Russia and Ukraine Current Events

Does anybody know what the Ukraine armed forces are up to?
I happened upon an article with some background on this.
Article:
However, when it comes to Ukraine, there actually isn’t much footage from major media of fighting on most of the front lines. While there are news teams in Kyiv and in Lviv, there is generally a lack of coverage of many of the front lines. This includes a lack of coverage of the Donbas front opposite Donetsk, as well as a lack of coverage of what is happening along the Crimea front as Russia has tried to push into southern Ukraine.

One reason for the lack of coverage may be because the war has developed along thousands of kilometers of front. With at least four major Russian thrusts into Ukraine, media can’t be at every place at the right time.

It also appears that before the war, many media could not receive permission to enter the area along the Donbas front, which Ukraine used to refer to at the “Anti-Terrorist Operation,” or ATO. That kept journalists in Kyiv or sometimes in Lviv. Most of them were in Kyiv when the war broke out, and as the war worsened, some left areas like Kharkiv and Kyiv and went to Lviv or to Poland.

On the Russian side, there have been no international media embeds with Russian forces, and Russian forces have generally appeared to not want media with them, for fear that media will show how they have performed on the first days of the conflict. That means coverage is mostly relegated to the Ukrainian side of the war.

It also appears that for the average Ukrainian, there is a widespread understanding of not sharing video of where soldiers are located. [...] Meanwhile, for many civilians, it seems curfews and other measures are keeping them from doing too much filming of the fighting. [...]

We have not seen much coverage from the Russian side, even propaganda coverage. On the Ukraine side, although we get reports of Russian planes being shot down and armored columns stopped, there isn’t always as much video evidence as one would expect.

Ukrainians appear very adept at doing good “opsec,” or operational security, and Russia doesn’t seem to want anyone to see what they are up to. With most media stuck in Kyiv, Lviv or abroad, this means there is a tremendous lack of information about this war despite the international focus on the fighting.
 
Im going in (have a ticket this sat to poland), I sat by in the yugo conflict 25 years ago, still haunts me today (I was living in holland at the time, a stain on all dutch ppl)

I dont make the same mistake again
I will share when I can
 
Im going in (have a ticket this sat to poland), I sat by in the yugo conflict 25 years ago, still haunts me today (I was living in holland at the time, a stain on all dutch ppl)

I dont make the same mistake again
I will share when I can
I bow to you, my respects.
 
Im going in (have a ticket this sat to poland), I sat by in the yugo conflict 25 years ago, still haunts me today (I was living in holland at the time, a stain on all dutch ppl)

I dont make the same mistake again
I will share when I can

i hope you can make a difference and come back safe.
 
Im watching the news in this order: BBC, Sky, RT and Al Jazeera.

RT is predictably absurd in their reporting, but watching repeated reports about this convoy of doom made me think of a few things:

1. 'Western' armies would never leave all their logistics canalised along single roads and in one endless line, for obvious reasons.
2. We did all our major fighting at night in Iraq in 2003 to maximise our technological advantages - from what I have seen the Russians have very little to no night fighting capability.
3. We would never abandon our vehicles without 'denying' them first with thermite grenades - The Russians seem to just walk away when they run out of gas, or morale.
4. We never had anyone run out of fuel in Iraq or Afghanistan - The Russians appear not only to be out of gas, but starving as well. Russian ration packs are being recovered with expiry dates of 2014.

From multiple sources, I have compiled a list of donated/urgently supplied critical equipments that have been supplied by other nations. I am aware there may be errors in this list, but it does show that if they can get it to where it needs to be in the next few days, the Russians are going to incur horrific, and possibly politically unacceptable losses of men and equipment.

CountryAnti-ArmourAnti-AirOther
US1200 JavlinsAt least 100 M141 BDMs
UK2000 NLAW
Germany1000 PZf3500 Stinger
Sweden5000 NLAW
Denmark2700 NLAW
Netherlands400 PZf3200 Stinger? Sniper Rifles
Luxembourg150 NLAW
Latvia?Stinger
Lithuania800 Fagots?Stinger
Estonia?Javlins?Stingers? 122mm Howitzer
Finland1500 NLAW2500 Rifles
Norway2000 M72 LAW
Belgium200 M72 LAW3000 FN Machine Guns
France?
Poland? Piorun Missiles?RGP 40 Grenade Launchers
? LMT 60mm Mortars
16950

I have found the odd reference to night vision and radios, but its possible that neither the supplier or Ukraine want to let these numbers be known.
 
2. We did all our major fighting at night in Iraq in 2003 to maximise our technological advantages - from what I have seen the Russians have very little to no night fighting capability.
is this true? every report i've seen (not that im glued to my tv about ukraine happenings) has been people talking about how bad the nights are with bombings etc. I havent seen/heard any daytime stuff.
 
1. 'Western' armies would never leave all their logistics canalised along single roads and in one endless line

This 40-mile 'convoy' must be moving at a snail's pace also. It's been within 25km of Kiev for 36 hours or more.
 
