Unfortunately, the map is very light on major terrain features like rivers, Russian defense/supply lines/ reserves, etc. Not easy perhaps impossible to secure of course…
If the soft spots are known and significant forces positioned without detection, Ukraine could induce a major panic and collapse some part of the Russian front. I assume they know where to strike but moving large armored forces and logistics into position without detection will be very difficult.
I think the preferred UKR major objective would be the Black Sea coast of the Crimea crossing points. They should have very helpful “5th Column” support there and an advance could cut major logistical support to the south bank of Kherson and isolate Russian forces that do not fall back quickly. Obviously the Russians know this and may have their best units in mobile reserve there. (Is Bakmhut just a diversion for both sides?) This Black Sea area of operation presents challenges to logistics and troop movement to both sides. It is also strategically critical to both. It would be a big trick to play for.. and possibly too much to gamble on the first battle of a new army. I seriously doubt this action, even if successful, would end the war. Russians have no reason to make peace and it would be dangerous for Putin to do it. Only China can force it on them.
Speaking as one with little knowledge of military history, tactics or strategy, your argument sounds like good news for Ukraine. I am concerned, however, by the prospect of a long, drawn-out conflict that grinds down Ukrainian manpower and Western resolve (and our resupply capabilities). In addition, while Russian public opinion probably doesn’t count for much in Putin’s calculus, it sounds like Russians would be less willing to give up Crimea than they would the disputed and later, annexed, areas of eastern Ukraine. So, even if Ukraine prevails by force of arms in expelling RUssia from every inch of its territory (including Crimea), that region would fester as the germ of some future effort to get payback by the Russian Bear.
The Russians must be expending enormous resources to figure out where the blow(s) will fall. A lot depends (for both sides) on their success or failure.
The Ukrainian formations will probably resemble the WW2 German Kampfgruppen, which were special purpose formations assembled for a specific purpose. Given the paucity of armor (250 tanks of which the Leopard 1 is at best obsolescent), the key is going to be the attached followup units if a breakthrough is made.
Good observation, re the battle group concept. That was my thought also. Combined arms operations are predicated on just that: organizing one’s forces into mission-oriented task forces. We’ll soon see if the Ukrainians have adopted that system.
Unfortunately, the map is very light on major terrain features like rivers, Russian defense/supply lines/ reserves, etc. Not easy perhaps impossible to secure of course…
If the soft spots are known and significant forces positioned without detection, Ukraine could induce a major panic and collapse some part of the Russian front. I assume they know where to strike but moving large armored forces and logistics into position without detection will be very difficult.
I think the preferred UKR major objective would be the Black Sea coast of the Crimea crossing points. They should have very helpful “5th Column” support there and an advance could cut major logistical support to the south bank of Kherson and isolate Russian forces that do not fall back quickly. Obviously the Russians know this and may have their best units in mobile reserve there. (Is Bakmhut just a diversion for both sides?) This Black Sea area of operation presents challenges to logistics and troop movement to both sides. It is also strategically critical to both. It would be a big trick to play for.. and possibly too much to gamble on the first battle of a new army. I seriously doubt this action, even if successful, would end the war. Russians have no reason to make peace and it would be dangerous for Putin to do it. Only China can force it on them.
Speaking as one with little knowledge of military history, tactics or strategy, your argument sounds like good news for Ukraine. I am concerned, however, by the prospect of a long, drawn-out conflict that grinds down Ukrainian manpower and Western resolve (and our resupply capabilities). In addition, while Russian public opinion probably doesn’t count for much in Putin’s calculus, it sounds like Russians would be less willing to give up Crimea than they would the disputed and later, annexed, areas of eastern Ukraine. So, even if Ukraine prevails by force of arms in expelling RUssia from every inch of its territory (including Crimea), that region would fester as the germ of some future effort to get payback by the Russian Bear.
From the New York Times,
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/06/world/europe/ukraine-counteroffensive-russia.html
Excellent analysis.
The Russians must be expending enormous resources to figure out where the blow(s) will fall. A lot depends (for both sides) on their success or failure.
The Ukrainian formations will probably resemble the WW2 German Kampfgruppen, which were special purpose formations assembled for a specific purpose. Given the paucity of armor (250 tanks of which the Leopard 1 is at best obsolescent), the key is going to be the attached followup units if a breakthrough is made.
Keeping my fingers crossed.
Good observation, re the battle group concept. That was my thought also. Combined arms operations are predicated on just that: organizing one’s forces into mission-oriented task forces. We’ll soon see if the Ukrainians have adopted that system.