Ukraine has been running out of ammunition. Can anyone guess why?
2 Likes
What will Russia due to counter the arrival of F-16s in Ukraine?
4 Likes
Is there any need for the Russians to do anything because of those rumored F-16s? All the previous Western WonderWeapons have not made any significant difference.
Supply chain factors, big maintenance requirements, the need for secure pristine runways are huge real-world problems – and that is before considering the pilot-training issue.
Worst case scenario is that US or other pilots fly “Ukrainian” F-16s from bases in NATO countries and strike Russian territory directly. In that case, residents of London, Berlin, Paris would be well advised to get out of there. Our Betters are pushing the world very close to the edge – for no apparent good reason.
3 Likes
The Ukrainian counteroffensive faced another huge problem: lack of close air support for the attacking forces. It is almost impossible for a blitzkrieg to work without close air support, especially for the deep strategic penetration, but it matters greatly even for purposes of winning the breakthrough battle. As John Nagl, a retired colonel who teaches warfighting at the US Army War College, put it: “America would never attempt to defeat a prepared defence without air superiority, but they [Ukrainians] don’t have air superiority. It’s impossible to overstate how important air superiority is for fighting a ground fight at a reasonable cost in casualties.”
5 Likes
William Lind has an interesting article – an imaginary conversation with some of the great German figures of the past.
Guest Article: His Majesty’s Birthday - Martin van Creveld (martin-van-creveld.com)
Discussion of how the Ukraine could turn its disaster around and defeat Russia was going well until Bismark stuck his oar in:
“Why is Germany allied with Ukraine when Russia is far more important to us? Yes, we need the grain of Ukraine. But Russia offers vastly more: grain, oil and gas, strategic position, a large if low quality army, a decent navy and air force, the list is endless,” Bismarck went on. “I have no love for the “Laws of History,” but there does seem to be a general rule that when Germany and Russia are allied, both do well, and when they are opposed, both do badly. Is there really any need to discuss what the outcomes of the World Wars would have been if Russia had joined the Central Powers in a new Dreikaiserbund or the Axis? Max? Moltke? Anybody?”
Of course, in modern Europe, no “leader” is giving priority to the interests of his (so often, her) citizens.
5 Likes
GMS posted a link to this piece on a different topic.
By the way, @gms thank you for that link. I was unaware of Martin van Creveld’s blog and I spent many hours in the last few days randomly reading some of his posts.
4 Likes
5 Likes
Of course! He’s got a few interesting pieces on that website.
1 Like
6 Likes
Depressing when you consider all the former great US and European ammunition makers.
Consider the once great Royal Ordnance:
7 Likes
What is depressing was the West’s foolish destruction of its own industrial base. But hey! We cut pollution, didn’t we?
There is that old saying that amateurs focus on tactics while professionals focus on logistics. If only we had politicians who were smart enough to recognize that it was probably unwise to pick an unnecessary fight with Russia (which supplied much of the exotic minerals needed for an arms industry) and China (which supplies critical electronic & mechanical components for Western weapons systems).
8 Likes
The industrial base isn’t the only thing that is getting destroyed in the West. The migrant crisis in the US and Western Europe make Raspail’s Camp of the Saints look like a garden party. The decline of the West has many interrelated elements.
8 Likes
So true! Arguably the rot started with the decision to destroy the family by having taxpayers subsidize illegitimate births. And the rot continued with the conscious debasement of the educational system.
Sometimes it seems like the only realistic option is to let it all burn.
9 Likes
Not to worry; it’s already started burning. There’s probably no stopping it.
7 Likes
Asia to the rescue:
https://www.technology.org/2023/12/15/south-korea-is-supplying-huge-amounts-of-ammunition-to-ukraine/
5 Likes
From the article: “South Korean law prohibits providing weapons to countries at war. Ukraine is obviously a country at war so the help of South Korea has been described as indirect. It is not entirely clear what that means, but there are speculations that the South Korean shells are being brought into the US to replenish the stockpiles after American shells were sent to Ukraine.”
OK, I am cynical. But what this likely means is that South Korean shells are being sold to the Biden* Administration for actual money, and the Biden* Administration is then giving other shells (or maybe the same shells) to the Zelensky regime. A good deal for the South Koreans; not such a good deal for the US taxpayer.
Time will tell whether the Zelensky regime is actually firing those South Korean shells at Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens … or is selling them to the Houthis.
7 Likes
Good catch, I share your cynicism
2 Likes
Arnaud Bertrand on X:
This is an exceedingly rare and fascinating article in French magazine Marianne, who got access to “several confidential defense reports” from the French army on the situation in Ukraine:
The situation looks exceedingly bleak for Ukraine, which might in part explain Macron’s recent declarations around sending troops to Ukraine. I translated the important parts of the article:
“A Ukrainian military victory now seems impossible”
The reports Marianne consulted write that Ukraine’s counter-offensive “gradually bogged down in mud and blood and did not result in any strategic gain” and that its planning, conceived by Kiev and Western general staffs, turned out to be “disastrous”: “Planners thought that once the first Russian defense lines were breached, the entire front would collapse […] These fundamental preliminary phases were conducted without considering the moral forces of the enemy in defense: that is, the will of the Russian soldier to hold onto the terrain”.The reports also highlight “the inadequacy of the training of Ukrainian soldiers and officers”: due to a lack of officers and a significant number of veterans, these “Year II soldiers” from Ukraine - often trained for “no more than three weeks” - were launched into an assault on a Russian fortification line that proved impregnable.