Head of the Sumy Regional State Administration Dmytro Zhyvytskyi announced on Facebook:

УРА! На Сумщині працює Байрактар!!!
⚡Вечір 1 березня:
Знешкодили стоянку техніки близько 80 одиниць, з них половина – гради. Біля с. Пустовійтівка Роменського району
Поблизу с. Бішкинь, по території більше 2 км. Близкько 100 одиниць, в основному танки та БТР
Дякую кожному причетному!
Сьогодні ми - єдині: тероборона, волонтери, медики, правоохоронці, комунальники, влада. Ми - єдиний фронт.
Сумщина – північний форпост України! Оборона Сумщини – це оборона всієї країни. Ми зупиняємо ворога на кордоні.
Слава Україні

www.facebook.com/Zhyvytskyy/posts/371937928267846
Content from External Source

Translation:

Hooray! Bayraktar is being used in Sumy region!!!
In the evening of March 1:
About 80 units of equipment were neutralized, half of them were Grad MLRS, on the outskirts of the village of Pustoviytivka, Romensky district.
Near the village of Bishkin, on the territory of more than 2 km. About 100 units, mostly tanks and armored personnel carriers
Thank you to everyone involved!
Sumy region is the northern outpost of Ukraine! The defense of Sumy region is the defense of the whole country. We stop the enemy at the border.
Glory to Ukraine
 
Dark days ahead. The cities face encirclement. Food is running out. The Russians may open a corridor of escape for civilians who go... where? Other countries? Or into vast Russian re-education compounds? Then comes the devastation from a distance, the armored columns slashing up major roads and setting up new bases... It's a dark picture.
Unfortunately I tend to agree with you Mr. Wolf. I found this article, with pull quote below, basically saying the Russian army is incompetent and we're not seeing a "probe and adjust" style invasion, rather a lot of untrained soldiers that have been taught to obey whatever order is giving to them, even it doesn't work out. However it concludes that the Russian army is large and can eventually over run Ukraine.

I hope to be called out for being wrong, but the pessimistic side of me says a year from now we'll be in pre-invasion status quo. Putin will eventually install a pro-Putin government in Kiev and it will be considered fate-acompli. Then Europe, and the rest of the world, will realize their windmills aren't enough in a cold winter and everyone will be lining up to buy Russian gas/oil. Putin will be sitting pretty, if deranged.

Pull quotes from an article on Russian military ineptness. To be fair, it seems to have a lot of anecdotes and no real sources, but is yet another take on events unfolding:

After four days of fighting, the Russian military is bogged down in Ukraine. In part this is due to the valiant resistance of Ukraine’s army and civilian defense forces. But it’s also due to the fact that the Russian army just isn’t very good.
Content from External Source
[

This weakness might not matter so much if an army makes rapid progress at the start of its offensive. Its troops could plunder the places they conquer for fuel, food, and other supplies. But the Russian army isn’t cut out for lightning strikes. Troops are trained in rote set-pieces, with no time devoted to improvising if things don’t go as planned. One reason for this is that junior officers are not allowed to take initiative. This is deliberate; it’s part of the top-down command system dating back to Soviet times, if not earlier. In politics and in warfare, the small elite on top doesn’t want subordinates to get too creative—if they did, they might take over.

And so, as the Russian invaders met resistance, they didn’t quite know what to do. Military operations designed to take place sequentially—Step 1, then 2, then 3, etc.—fell apart, catastrophically. If Step 2 hit a big obstacle, the by-the-book soldiers moved on to Step 3 anyway. Therefore, large troop-transport planes tried to land, even though the airport hadn’t been completely secured and Ukrainian air-defense systems hadn’t been destroyed. As a result, two Il-76 transport planes, each carrying 100 airborne troops, were shot down.
Content from External Source
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...ssia-s-army-is-inept/ar-AAUqQkD?ocid=msedgntp
 
Well worth reading - an article on how the war is being reported on Russian TV:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60571737

Basically, it's very different to what we're seeing: Russian's doing well; fighting for freedom; Ukrainian civilian casualties actually inflicted by their own side; and no mention of attacks on Kiev.
 
Article:
Russian forces are completing the reinforcement and resupply of their troops north and west of Kyiv and launching an envelopment of the capital likely aimed at encircling and ultimately capturing it. This effort will likely accelerate in the next 24-48 hours. Russian operations against Kyiv are Moscow’s main effort. Russian troops are also undertaking three supporting efforts, one to seize Kharkiv, one to take Mariupol and secure the “land bridge” connecting Rostov-on-Don to Crimea, and one to secure Kherson and set conditions for a drive west toward Mykolayiv and Odesa. The three supporting operations are active, with the operation against Mariupol making the most progress in the last 24 hours.

The Russian military has continued using area-attack weapons in the city of Kharkiv, dramatically increasing the damage to civilian infrastructure and civilian casualties.

Belarusian forces have likely entered the war on Russia’s side despite denials by the Belarusian president.

Reports that the convoy’s length grew from 17 to 40 miles are likely inaccurate. A spokesperson from Maxar Technologies has clarified to ISW that Maxar obtained new imagery showing more of the convoy, not the convoy getting longer.

The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian troops have encircled Sumy, Lebedyn, and Okhtyrka and have been shelling Okhtyrka heavily.

DraftUkraineCoTMarch1,2022_0.png

For comparison:

One of yesterday's narratives was that Belarus is entering the war; Lukashenko has denied it, and I've not seen proof. My guess is that Ukraine would love to destroy the railway lines in Belarus sooner rather than later, and that Russia would like to prep its offensive into Western Ukraine before that happens. We'll see.

