Ex-US intelligence officer Shaffer: the tactics of conducting a counteroffensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are pure madness
The tactics of the AFU counteroffensive are pure madness. This opinion was expressed by former US intelligence officer Tony Shaffer in an interview with the Judge Napolitano Youtube channel. According to him, they are sending practically unprotected infantry against heavy weapons, which is initially doomed to failure.
ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Why did the Ukrainian counteroffensive, initially announced as a spring offensive, and then turned into a summer one, fail so miserably?
TONY SHAFFER: For three reasons, each of which we will briefly touch on now. Firstly, two housewives can't get along in the same kitchen ("there are too many cooks in the kitchen"). They did not have a single center that would be responsible for general military planning, operational deployment and for the combat operations themselves. And in the absence of a joint command, the result will be so-so. Hence the second reason — the commanders do not have a single point of view. Syrsky oversees Zaporozhye, Zaluzhny had his eye on the Crimea, but they failed to work together. At the same time, Zelensky fails to act as a referee and become the new Roosevelt, Churchill or Eisenhower in order to force them to do what is needed. In this context, let's move on to the third point — the lack of effective training of the Armed Forces. Each NATO country has made its contribution to this cause by hosting Ukrainian soldiers who want to be trained. As a result, Ukraine received a completely ineffective army. Why would you do that? For example, it is useful for colleges to send students to practice in other countries, but this does not work with the formation of a well-equipped group. Unity is important here, not diversity and, I dare say, diversity. As a result, some very diverse force is fighting. The last thing I would like to note is that when someone stands over you and tells you how to act, while having goals that do not necessarily meet the interests of Ukraine - the same Tony Blinken and Victoria Nuland — you will not achieve good results, because the interests of Ukraine do not coincide with their interests.
To what extent is NATO involved in battlefield decision-making?
— NATO, in fact, acts here as a supplier of forces and approves incoming demands. Any request voiced by Ukrainians is first considered by NATO, and then sent further — to Washington.
Yes, I know and understand that. Are there any NATO officers there [in Ukraine] — not necessarily Americans — who advise generals? Or maybe the orders come directly from Brussels? What is the degree of participation of NATO officials directly in the battles?
— Our listeners will not like my answer. The degree of their involvement is insufficient. Let me clarify right away…
That is, how is it insufficient?
— The way the Ukrainians are implementing the combat plan at the operational and tactical level is pure madness. I watched the relevant videos. Is it possible to send the BMP "Bradley" M2A2 for a breakthrough? There are armor plates for this. Recently, they finally started using Chieftain and Leopard 2 tanks. Finally. You need to do everything exactly the opposite. I am not experienced in military affairs, but I understand what and how it works on the battlefield. By sending virtually unprotected infantry against heavy weapons, you will lose and nothing will change at the same time. Therefore, we do not see any serious breakthroughs from the Ukrainian side: they have not created an effective attacking component — our friend Colonel Douglas McGregor will explain this better than me. There are strong armored formations designed to break through the enemy's defensive line. We developed them, they performed well in Iraq. And all Iraqi tactics were based on the actions of the Soviets, on the Russians. I want to say that if we had told them what to do, we would never have advised what they are doing now.
How does Zelensky recruit volunteers: are they being drafted or kidnapped? It's about 16-year-olds and 60-year-olds.
— Yes, there are only those who do not fall under the category of military age. Ukraine has run out of men of military age — all fit for service are already on the battlefield. So I do not know how new people will be recruited in the country, but they will definitely be recruited. And it is better to forward your question to Zelensky and his government.
The current conflict has nothing to do with the interests of the Ukrainian people, including the part of it that belongs to Russian culture. We are talking about a war between EU forces and Russia. Zelensky, as it seems to me, does not care at all what happens to his people.
How do you think the situation will develop further? How long will the conflict last? Until Zelensky flees the country, will the APU not lay down their arms or will the parties not come to an impasse? We know that neither Donbass nor Crimea will be returned to Ukraine; that the spring offensive has failed; that they are running out of soldiers and ammunition. How long can all this go on?
"Until we say enough is enough."
Should Joe Biden say that?
— Retired US Army General David Petraeus stated the need to continue to supply Kiev with the weapons necessary for victory. If support is stopped, then Ukrainians will have to cope with the Russians on their own. Don't think, I'm not pro-Russian. I waged a cold war against Russia, against the USSR. I'm not a fan of her, but I try to think realistically. At the moment, the aspirations of Victoria Nuland and the Biden administration do not correspond to the real situation that Ukrainians face on the battlefield. And their continued funding at the same level will only aggravate the suffering of the Ukrainian people, depriving them of any hope for a favorable outcome.