Without any air support, with disparate Western equipment that was less efficient than the old Soviet material (“obsolete, easy to maintain, and capable of being used in degraded mode”, the report mentions), the Ukrainian troops had no hope of breaking through. Add to this the “Russian super-dominance in the field of electronic jamming penalizing, on the Ukrainian side, the use of drones and command systems”.
“The Russian army is today the ‘tactical and technical’ reference for thinking and implementing the defensive mode,” writes the report. Not only does Moscow have heavy engineering equipment that allowed it to construct defensive works (“almost total absence of this material on the Ukrainian side, and the impossibility for Westerners to supply it quickly”) but the 1,200 km front, known as the Sourokovine line (after a Russian general), has been mined to a huge extent.
The reports also highlight that contrary to Ukraine “the Russians have managed their reserve troops well, to ensure operational endurance.” According to this document, Moscow reinforces its units before they are completely worn out, mixes recruits with experienced troops, ensures regular rest periods in the rear… and “always had a coherent reserve force to manage unforeseen events.” This is far from the widespread idea in the West of a Russian army sending its troops to the slaughter without counting…
“To date, the Ukrainian general staff does not have a critical mass of land forces capable of inter-arms maneuver at the corps level capable of challenging their Russian counterparts to break through its defensive line,” concludes this confidential defense report, according to which “the gravest error of analysis and judgment would be to continue to seek exclusively military solutions to stop the hostilities”. A French officer summarizes: “It is clear, given the forces present, that Ukraine cannot win this war militarily.”
“The conflict entered a critical phase in December”
“The combativeness of Ukrainian soldiers is deeply affected,” mentions a forward-looking report for the year 2024. “Zelensky would need 35,000 men per month, he’s not recruiting half of that, while Putin draws from a pool of 30,000 volunteers per month,” observes a military officer returned from Kiev. In terms of equipment, the balance is just as unbalanced: the failed offensive of 2023 “tactically destroyed” half of Kiev’s 12 combat brigades.Since then, Western aid has never been so low. It is therefore clear that no Ukrainian offensive can be launched this year. “The West can supply 3D printers to manufacture drones or loitering munitions, but can never print men,” notes this report. “Given the situation, it may have been decided to strengthen the Ukrainian army, not with fighters, but with support forces, in the rear, allowing Ukrainian soldiers to be freed up for the front,” admits a senior officer, confirming a “ramp-up” of Western military personnel in civilian clothes. “Besides the Americans, who allowed the New York Times to visit a CIA camp, there are quite a few Britons,” slips a military officer, who does not deny the presence of French special forces, notably combat swimmers for training missions…
“The risk of a Russian breakthrough is real”
On February 17, Kiev had to abandon the city of Avdiivka, in the northern suburbs of Donetsk, which had until then been a fortified stronghold. “It was both the heart and symbol of Ukrainian resistance in the Russian-speaking Donbass,” highlights a report on the “battle of Avdiivka,” drawing a series of damning lessons. “The Russians changed their modus operandi by compartmentalizing the city, and especially by using gliding bombs on a large scale for the first time,” notes this document. When a 155mm artillery shell carries 7 kg of explosive, the gliding bomb delivers between 200 and 700 kg and can thus pierce concrete structures more than 2 m thick. A hell for Ukrainian defenses, which lost more than 1,000 men per day. Furthermore, the Russians use sound suppressors on light infantry weapons to foil acoustic detection systems on the ground.“The decision to retreat by the Ukrainian armed forces was a surprise,” notes this last report, highlighting “its suddenness and lack of preparation,” fearing that this choice was “more endured than decided by the Ukrainian command,” suggesting a possible onset of “disarray.”
“The Ukrainian armed forces have tactically shown that they do not possess the human and material capabilities […] to hold a sector of the front that is subjected to the assailant’s effort,” continues the document. “The Ukrainian failure in Avdiivka shows that, despite the emergency deployment of an ‘elite’ brigade – the 3rd Azov Air Assault Brigade –, Kiev is not capable of locally restoring a sector of the front that collapses,” alerts this last report.
What the Russians will do with this tactical success remains to be seen. Will they continue in the current mode of “nibbling and slowly shaking” the entire front line, or will they seek to “break through in depth”? “The terrain behind Avdiivka allows it,” signals this recent document, also warning that Western sources tend to “underestimate” the Russians, themselves adept at the practice of “Maskirovka,” “appearing weak when strong.” According to this analysis, after two years of war, Russian forces have thus shown their ability to “develop operational endurance” that allows them to wage “a slow and long-intensity war based on the continuous attrition of the Ukrainian army.”
9 Likes
3 Likes
We laugh at French military prowess (French military rifles for sale - never fired, dropped once) but in truth that’s a carry-over from WWII attitudes about the French contribution. DeGaulle gaulled most of the Allied command (and compare that to Monty, who should have gaulled the Allies), and since the Free French military contingent wasn’t that big, it never got the kind of recognition it ought to have for its efforts. Truth is the French have had a small but quite good, professional military. In many ways it fits where the nation is - self-sufficient but not really a player on the world stage. Would that we emulated the French military more.
Probably THE counter-insurgency book was written by a French officer, using Mao as his example of classic insurgency organization.
7 Likes