The other narrative that was pushed yesterday is that Russia is strategically targeting civilians, and I'm not seeing evidence of that either. A person with a camera looks much like a sniper with an RPG (there's Iraq footage to prove that), and if a Russian unit sees that in a window of some highrise, they're liable to fire on that for tactical reasons. It's also clear that Russia is targeting infrastructure, e.g. the TV tower, or power substations.

I haven't seen current casualty numbers reported:
Article:
At least 136 people, including 13 children, have been killed in Ukraine since Thursday, February 24, the UN said Tuesday.

Another 400 civilians, including 26 children, have been injured, according to Liz Throssell, spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

"These are only the casualties we were able to cross-check, and the real toll is likely to be much higher," Throssell said.

She added that most of the casualties were caused by the use of explosive weapons with a wide impact area, including shelling from heavy artillery and multiple launch rocket systems, and airstrikes.

Ukraine's Interior Ministry reported higher figures on Sunday, saying 352 civilians had died and 1,684 had been injured since the Russian invasion.

The casualties in Kharkiv don't look that bad to me, and it's not clear if these are all civiluans:
Article:
Russian forces intensified their bombing campaign on Ukrainian cities — with at least 21 people killed and 112 wounded in Kharkiv, the mayor of Ukraine's second city said Wednesday.

Unavoidably, civilians get killed in wars, especially in urban warfare. It's not beyond Russia to escalate to leveling residential neighborhoods or whole cities, but from what I know, they've not yet done so in Ukraine.

The problem with peace is that as long as Russia wants Ukraine to disarm, and for Luhansk and Donesk to be independent, and as long as Ukraine won't give up the Krim, it's not going to happen, short of a military decision.
 
Italian newspapers are saying some official Russian media published, obviously by mistake, a 'victory' declaration which was then deleted. This is what Corriere (one of the most respected Italian newspapers) says:

Russia, i piani di Putin svelati in un articolo sulla vittoria in Ucraina (pubblicato per errore)​


di Marco Imarisio
Nel testo, comparso il 26 febbraio sull’agenzia di stampa Ria Novosti, si legge: «L’Ucraina è tornata in Russia, l’epoca della diaspora del mondo russo sta volgendo al termine». E ancora: «Il dominio occidentale è finito»
https://www.corriere.it/esteri/22_m...in-86e8b0f8-993c-11ec-9c59-6d8197f09466.shtml


Russia: Putin's plans revealed in an article on victory in Ukraine (published by mistake)

by Marco Imarisio
The piece, published on Feb 26th by Ria Novosti news agency, reads: "Ukraine is back into Russia, the time of the diaspora of the Russian world is coming to an end". And then: "Western world is finished

Ma davvero qualcuno a Parigi e Berlino ha potuto credere che Mosca avrebbe rinunciato a Kiev? L’America e l’Europa non hanno avuto la forza di conservare l’Ucraina all’interno della loro sfera di influenza. Più precisamente, avevano una sola strategia: scommettere sul collasso della Russia
Did someone in Paris or Berlin really think Russia would have given up Kiev? America and Europe have not had the strength to keep Ukraine inside there influence sphere. More precisely, they only had one strategy: bet on the collapse of Russia.




If this is confirmed, it's shocking. But it also explains the Russian military strategy: they thought to squish Ukraine in two days with a decapitating strike on Kyiv by paratroopers and fast armoured advances towards Kyiv and the main junction points. They planned to capture Ukraine intact and then annex it (in one form or another) to Russia. It badly failed and now they are faced with mounting losses (their KIAs are in the thousands for sure at this moment) and the dilemma of what to do next: sure they could go full Grozny or full Aleppo-style and level Ukrainan cities of course, but then they would add a wasteland to their empire, an unsustainable burden (not to mention the massive human cost and subsequent reactions). Or they can go for an attrition war and try to occupy as much land as they can, but they will incur in substantial losses and costs which I doubt Russia (an economy smaller than Italy!) can sustain. It looks to me Putin has made a major miscalculation and has put himself (and Russia) in a bad lose-lose situation.

Slava Ukraine

Edit: BBC reports on the Ria Novosti article too.

What's in the article?​

Many Twitter users presumed the editorial piece was intended for publication after a swift Russian victory in Ukraine.
In it, contributor Petr Akopov claims that Russia is returning to lead a new world order, while making good the "terrible catastrophe" that was the end of the Soviet Union in 1991.
It is headlined "The arrival of Russia in a new world", but the Russian word for "arrival" (nastuplenie) can also mean "attack".
Mr Akopov justifies the "virtual civil war" as "Russia restoring its historical fullness, gathering the Russian world, the Russian people together".
Moscow is drawing together "Russians, Belarusians and Little Russians (Ukrainians)", he says, suggesting a Russian plan to increase its sphere of influence.
The architect of this act of reunion is, of course, Mr Putin, who is praised for taking action now, rather than leaving the situation to be resolved in the future.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60562240
 
Last edited:
Well worth reading - an article on how the war is being reported on Russian TV:
Article:
MOSCOW, March 1 (Reuters) - Russian radio station Ekho Moskvy was taken off air on Tuesday, its editor Alexei Venediktov said, in a blow to one of the few remaining liberal media that the Kremlin has tolerated until now.

