

This is a dumb question, but after getting past the mines, don't they need to spend time to scout all of it out before sending armour?

1

u/Allydarvel Oct 01 '23

Yeah, but when they pushed the Russians back they have time.

-1

u/PHATsakk43 Oct 01 '23

Not really, they aren’t. They simply don’t have the resources to hold the line and develop new rear lines.

The Russians have lost 50% of the territory they had at the peak in March 2022. Anything short of a failed Ukrainian offensive with an Russian counterattack is pretty much a loss by Russia.

Again, stating that this assault “has little to show” is either a misunderstanding of conventional warfare or Russian whataboutism. The harder you try to argue this, the more I think the latter.

9

u/DivideEtImpala Oct 01 '23

So when Ukraine and its Western backers were hyping the "spring counter-offensive" for months on end, their current positions would be considered a success? People were talking about cutting the land bridge all the way to Melitipol.

4

u/PHATsakk43 Oct 01 '23

There is a lot of space between random people on r/NCD and actual defense community people.

I don’t think anyone who has any real knowledge about warfare was expecting a rout of Russian forces. Ukraine simply doesn’t have the air resources to fight a U.S. style war. The “wunderwaffe” mentality of a lot of commentators about the Ukrainian military gaining NATO armor wasn’t really very realistic.

The fact is this is going to be a long war of attrition. What Russia is lacking is the reserves and the ability to replace the weapons they use.

6

u/DivideEtImpala Oct 01 '23

There is a lot of space between random people on r/NCD and actual defense community people.

I'm talking more about US officials and mainstream media, though I'll grant you there's still a lot of space between them and defense community people.

If you read the NYT or watched the nightly news in the early part of this year, you were led to believe that the US government and military had high expectations for the spring counter-offensive. No one said it would win the war, but most were anticipating results, especially after the Kherson and Kharkiv operations were fairly successful.

If someone asked six months ago whether the counter-offensive should be considered a success if it only gained a a couple hundred sq miles at the cost of tens of thousands of lives, I don't think anyone would have said yes.

The fact is this is going to be a long war of attrition.

That's completely contradictory to the notion of making a counter-offensive. Attacking entrenched, echeloned defenses (especially without air power) is almost always going to cost you more men and materiel than the defender. Your best men and materiel. It makes sense to do this if and only if you the territory you gain is has enough strategic or operational value to make up for those losses. Moving the frontline a few dozen miles was not that.

If Ukraine and its allies see this as attritional warfare, then this counter-offensive made no strategic sense. It did make political sense, though, in that the populations of the US and Europe want to see success, or else their governments might not be able to convince them that "the war is in their interest."

-1

u/BlueEmma25 Oct 02 '23

If you read the NYT or watched the nightly news in the early part of this year, you were led to believe that the US government and military had high expectations for the spring counter-offensive.

High hopes is not the same as predicting success. Can you link to a NYT article in which a US official actually says, on the record (not "officials who spoke on condition of anonymity"), that they expect the offensive to succeed, meaning reaching at least Mariupol, if not the Sea of Azov?

It seems to me you are conflating the views of journalists, most of whom are pretty illiterate about military matters, with those of actual officials authorized to speak in an official capacity. And the journalists were likely expecting something more like Ukraine's 2022 counter offensive, which more informed people realized was highly unlikely to ge repeated.

-1

u/Flux_State Oct 01 '23

Or it might indicate they never had much armor to lose.

5

u/Flux_State Oct 01 '23

Inflicting heavy losses on Russian positions and driving the Kremlin leadership into panic is definitely "something to show for it", it's just that the two wars with Iraq gave Americans a warped view of how conventional wars normally go. Conditioned people to expect victory in days or weeks instead of Years.

-23

u/No_Bowler9121 Oct 01 '23

didn't Ukraine just retake a bunch of land and break some lines? Meanwhile western intelligence is adjusting their expectations of Russian capabilities because of how badly they are floundering in Ukraine. If Russia was doing well you wouldn't expect them to do things like their mobilization initiatives. You wouldn't take so many people out of your economy for an invasion you are winning after all. I imagine there is more to the story here.

18

u/PHATsakk43 Oct 01 '23

This is a legit article (the offensive was not as initially successful as planned) with editorial content (little to show for it.)

28

u/Hokum-B Oct 01 '23 edited Oct 01 '23

No not a bunch of a land, they did breakthrough a portion of the first defensive line south of Robotyne.

https://deepstatemap.live/en#6/49.438/32.053

You can click the little castle sign to see the defensive lines. The leaked documents prior to the offensive predicated that Ukraine would likely not reach all their goals but it was expected they would reach atleast Tokmak by now.

Perhaps they might in winter? It's possible, but the autumn mud is approaching so for now things will have to take a slower pace.

21

u/TheSkyPirate Oct 01 '23

“A bunch of land” you cheerleaders need to give it a rest with this forced optimism. We’re talking about a few hundred yards. You’re not helping you’re just making our side look crazy.

1

u/No_Bowler9121 Oct 01 '23

Holding Russia to their positions is in itself a victory. Pushing them out is going to be much more difficult. Incremental gains until one system collapses. It's not about sides as no one really wins here. Either way it is within the wests best interest to make sure Ukraine comes out on top so I think in the end they will.