Long thread about how I think the first 96 hours have gone, still very early/incomplete impressions. The initial Russian operation was premised on terrible assumptions about Ukraine’s ability & will to fight, and an unworkable concept of operations. Moscow badly miscalculated. 1/
The Russian operation was focused on getting to Kyiv quickly, forcing a surrender, and pushing a small number of units forward quickly in a way that avoided large engagements with UKR forces. They’ve been skirting major cities, going for key road junctions/smaller towns, etc. 2/
Why did Moscow choose this course of action? A few theories: they didn’t take Ukraine & its military seriously. They wanted to avoid attrition & devastation because of consequences for pol goals in Ukraine, costs of casualties, and they want to hide the costs from the public. 3/
It is also possible that Russian military planners genuinely wanted to avoid inflicting high levels of destruction given how unpopular this war was going to be at home. Most Russian soldiers are young & have little interest in fighting Ukrainians as an opponent. 4/
What I’ve seen so far suggests that Russian troops were unaware they would be ordered to invade, and appear reluctant to prosecute this war. They don't see Ukrainians as adversaries and the military didn’t prepare them for this campaign. Outside of Chechens, morale seems low. 5/
This is an unworkable concept of operations. It seems they tried to win quickly and cheaply via 'thunder runs,' hoping to avoid the worst of sanctions & Western outrage. They’ve ended up in the worst of all worlds, trickling more resources into a failed strategy. 6/
However, this is barely a few days into the war. Ukraine has done remarkably well, but no analysts (except maybe in Moscow) expected Russia to defeat the largest country in Europe within 4 days, especially given UKR military capability. 7/
On the shambolic effort - Russian units are not really fighting as BTGs. They’re driving down roads in small detachments, pushing recon & VDV units forward. Tanks often by themselves and vice versa. Fires & enablers not used decisively, and often not used at all. 8/
Outside of the fighting NW of Kyiv we have a lot of smaller detachments, tanks, IFVs, often recon or VDV units pressing down roads & into cities. Small formations regularly outrunning logistics, without support, or letting support & artillery get ambushed behind them. 9/
Beyond large numbers of units strewn out in small detachments & checkpoints, we have the inverse situation as well. Long trains of Russian vehicles stuck in their own traffic jams, entering across the border. Air defenses not covering them, but stuck on the road with them. 10/
As companies & platoons run ahead to seize points, logistics can’t keep up, and they’re not being effectively covered by support. Most of the fights I've seen are small skirmishes, especially on the outskirts of major cities. These may be intense, but not major battles. 11/
The Russian failure is driven by the fact that they’re attempting to conduct a full-scale invasion without the mil operation that it would require, thinking they can avoid most of the fighting. This has led to not only unworkable force employment, but lack of employment. /12
The truth is that large parts of the Russian military have yet to enter this war, with many of the capabilities still unused. Not to take away from UKR great mil performance, and resilience, but I see a lot of early judgments & conclusions that need moderation. 13/
In the first 4 days, Russian tactical aviation, except for some Su-25s, largely sat on the sidelines. So have most combat helicopters. They have hundreds of both deployed in the area. Russia's air force is missing in action, and largely unused. 14/
The Russian military sought to use cruise/ballistic missiles to destroy/suppress UKR air defense and target air bases. However, they're not flying CAPs, or offensive counter air, and only today have I spotted the first Su-34 bomber conducting strikes. /15
Except for heavy shelling around Kharkiv, use of fires have been limited compared to how the Russian mil typically operates. Sadly, I think this will change. Russian mil is an artillery army first, and it has used a fraction of its available fires in this war thus far. /16
The bulk of the Russian military has yet to enter the fight. Outside Kharkiv, most of the 1st Guards Tank Army, and 20th Army, are just sitting there. They pushed a few BTGs a considerable distance past Sumy, but I think a lot of Russia's forces are still on the sidelines. /17
Another point, Russian losses are significant, and they have had a number of troops captured, but they have been advancing along some axes. In general, Ukrainians are posting evidence of their combat successes, but the opposite is less true, distorting the overall picture. 18/
Hence my next thought. In a desperate effort to keep the war hidden from the Russian public, framing this as a Donbas operation, Moscow has completely ceded the information environment to Ukraine, which has galvanized morale and support behind Kyiv. Another miscalculation. /19
I won't comment on the host of official claims made in this war so far, except that I think Kyiv is doing a great job shaping perceptions & the information environment. That said, folks should approach official claims critically in a time of war. /20
Looking at the military effort, I think Russian forces are getting some basics really wrong, but we're also learning things that are probably not true about the Russian military as well. They're not really fighting the way they train and organize for a major conventional war. /21
The assumptions have Grozny 1994 vibes, while some of the operations remind me of classic mil org driven blunders. Sending airborne air assault brigades or naval infantry in early on to 'do their thing,' even though it is unnecessary, risky, or impractical. /22
What's next? Russia's political leadership is still not conceding their plan's failure, trying to take Kyiv quickly. But we're seeing them open up greater use of fires, strikes, and air power. Sadly, I expect the worst is yet ahead, and this war could get a lot more ugly. /23
I was going to add, that I've seen and read other explainer threads out there about the Russian military failure. I differ with some of those explanations, they're generally not coming from Russia mil experts, and 4 days into a war might be a bit early for conclusive statements.