The move came shortly after the prosecutor general's office demanded that access be restricted to Ekho Moskvy and the TV Rain online news channel because of their coverage of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

I saw a long article yesterday about how Russian state propanda is failing to get people to care about "de-nazifying Ukraine", vk.com users being mostly silent, and big influencers on instagram etc. making anti-war appeals, but I can't find it again.

Source: https://m.imgur.com/gallery/6mycNaY
 
Last edited:
Stopped, or waiting for supplies or combat power to catch up is not 'bogged down'.
"to prevent someone or something from moving on or progressing" ( https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/bog-down-someone-something )

If you're stopped because you're waiting for something you need to progress, I think it's fair to use the phrase: "On Tuesday, Pentagon officials said a massive Russian armored column has been bogged down on its advance to Kyiv in part because of lack of supplies." ( https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/mar/1/lack-fuel-and-food-hinders-russian-advance-kyiv-pe/ )
 
"to prevent someone or something from moving on or progressing" ( https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/bog-down-someone-something )

If you're stopped because you're waiting for something you need to progress, I think it's fair to use the phrase: "On Tuesday, Pentagon officials said a massive Russian armored column has been bogged down on its advance to Kyiv in part because of lack of supplies." ( https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/mar/1/lack-fuel-and-food-hinders-russian-advance-kyiv-pe/ )
It doesn't mean that in a military sense. Are you a soldier mate?
 
Stopped, or waiting for supplies or combat power to catch up is not 'bogged down'.
i think if it was part of the plan :
advance to milemarker x and wait 1 day for supply trucks to catch up.

then it's not bogged down.
but if it wasnt part of the plan, and just planned logistics failing, i'm personally comfortable with "bogged down". I wouldnt personally use that phrase, i'd likely use "stalled"... and then people would complain about the dictionary definition of that :)

but i dont think its
usually a phrase used by journalists when they have no new news to report.
i think the news they are trying to report is that Russian troops are stalled due to crappy logistics planning. Journalists arent going to use military lingo, because they are writing for me. I'm the one who has to understand the article, it's not like generals or soldiers are reading "slate" to get their news on whats happening :)
 
When I think of "bogged down" I think of actual "bogs". Wheels stuck in mud. Vehicles going nowhere. Sinking deeper and getting further mired. The whole operation going wrong and grinding to a miserable and messy - though perhaps temporary - halt.
 
Last edited:
'Bogged down' is usually a phrase used by journalists when they have no new news to report.
Could very well be. I didn't personally say it, and I did preface that it was just one more take on what's happening. Like a lot of the reporting out there, it's anecdotes and speculation.

As deirde said above, it may depend on if it was a planned pause, an unplanned pause in reaction to changing conditions or a complete failure of logistics. In any of those events, the writing is for lay people like me. I've never been a solider, so maybe there is some strange military acronym like P-SNAPP (Planned Strategic Naptime and Armament Procurement Pause) that would be meaningless to the average reader, so they use the word bogged-down. But that would not be the right word IF advance and pause was what the Russians planned to do all along.

I think half the articles I've read would be in violation of the posting policies here on this forum, but with limited information it's seems to be all there is.

One of the more depressing quotes from the article is less speculation, as it's based more on history (bold by me):

As the resistance mounts and as the Russians’ offensive is thwarted, Putin and his generals can be expected to turn up the heat, shelling—and, recently, bombing—cities, destroying whatever they can destroy, for destruction’s sake. This is what the Russian military has done elsewhere, notably in Chechnya, when its officers feel frustrated. At some point, superior firepower will win out, at least in the short run.
Content from External Source
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...ssia-s-army-is-inept/ar-AAUqQkD?ocid=msedgntp
 
Yeah, true. And I probably chose the wrong words anyway. Exact quote:

"At the beginning we were told we were going for training. Eventually, after we were sent to the front line everyone was demoralized. Nobody wanted to fight but we were told we would be enemies of the state and because it's wartime we might even be shot."
 
i hope you can make a difference and come back safe.
thanks I intend to, this is not a hero mission or shit, just something I have to do in my heart. now part of ukraine foreign legion Im in my 50s (seen a lot of shit, I am dependable in a crisis, I know some ppl just forget how to operate when shit hits the fan) better me than some ukraine kid. If I can help some ppl to escape then then its worth the risk. kia kaha
 
thanks I intend to, this is not a hero mission or shit, just something I have to do in my heart. now part of ukraine foreign legion Im in my 50s (seen a lot of shit, I am dependable in a crisis, I know some ppl just forget how to operate when shit hits the fan) better me than some ukraine kid. If I can help some ppl to escape then then its worth the risk. kia kaha
Are the foreign veterans keeping their previous ranks, or being separated into their previous specialisations, like infantry, engineers, artillery etc?
 
