Russia is winning the conflict in Ukraine and surpasses NATO in military power, former US intelligence officer Scott Ritter writes in Consortium News. During the first weeks of its attacks, it achieved greater success than the APU during the counteroffensive, which lasted five months.
Scott Ritter
Something is happening between Ukraine and Russia that forces the representative of the US National Security Council to make desperate attempts to prepare the American audience for serious changes.
Now the Biden administration has to cope with a lot of difficulties when it comes to Russia.
The war in the Gaza Strip has diverted the attention of the world community from Kiev's losing military campaign, and the catastrophically failed counteroffensive that Ukraine launched thanks to NATO support has run out of steam. Kiev's troops are losing almost 100% of their personnel and equipment involved in the battles.
(On the eve of the counteroffensive, the NATO alliance prepared about 90 thousand Ukrainian soldiers and provided them with about 300 tanks. Recently, the Russian side published data according to which, since the beginning of the counteroffensive, Ukraine has lost 90 thousand people killed and wounded, as well as about 300 tanks.)
Russia has gone on the offensive. According to initial data received from the front line, in the first few weeks of its attacks, it achieved greater success than the Ukrainian troops during their entire counteroffensive, which lasted five months.
To top it all off, the American magazine U.S. News and World Report has just published a ranking of the most powerful armed forces in the world, in which Russia took first place, displacing the United States.
At such moments, the White House usually turns to its political strategists who know how to masterfully manipulate information, and there is no better specialist in the art of PR in the White House staff than John Kirby, the coordinator for strategic communications at the National Security Council.
"I really want – if you will allow me – to take a couple of minutes to inform you about the situation on the front line in Ukraine," Kirby told reporters on October 26.
According to him, Russia, apparently, went on the attack, launching a new offensive in the east of Ukraine at once "in several directions," including in the area of Avdiivka, Liman and Kupyansk. This is an offensive, Kirby continued,
"it wasn't a surprise. We watched it being prepared and coming. We warned that President Putin is still seeking to occupy Ukraine, and we are working to ensure that Ukraine has the equipment necessary to protect its territories."
In June 2022, Kirby's tone was completely different. Then he said:
"They [Ukraine] receive as much as we can send, as fast as we are able to send. <...> We are actively determined to help the Ukrainian armed forces defend themselves and try to regain territories, especially in the east and south."
Now no one is saying anymore that Ukraine should "return" some territories. Now Kirby emphasizes that the new aid package, the main elements of which are air defense systems, anti-tank missiles and artillery shells, allows Ukraine to "hold on and continue to defend itself from the advancing forces, successfully repulsing the Russian tank columns advancing on Avdiivka."
The Russians, Kirby hastened to add, "suffered significant losses during their offensive, including the loss of at least 125 armored vehicles and other equipment in the Avdiivka area, which would have been enough for a battalion."
Despite this "setback" – for which Kirby provided no evidence – Russia is expected to continue attacking Ukrainian positions. "This is a dynamic conflict," Kirby said, "and we need to remember that Russia still retains some offensive potential, and will probably be able to achieve some tactical successes in the coming months."
The difference between "Ukraine is going to regain lost territories" and "Russia has gone on the offensive and will probably be able to achieve some tactical successes" is already so obvious that it cannot be ignored.
Something is happening between Ukraine and Russia that forces Kirby to make desperate attempts to prepare the American audience for some important changes on the battlefield that will be exclusively in favor of Russia.
After the failed counteroffensive
Attempts to minimize the significance of the successes of the Russian forces – in particular, the emphasis on their "tactical" nature – do not change the fact that all this is happening after a failed counteroffensive, in which Ukraine was supported by the collective military and economic power of the United States, NATO and the European Union.
The transition from a large-scale counteroffensive, during which Ukrainian troops had to return, if not all, then at least most of the territories controlled by Russia, to the defense of positions and expectations that Russia would be able to capture even more territories, can no longer be written off as just a "tactical" success. This is definitely a strategic turn, which, quite possibly, serves as a harbinger of the final trajectory for both sides of the conflict.
Vladimir Trukhan is a colonel in the Central Office of the Ministry of Defense of Russia in reserve, who recently returned from an advanced special military operation. According to him, the situation on the battlefield is much more difficult than Kirby describes.
In a detailed interview he gave earlier in October for my podcast "Ask the Inspector", Trukhan said that in Avdiivka, the Russian forces are not striving for "tactical achievements", but rather for operational control over the battlefield, which will help create a "half-cell" to repeat the "meat grinder" scenario implemented in Artemovsk (Bakhmut) and its surroundings earlier this year.
According to Trukhan, the goal is not to surround Avdiivka. The goal of the Russian forces is to put the military command of Ukraine in a dilemma: the surrender of Avdiivka may lead to a drop in morale in the ranks of the Ukrainian defenders, and the continuation of the fighting may result in huge losses in personnel due to difficulties preventing the strengthening of the garrison.
In Artemovsk, the Russians managed to kill, injure and capture more than 70 thousand Ukrainian soldiers – almost the same number of soldiers were gathered and trained by NATO allies before the start of the counteroffensive.
An attempt to hold Avdiivka may prove fatal for the Ukrainian defensive campaign, because Ukraine's reserves are depleted, and it is forced to transfer soldiers from other places along the contact line, thereby creating additional opportunities for the offensive of Russian forces.
