Discover more from Alex Krainer's TrendCompass
On Wednesday, 7 September 2022 Ukraine's armed forces launched a counter offensive at three points along the 1,000 kilometer long demarcation line. While two points of attack failed, one achieved a stunning success, pushing the Russian forces away from the Kharkov region and regaining control over a 3,000 square kilometer territory. This was clearly a success for Ukraine and an embarrassing setback for the Russians. The upset triggered a chorus of loud triumphalist cheering in western capitals with think tanks falling over one another to announce the beginning of the end for Vladimir Putin's Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine and his inevitable political demise, soon to be followed by Russia's economic collapse, etc. This CNN report is a relatively moderate example.
As usual, the commentariat ran ahead of themselves, always exaggerating what they like and ignoring what they don't. But as the dust slowly settles, it turns out that Ukraine's counter-offensive might only have scored a very costly Pyrrhic victory in a war that’s far from over for Russia. Western media tend to characterize Russia's SMO as a very fragile endeavor, always one significant setback, or one game-changing wonder-weapon away from unravelling entirely, then dragging down and sinking the mother ship itself. Ukraine's Jedis are always just about to blow up the death-star. But we could check some of that wishful thinking by looking at Russia's war machine in a broader context.
Under Vladimir Putin’s leadership, it has conducted three major military operations: the Second Chechen Wars (1999-2009), an intervention in Georgia (2008) and the ongoing operation in Syria (2015). Russian military forces have successfully achieved their stated objectives in each case. This was not without setbacks and casualties. During the second Chechen war, Russian troops sustained over 7,000 casualties. In addition, a series of terrorist attacks in Russia proper resulted in more than 600 civilian deaths. At that time, Russia's armed forces were far weaker, less well organized and equipped. Her economy was significantly more fragile and dependent on the west than it is today. Nevertheless, neither the long and costly Chechen war nor the terror attacks derailed Russian leadership from achieving their objectives, and it is not clear that losing a chunk of territory in Ukraine will alter the outcome of Russia's SMO in any significant way.
Transitorily emboldened Kiev is determined to fight on and their US/UK/NATO allies are even more determined to help them, deter Russia and push its troops from all of Ukraine's territory. This is certainly not a slight force that the Russians are up against, but again, we shouldn't underestimate the determination of Russia's leadership nor the ability of the Russians people to soldier through the setbacks and the hardships should they materialize. When Hitler launched the Operation Barbarossa on 22 June 1941, this was the largest invasion force in history of warfare:
about 3.8 million troops
600,000 motor vehicles
600,000 to 700,000 horses
3,350 tanks
2,770 aircraft
7,200 artillery pieces
It wasn't enough. Hitler's invasion failed as did Napoleon's (which was also the biggest ever at that time). The pipe dreams about destroying Russia will most likely go unfulfilled yet again. Western leaders would probably do themselves and their constituents a huge favor by shedding their blind anti-Russia zealotry, rethinking the policy of escalation and engaging in a dialogue with the Russians. A constructive compromise shouldn't be difficult to formulate. At any rate, they'll have to do so whether they want to or not. In the end, all wars end at a negotiating table.
Did Ukraine strike a death-blow to Russia?
This post has aged very badly, Alex 😂😂😂😂.