Article:

First Major Ukrainian City (Kherson) Has Fallen to the Russians, Mayor Confirms​

Updated Mar. 02, 2022 4:51PM ET / Published Mar. 02, 2022 4:35PM ET

Kherson has become the first major Ukrainian city on Wednesday to fall to Russian forces since the invasion began, the city’s mayor and a senior Ukrainian government official confirmed to The New York Times. “There is no Ukrainian army here,” Mayor Igor Kolykhaev said in an interview. “The city is surrounded.” Video and photos showed Russian troops controlling a government administrative building, the Times reported, and Kolykhaev said a handful of Russian troops, including a commander, entered city hall on Wednesday and told him they would be setting up a new administration. It followed what The Daily Beast’s correspondents described as a “horrific battle” for the city. Earlier on Wednesday, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense had denied that Kherson had fallen and a Pentagon official described the southern city as “contested.”
Read it at The New York Times
 

Source: https://mobile.twitter.com/FilippoGrandi/status/1499156937644118022

Article:
At least 1 million people have fled Ukraine since Russian forces invaded the country on Feb. 24, according to UN High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi.

The big picture: It's the "swiftest exodus of refugees this century," AP notes. More than 2,000 civilians have been killed so far, Ukraine's State Emergency Service said Wednesday.

United Nations aid agencies have warned dwindling fuel, cash and medical supplies could lead to up to 5 million people fleeing Ukraine.

Ukraine has 44 million population.
If 2000 is correct, the civilian death rate has risen to over 500 per day, given that Sunday's number was at 352. That's a lot worse than the first few days.
Article:
In its first acknowledgement of significant casualties, Russia's defense ministry announced that 498 Russian troops had been killed and 1,597 injured. Ukraine has claimed its forces have killed more than 5,300 Russian troops. Neither figures have been independently verified.

Russia has become "much more aggressive" in its use of missiles and artillery targeting cities, including civilian infrastructure around Kyiv.

Article:
Russian forces resumed offensive operations in support of their envelopment of Kyiv on March 2 but made few territorial advances. Russian forces resumed offensive operations on both axes of advance toward Kyiv after largely pausing for 72 hours to reinforce and resupply their troops north and west of Kyiv. Russian operations to envelop Kyiv are Moscow’s main effort. Russian troops are also undertaking three supporting efforts, one to seize Kharkiv, one to take Mariupol and secure the “land bridge” connecting Rostov-on-Don to Crimea, and one to secure Kherson and set conditions for a drive west toward Mykolayiv and Odesa. The three supporting operations were active in the last 24 hours; Russian forces likely captured Kherson and began a bombardment of critical civilian infrastructure in Mariupol in a likely effort to force the city to surrender while making few territorial gains in Kharkiv.

Russian forces are receiving needed supplies and reinforcements that may facilitate much more rapid and effective operations in the coming 24-72 hours. The Russian effort around Kyiv remains poorly organized, however, with elements of many different battalions combined into what seem to be ad hoc groupings rather than operating under standing regiment or brigade headquarters. The initial errors in the Russian force composition and organization in Belarus and western Russia that ISW has previously reported on, which contributed to Russian logistical and operational failures around Kyiv, will be difficult to remedy quickly and will likely continue to cause friction and reduce the effectiveness of Russian operations even as supply issues are addressed and reinforcements come into the fight.[2] It remains too early to evaluate the likely effective combat power the added Russian troops will bring.

DraftUkraineCoTMarch2,2022.png

The Ukrainian Air Force reportedly remains active over Kyiv. The Ukrainian General Staff claimed two Ukrainian Mig-29s shot down two Russian SU-35s over Kyiv the night of March 1.

Supporting Effort #2—Mariupol: Russian forces fully encircled Mariupol as of March 2 and are conducting a deliberate campaign to destroy critical civilian infrastructure and residential areas in a likely attempt to force the city to surrender. Deputy Mayor of Mariupol Serhiy Orlov informed the BBC that the city is "near to a humanitarian catastrophe" after 15 hours of Russian bombardment on March 2.[21] Orlov confirmed Russian forces have advanced to within several kilometers of the city on all sides and are particularly targeting critical civilian infrastructure. Russian forces have taken a similar approach of creating a humanitarian catastrophe by deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure throughout the Russian intervention in the Syrian Civil War.

March 1
SmartSelect_20220302-110927_Samsung Internet.jpg
March 2
SmartSelect_20220303-072637_Samsung Internet.jpg
It looks like Ukraine repelled Russia from Kiev somewhat, and also regained the eastern shore of the Dnepr all the way to the border; and possibly Russia is trying to cut these troops off.
 
Last edited:

UN Resolution on Aggression against Ukraine​

Article:
The UN General Assembly overwhelmingly adopted a resolution on Wednesday demanding that Russia immediately end its military operations in Ukraine.

The resolution demands that Russia “immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders.”

Five countries - Belarus, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (more commonly known as North Korea), Eritrea, Russia and Syria - voted against it, while 35 abstained.
Article:
11th Emergency Special Session
Ukraine
Convened by S/RES/2623 (2022) of 27 February 2022​
Resolution No.​
Plenary or Cttee.​
Agenda Item No.​
Meeting Record/Date/Vote​
Draft​
Topic​
A/RES/ES-11/1Plenary5A/ES-11/PV.5
2 March 2022
141-5-35
A/ES-11/L.1Aggression against Ukraine
(The last UN emergency session before that was in 1950 and concerned Israel.)

The resolution and the minutes seem to not be online yet, I'm quoting from the draft (attached):

Aggression against Ukraine​

The General Assembly, [...]

