1) Ukraine Strategy Thread--day 2. How we can tell it was pre-planned and thought out. Some people have asked how we know that Ukraine had such a thought out strategic plan. We cant be 100% sure, but there is pretty good evidence that they did. And we should start with airfields.
2) At the very start of the campaign the Russians undertook a military operation as if they were in a Sylvester Stallone film. In broad daylight they choppered in some of their best troops to seize Hostomel airfield, just outside Kyiv. nytimes.com/2022/02/24/wor…
3) If this attack had succeeded, it would have been hugely advantageous to the Russians. Given them a forward staging post on Kyiv's doorstep. And had the Ukrainians not prepared well, it might have succeeded.
4) However the Ukrainians here (and other places) have clearly understood the importance of depriving the Russians of forward airfields, and counterattacked almost immediately with a rapid reaction force (this does not happen by accident). coffeeordie.com/ukrainian-reta…
5) Indeed the Ukrainians understood how important the airstrip was, and had a plan in place in case it was attacked and put that plan into place immediately--to great effect.
6) Something similar has happened at another forward airfield the Russians did take early in the war, the one outside of Kherson (the one major city the Russian army has seized, though its present control is uncertain).
7) The Russians almost immediately tried to turn Kherson airport into a forward staging post for their attack helicopters. If it would have worked, it would have been very beneficial for them. However the Ukrainians knew the danger and prioritized wrecking the airfield.
8) Indeed the Ukrainians started wiping out many of the Russian helicopters based at Kherson almost as soon as they appeared. businessinsider.com/photo-destroye…
9) And when the Russians tried to deploy more helicopters to Kherson, the Ukrainians wiped many of those out again, to the point that the airfield became a millstone around Russian necks.
10) So from this indication, Ukrainian strategy was well-planned, well prioritized, and has worked to severely restrict Russian options. You don't have such a successful understanding of the value of airfields by accident.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Returning to this peace deal thread as Pres Zelensky gave a very interesting interview to Russian media in which he touched explicitly or implicitly on all the key points (except reparations).
Accepts some form of neutrality, though with security guarantees. So no NATO but (implicitly) no block on Ukraine joining EU.
Wants ceasefire and withdrawal to Feb 24 line.
Big concession is that he is not demanding return of Crimea or Donetsk/Luhansk. He however would not accept any deal unless it was accepted by the Ukrainian legislature.
If Russia is really deploying more forces around Kyiv, and planning on restarting offensive operations, it would be a sign that they really dont have a solid grasp of the strategic situation. Kyiv now would be one of the best defended cities on the earth.
The Russians would need a massive build up to attempt to take Kyiv.
If, otoh, Russia is pulling troops from Sumy and Kharkiv, as reports indicate, to push in two separate directions (down from Kharkiv towards Donbas and also back towards Kyiv), they are not concentrating on an Eastern Strategy.
Will tweet more later about the long-term implications if Russia is going for an Eastern Strategy. Its extremely complicated and holds out the possibility of a disastrous long-war for Russia. In the short term, though, its still no sure thing.
Because of the strategically nonsensical way the Russians went into the campaign, shifting troops from the edges to the east will be no easy task. There are no simple road communications they can use.
The Ukrainians holding Sumy (they seem to be expanding their control there) means that Russia would have to bring anything it needed for the east that is presently in front of Kyiv back into Russia (not easy with heavy equipment).
I hope it doesn’t need to be said that war crimes by Russia don’t justify war crimes by Ukraine.
Some people seem to be arguing that the Russian prisoners almost deserve to be shot in the legs (if that is happening) because of the brutality in the war. Not only is this ethically wrong, it’s strategically a terrible thing.
Many Russians soldiers are probably in low morale; hate this war and are looking for a way out. You want them to consider surrendering. Once that starts happening in large numbers, it can be contagious.
The repercussions of Russia's catastrophe are coming. Armenia had banked for years on Russia providing them some support. Azerbaijan seems to think they can now do what they want. God help us, I hope there is not another war.
I am hardly a regional expert, but the repercussions of Putin's disastrous decision making looks like it might completely alter the political reality in the caucasus and central Asia. So many things seem in flux when Russia is shown to be a partly-paper tiger.
Footage supposedly of Russian forces leaving Nagorno Karabakh--that was fast. Russia is severely weakened.
1. A thread (speculative) on what is the most important/least discussed strategic concept of the invasion so far: Ukrainian strategy. What the Ukrainians have done seems systematic, well-planned and very effective. This is an attempt to systematize it as a non Ukrainian.
2. One of the real problems so far is that the pre and post-invasion analysis has been dominated by Russian strategy people, who never bothered to look much at the Ukrainians as a serious force, which is why they expected, w/o evidence, that the Ukrainians would collapse quickly
3. What the Ukrainians have done is seemingly put in place a plan of action that has stymied a much larger war machine and inflicted the kinds of losses on the invaders that is rendering them ineffective. Here is what their plan might be.