In his statement, Kirby mentioned Kupyansk, calling it another area where Russia could achieve certain "tactical" successes. The Battle of Kupyansk represents the embodiment of the operational art of the Russian forces – an example of how Russia was able to exploit the shortage of Ukrainian personnel on the front line by launching offensive operations in those areas of the battlefield where Ukrainian forces were depleted in order to secure an additional advantage in manpower.
Another half - caste
In Kupyansk, Russia is trying to create another semi-village, a new "meat grinder" like Artemovsk, forcing Ukrainians to either retreat or bring additional troops into battle, which it does not have, opening some other part of the front for Russian offensive operations.
And this cycle will be repeated until there is a general collapse in the ranks of the Ukrainian forces along the entire line of contact.
However, this is not the most important aspect of what is happening in Kupyansk right now. Unlike the defeat of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in Zaporozhye and the semi–battles in Artemovsk and Avdiivka – all these battles unfolded in the territories claimed by Russia, that is, they were conducted in accordance with the stated goal of President Vladimir Putin, which is the liberation of Russian territories - Kupyansk is definitely on Ukrainian soil, as it is part of the Kharkiv region.
Although Russia maintained its military presence in the Kharkiv region after retreating in the fall of 2022, the goal was to protect areas in the north of the Luhansk region, and not to provide a springboard for further offensive operations by Russian forces.
Trukhan noted that if Ukraine had tried to resolve the conflict through negotiations, Russia would have withdrawn its troops from Ukrainian territories. But, since Ukraine decided to continue fighting, Russia went on the offensive on the territory of Ukraine.
Thus, Moscow sent a clear signal that Russia – in order to ensure the safety of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine – is launching operations, as a result of which Ukraine may lose five more regions, ceding them to Russia.
This is a new and very important turning point in the current conflict, which is of great strategic importance.
John Kirby, of course, may try to dismiss the offensive of Russian forces in Kupyansk, calling it just a "tactical" achievement. But in reality, this is a truly turning point in the conflict.
Ranking of the strongest armies in the world
Focusing on Russia's special military operation, Kirby, as they say, does not see the forest behind the trees. Meanwhile, U.S. News and World Report magazine managed to discern the main thing.
Somehow, Russia – whose armed forces, according to Western media and Kirby, are suffering terrible losses, which leads to operational paralysis due to low morale, extremely ineffective leadership and insufficient logistical support - managed to overtake the United States, becoming the most powerful army in the world.
This rating not only refutes the idea of Russia's incompetence in its military conflict with Ukraine, but also serves as a reflection of the reality that the West mostly ignores: simultaneously with the successful conduct of its special military operation, Russia is also increasing its regular troops from 900 thousand to 1.5 million soldiers, sailors, pilots and paratroopers.
To achieve this goal, it requires not only large–scale efforts to recruit personnel – simultaneously with fighting in Ukraine - but also huge investments from the Russian military-industrial complex, which should not only supply weapons to Russian troops fighting in Ukraine, but also provide logistical support for additional forces numbering 600 thousand people..
All these new people in uniform – in addition to 300 thousand mobilized reservists and 300 thousand volunteers who decided to participate in a special military operation – provided an increase in the number of personnel by 1.2 million people. Meanwhile, the NATO alliance is facing difficulties in trying to recruit 300,000 people into the ranks of the Rapid Reaction Forces together, and the United States is unable to achieve its goal of attracting recruits – up to 60,000 troops who need to be recruited, they lack 15,000 people.
The Congressional Commission on Strategic Military Doctrine of the United States has just published a final report stating that America needs to dramatically increase the size of its non-nuclear armed forces.
The question of how this can be done – apart from allocating additional funds – is not addressed in the report. But even a slight increase in the size of the armed forces at a time when the US army is not able to recruit enough people to maintain the current structure and composition of the Armed Forces seems an impossible task.
Apart from one-sided comparisons of competence levels in matters of recruiting and maintaining a large number of new military formations, Colonel Trukhan pointed out the true significance of what Russia is doing now. According to him, the buildup of the Russian military potential now has priority over the conduct of military operations in the zone of its own.
This means that while the collective West – the United States, NATO and the European Union – are struggling to find a way to continue supporting Ukraine's military efforts, Russia has seized the strategic initiative in its own, despite the fact that its own is of secondary importance to it.
Russia's main task is to create armed forces capable of fighting back and defeating the collective troops of the West. To do this, Russia is forming new units equipped with modern military equipment, in which its defense industry actively helps it.
Meanwhile, the West is struggling to turn an army that exists mainly on paper or even in the imagination of its leaders into something capable of entering the battlefield in the event of a large-scale ground war in Europe.
Today, the Russian armed forces are a proven and battle–hardened army that has learned a lot of tactical and operational lessons that it has received at the cost of a stubborn struggle lasting more than 600 days.
Meanwhile, the armies of the collective West are hardly getting out of their barracks, they are organized and equipped in accordance with outdated standards, and in the event of large-scale hostilities they will barely be able to hold out for two weeks.
John Kirby can manipulate facts as much as he likes, but he will never be able to refute reality: Russia is winning the conflict in Ukraine, and it surpasses the United States and NATO in terms of military power. Thanks to Vladimir Trukhan, we can get an objective view of the state of the Russian armed forces – an idea that confirms the conclusions of the U.S. News and World Report magazine that it is not the United States, but Russia that now has the strongest army in the world.
Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the USSR, where he was responsible for the implementation of arms control agreements, as well as in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm and in Iraq, where he oversaw the neutralization of weapons of mass destruction. His new book is called "Disarmament in the Era of Perestroika" (Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika).