Condemning the 24 February 2022 declaration by the Russian Federation of a “special military operation” in Ukraine,

Reaffirming that no territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal,

Expressing grave concern at reports of attacks on civilian facilities such as residences, schools and hospitals, and of civilian casualties, including women, older persons, persons with disabilities, and children,

Recognizing that the military operations of the Russian Federation inside the sovereign territory of Ukraine are on a scale that the international community has not seen in Europe in decades and that urgent action is needed to save this generation from the scourge of war, [...]

Condemning the decision of the Russian Federation to increase the readiness of its nuclear forces,

Expressing grave concern at the deteriorating humanitarian situation in and around Ukraine, with an increasing number of internally displaced persons and refugees in need of humanitarian assistance, [...]

3. Demands that the Russian Federation immediately cease its use of force against Ukraine and to refrain from any further unlawful threat or use of force against any Member State;

4. Also demands that the Russian Federation immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders; [...]

6. Demands that the Russian Federation immediately and unconditionally reverse the decision related to the status of certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine; [...]

9. Demands all parties to allow safe and unfettered passage to destinations outside of Ukraine and to facilitate the rapid, safe and unhindered access to humanitarian assistance for those in need in Ukraine, to protect civilians, including humanitarian personnel and persons in vulnerable situations, including women, older persons, persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, migrants and children, and to respect human rights;

10. Deplores the involvement of Belarus in this unlawful use of force against Ukraine, and calls upon it to abide by its international obligations; [...]

12. Demands that all parties fully comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law to spare the civilian population, and civilian objects, refraining from attacking, destroying, removing or rendering useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and respecting and protecting humanitarian personnel and consignments used for humanitarian relief operations;

[...].
Content from External Source
 

Attachments

  • N2227227.pdf
    203.1 KB · Views: 150
Last edited:
These things seem to explain slow and poor Russian offensive.

- Sent in second rate troops and oldest equipment. Usable and expendable without degrading national security. Poor organization and poor logistics. Poor morale. Some low level passive mutiny.

-The "Führer Principle" top down command structure of an autocratic culture military. Inflexible tactics.

-Mud season. Only roads are usable.

-Political failure. Unreasonable wishful thinking. Expected ethnic Russian Ukrainians to welcome Russian invasion, and the rest of the population to be submissive.

Russians will use their greatest asset to compensate: Devastation at a distance; age old siege tactics of isolation, terror and starvation. I think this was always part of the plan if the coup de main failed, not an ad hoc development. They have the option of bringing in at least some first rate forces.

The Russians have a long history of subduing populations to autocratic rule. I'm afraid they will try to empty the cities so that population will have no choice but to depend on Russians for food and shelter. Refugee camps morph into vast re-education compounds?

The insurgency has already begun and there will be no real divide between major military phase and insurgency phase. No reasonable expectation that Russians can win this phase, but they will keep trying. What will happen to population during this phase, and what will happen after Russian counter-insurgency collapses? This is a very dark picture.
 
Last edited:
slow and poor Russian offensive.
I see Russia successfully working towards its objectives.
20220303_121906.png
The breakthrough in the Northeast threatened a pincer movement that forced the Ukrainian troops defending the border opposite Kursk to retreat or be surrounded. If that breakthrough reaches the river Dnepr, and expands control towards the Belarussian border, Russia will control a wide contiguous area from where they can start establishing a logistics infrastructure to support besieging Kyiv. Note the highway leading into Kiev from the Northeast, bonus points if there's also a railway line.

In the southeast, positions were pretty much entrenched from 8 years of conflict. Breaking out of Donezk/Luhansk would be expensive. Instead, Russia focused on establishing a corridor along the coast that reduced its dependence on the Krimean bridges. If the Russians can advance along the Dnepr to Kyiv (and maybe meet that line from Kharkiv), they can cut off all of Eastern Ukraine, and that puts the Ukranian troops in the Donbass in a difficult position where they may have to retreat or surrender.

They also have a strategic option to cut through Ukraine even further in the West.
20220303_135053.jpgTransnistrianRegionMap.png
Article:
Transnistria, officially the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (PMR),[c] is an unrecognised breakaway state located in the narrow strip of land between the river Dniester and the Moldovan–Ukrainian border that is internationally recognised as part of Moldova.

The 1992 cease-fire agreement between Moldova and Transnistria established a Russian peace-keeper presence in Transnistria and a 1,200-member Russian military contingent is present in Transnistria.
Article:
The operational group was as of June 2019 commanded by Colonel Dmitry Zelenkov of Russia and numbered 1,500 troops. It serves alongside the Joint Control Commission.

Nobody seems to know how many Russian troops are in Transnistria right now, but it seems clear that once Russia extends its control from the Krim along the coast past Odessa, it can connect with Transnistria, and that immediately boosts its reach towards West Ukraine. An advance there could form a pincer with an opposite advance from Belarus.

We're now a week in, Russia has mostly achieved air superiority, taken one city and surrounded others, pressured Kyiv, established a corridor along the Azov Sea, and deterred other nations from entering the conflict. They're not doing as badly as Ukranian propaganda would have us believe. (I feel that the operations I suggested above could be completed, or be well under way, within the next 3 weeks, if the conditions don't change substantially.)


oldest equipment
Twitter picture of a captured TOS-1A thermobaric rocket launcher.