Also, looking at day 5, seeing major adjustments. Russian military is suspending unsupported thunder runs, resupplying, and reorganizing. Ukraine's military has performed rly well, but I think we're going to see a different Russian approach moving forward.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
An update on the war following a recent trip. Ukrainian forces are holding, but the situation has worsened since July due to mounting offensive pressure. Here I cover some of the negative and positive trends, along with the salient dynamics at the front. Long thread. 1/
Drones continue to be responsible for most daily casualties, with the front line defined by overlapping drone and artillery fire engagement zones 20-25km from the forward line of troops. This is commonly referred to as the ‘kill zone.’ 2/
One of the key dynamics this year has been a tug of war contest between Russian forces and the AFU over superiority in this kill zone, and its relative footprint. That in turn determines initiative on the ground, and the cost incurred in offensive, or defensive ops. 3/
As the situation in Pokrovsk becomes critical, and AFU reinforces the pocket to stabilize the flanks, there's considerable attention now to how this battle is unfolding. A few thoughts on the situation. 1/
The situation around Pokrovsk deteriorated over time as Russian forces kept infiltrating through the southern part of the city. Ukrainian positions grew increasingly thin. Worsening weather enabled Russian troops to get more men into the city in recent weeks. 2/
Earlier in the summer AFU units were working to stem the infiltration. The Russian advance at Dobropillia to some extent forced a shift of attention & resources. A lack of operational reserves has long resulted in a ‘firefighting’ approach to counter advances across the line. 3/
Russia’s advance near Dobropillia reflects the broader problematic dynamic, characterized by a lack of cohesive defensive lines, and undermanned units holding terrain, which can result in gradual then seemingly sudden shifts. Thread /1 (DeepStateMap)
The situation is still developing and hopefully will not result in a larger operational breakthrough, but this is a symptom of challenges and problems that many have been speaking to. I sought to cover them in this lengthy thread two weeks ago. /2
Advances around Pokrovsk had been blamed on RF diversionary-reconnaissance groups. But these are often just small assault infantry groups of 2/4/6 men, or motorcycle/buggy groups, which can bypass the porous defensive line if they can get past the drone coverage. 3/
An update on the war following a recent trip. As Russian offensive presume mounts, the front is not at risk of collapse, though salients have formed. More concerning is that Russian improvements in drone employment have reduced Ukraine’s advantages. Long thread. 1/
In 2024 AFU expanded drone units within the force. This helped offset Russia’s materiel advantage, while compensating for the AFU’s continued manpower deficit. These initiatives are now well known and I covered them in previous threads. 2/
Drones became responsible for most day-to-day casualties at the front, attriting Russian forces at 0-15km, and serving as the main force multiplier for the AFU. This enabled a low-density defending force to hold the 1200km+ front line, establishing defeat and denial zones. 3/
An update on the war following a recent trip. The situation has improved compared with Fall 2024. Russian offensive momentum slowed significantly over the winter, though it is premature to claim that the front has stabilized, especially following AFU withdrawal in Kursk. /1
Russian advances were stalled for three reasons: materiel exhaustion from losses in the fall, effective Ukrainian adaptation to how Russian forces were prosecuting offensive operations, and winter weather conditions which affected the pace of operations. 2/
This dynamic may not hold as we get further into the spring. Russian forces appear to be regrouping for renewed offensive operations. Ukrainian forces have improved tactically at countering how RF fight, employing UAS to compensate for a deficit of manpower at the front. 3/
The suspension of U.S. assistance for Ukraine is a very unfortunate and significant development, but it may not have immediate impact. Ukraine is far less dependent on the U.S. for day to day battlefield needs in 2025, than it was in earlier periods of the war. 1/
Ukraine’s current approach to defensive operations combines mines, strike drones, and traditional artillery fires to attrit Russian forces at 0-30km. Most of the casualties are now inflicted with mines, and drones, which are produced in Ukraine. 2/
Traditional artillery fires are less relevant at the moment, and there is a relative parity between the two sides. In combination with munitions recently delivered by the U.S. in recent months, which frontloaded supplies, Europeans could sustain Ukraine through this year. 3/