Source: https://twitter.com/oryxspioenkop/status/1498697710429425672

Article:
_123466836_gettyimages-1234869951.jpg.jpeg.jpg
Russian army thermobaric rocket launchers at a defence exhibition in Moscow last year
_123469299_thermobaric_weapons_close_up_2x640-nc.png.jpeg.jpg
There are no international laws specifically banning their use, but if a country uses them to target civilian populations in built-up areas, schools or hospitals, then it could be convicted of a war crime under the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.

Thermobaric munitions can be traced back to World War Two, when they were initially used by the German army. They were not widely developed until the 1960s, when the US used them in Vietnam. The US also used them in Afghanistan. First, in 2001 to try to destroy al-Qaeda forces hiding in the caves of the Tora Bora mountains, and in 2017, against Islamic State forces.
Russia used them in its war in Chechnya in 1999 and was condemned by Human Rights Watch for doing so. Russian-made thermobaric weapons were reportedly used in the Syrian civil war by the regime of Bashar al-Assad.
 
Last edited:
Two days later:

Ukrainian forces we spoke to on Thursday expect the Russians to reach Kyiv in a day or two.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60607649
Content from External Source
This 'bogged down' and convoy watching is really showing me a lack of understanding of Soviet and Russian doctrine.

They are sat there as they feel comfortable with air superiority. So far the Russians have not committed their best units to the ground fight, and only a fraction of their air force.

If they are following their previous form, they need to get their MLRS and artillery within 25 km of the objective, and stage a huge amount of ammunition within reach for a sustained bombardment. More recently they have been doing their usual bombard and conquer tactics in the southern cities which is more or less working, and from a strictly tactical viewpoint, its not necessary to capture every town square if they can be surrounded and besieged.

There are multiple possibilities for these moves, some of which could be that the units in Ukraine are indeed starving and demoralised, and they underestimated the resolve of the Ukrainians and the willingness of the west to supply them with weapons.

But, it could also be that Russia wants its southern flank secure first prior to an assault on Kyiv to prevent the best units of the UA army from redeploying.

Whichever way it turns out, for which I might be wrong, I am supporting Ukraine on this, and have even considered volunteering myself, but MrsDr has used her veto, and reminded me that I was medically discharged from the British Army for a reason.

I do however want to suggest caution of making assumptions that from the snapshots of Russian POWs looking bewildered, and an unverifiable number of Russian armoured vehicles being destroyed and TV talking heads wondering why its not exactly like Call of Duty, that we all might need to manage our expectations and predictions.
 
stage a huge amount of ammunition within reach for a sustained bombardment
Just-in-time logistics? A large fraction of the trucks on our roads are rolling warehouses in normal civilian operations, and the Russians don't exactly have warehouses in Ukraine or Belarus.

snapshots of Russian POWs looking bewildered
Some of them are, but we're not shown all of them. Remember that the troop deployment in Western Russia was billed as a training exercise before the invasion, and if Ukraine had acceded to Putin's demands, that might've been the end of it. So when some Russians say they were told they'd go for a training exercise when they deployed, that's obviously true.
It's been within 25km of Kiev for 36 hours or more.
So 25 km is the range of the Ukrainian artillery then?
 
Im watching the news in this order: BBC, Sky, RT and Al Jazeera.

RT is predictably absurd in their reporting, but watching repeated reports about this convoy of doom made me think of a few things:

1. 'Western' armies would never leave all their logistics canalised along single roads and in one endless line, for obvious reasons.
2. We did all our major fighting at night in Iraq in 2003 to maximise our technological advantages - from what I have seen the Russians have very little to no night fighting capability.
3. We would never abandon our vehicles without 'denying' them first with thermite grenades - The Russians seem to just walk away when they run out of gas, or morale.
4. We never had anyone run out of fuel in Iraq or Afghanistan - The Russians appear not only to be out of gas, but starving as well. Russian ration packs are being recovered with expiry dates of 2014.
I've heard the rumor (sorry, I can no longer find the reference) that some Russian soldiers, upon finding out where they were going and what the situation ahead was, were punching holes in their gas tanks to avoid traveling further. Take it with a grain of salt, but it's possible that a lack of gas is not the problem so much as low morale among the troops.
 
punching holes in their gas tanks to avoid traveling
evidence: a bullet hole in a gas tank, probably.

Sorry, but this is indistinguishable from propaganda.

Article:
WASHINGTON — Plagued by poor morale as well as fuel and food shortages, some Russian troops in Ukraine have surrendered en masse or sabotaged their own vehicles to avoid fighting, a senior Pentagon official said on Tuesday.

Some entire Russian units have laid down their arms without a fight after confronting a surprisingly stiff Ukrainian defense, the official said. A significant number of the Russian troops are young conscripts who are poorly trained and ill-prepared for the all-out assault. And in some cases, Russian troops have deliberately punched holes in their vehicles’ gas tanks, presumably to avoid combat, the official said.

The Pentagon official declined to say how the military made these assessments — presumably a mosaic of intelligence including statements from captured Russian soldiers and communications intercepts — or how widespread these setbacks may be across the sprawling battlefield. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss operational developments.
 
Last edited:
We've talked about sharing intelligence with Ukraine in posts #118 and #120. Yesterday, that was in the news.
Article:
Officials say the U.S. has long shared intelligence with Ukraine and continues to do so, but lawmakers say the issue of helping the Ukrainian forces with targeting information for deadly attacks is one of the many difficult quandaries officials confront as they try to help Ukraine fight off a Russian invasion without becoming embroiled in a military conflict with a nuclear-armed superpower.

“We want to support the Ukrainians in every way we possibly can, without going to war with Russia,” Smith said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “When it comes to intel-sharing and targeting, that’s a fine line.”

The U.S. is providing some intelligence to Ukraine, he said, but not “real-time targeting.”

“We’re not doing that, because that steps over the line to making us participating in the war. So the Pentagon is really struggling and walking that very fine line,” he said.

The issue then came up on the White House press briefing.
Article:
Q Okay. Let me ask you: Is there any discussion about sharing U.S. intelligence with the Ukrainians about what is happening on the ground in real time?

MS. PSAKI: We have been sharing it real time.

Q You have been? Okay. And is there a sense that the communication has been enough to give them what they need in order to be in a defensive posture, in order to fend off the Russian forces to the best of their abilities to the extent that they can (inaudible)?

MS. PSAKI: Well, without getting too far into details of what we do, for obvious reasons, we have consistently been sharing intelligence that includes information the Ukrainians can use to inform and develop their military response to Russia’s invasion. That has been ongoing, and reports that suggest otherwise are inaccurate.

[...]

Q Representative Adam Smith today on MSNBC said that we — the United States — are providing some intelligence to the Ukrainians, but not providing the type of real-time and targeting that you see the U.S. military getting in war. So why is arming the Ukrainians with Stingers and Javelins appropriate but not providing them targeting intelligence for those weapons?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I think this is similar to what Kristen just asked. I would just say that there’ve been a range of reports out there that are false. We can’t get into details of all of our intelligence sharing for obvious reasons. But we’ve continued and consistently shared a significant amount of detailed, timely intelligence on Russia’s plans and activities with the Ukrainian government to help Ukrainians defend themselves.

We’ve been doing that for months. This includes information that should help them inform and develop their military response to Russia’s invasion. That’s what’s happening — or has been happening.

Article:
Sen. MARCO RUBIO (R-Fla.), the top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, replied to NatSec Daily’s tweet about the Daniels-Psaki exchange by calling the press secretary’s response “truthy.”

 
Last edited:
Article:
The Russian military has continued its unsuccessful attempts to encircle Kyiv and capture Kharkiv. The Russians continued to attack piecemeal, committing a few battalion tactical groups at a time rather than concentrating overwhelming force to achieve decisive effects. Russian commanders appear to prefer opening up new lines of advance for regiment-sized operations but have been unable to achieve meaningful synergies between efforts along different axes toward the same objectives. They have also continued conducting operations in southern Ukraine along three diverging axes rather than concentrating on one or attempting mutually supporting efforts. These failures of basic operational art—long a strong suit of the Soviet military and heavily studied at Russian military academies—remain inexplicable as does the Russian military’s failure to gain air superiority or at least to ground the Ukrainian Air Force. The Russian conventional military continues to underperform badly, although it may still wear down and defeat the conventional Ukrainian military by sheer force of numbers and brutality. Initial indications that Russia is mobilizing reinforcements from as far away as the Pacific Ocean are concerning in this respect. Those indications also suggest, however, that the Russian General Staff has concluded that the forces it initially concentrated for the invasion of Ukraine will be insufficient to achieve Moscow’s military objectives.

Russian forces opened a new line of advance from Belarus south toward Zhytomyr Oblast, west of Kyiv, as Russian forces attempting to encircle Kyiv from the northwest were driven further west by determined Ukrainian resistance and counterattacks. Russian forces will struggle to complete an encirclement of Kyiv at all if they have to advance along ring roads as far from the city center as those they are now using.

The Ukrainian military indicates that a regiment-sized Russian formation will try to envelop or bypass Kharkiv in the coming days.

Russia has not achieved air superiority over Ukraine as of March 3. The Ukrainian Air Force continues operating a week after the invasion began, with the Ukrainian General Staff reporting that Ukrainian Su-24s and Su-25s conducted airstrikes in Kyiv, Sumy, Chernihiv, and Kharkiv oblasts in the last 24 hours.

The Ukrainian General Staff additionally published photos on March 2 of a Russian plan Ukrainian forces captured from a battalion of the Black Sea Fleet’s 810th Naval Infantry Brigade.[34] The plans stated that Putin authorized a Russian invasion of Ukraine on January 18, planned at that time to run from February 20 to March 6. The BTG reportedly planned to conduct an amphibious landing at Stepanovka, on the Sea of Azov, before operating with elements of the 58th CAA and 117th Naval Infantry Regiment to surround and seize Melitopol. No such landing occurred.

The mayor of Kherson confirmed that no Ukrainian forces remain in the city and that "for the Ukrainian flag to continue flying over us" he negotiated several conditions with Russian forces, including a strict curfew from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. and forbidding civilians from walking in groups larger than two or confronting Russian forces.

DraftUkraineCoTMarch3,2022.png
DraftUkraineCoTMarch2,2022.png
 
Back
Top