Military Analyst: “Ukrainian Offensive Was Poorly Planned”

The Ukrainian offensive is slow but steady, military analyst Gady says after visiting the front lines. The military leadership organized the operation poorly, but has learned lessons in the meantime. What does that mean for the course of the war?

tagesschau.de: You were recently in Ukraine with other military analysts from different countries and on different sectors of the front. In your opinion, how is the Ukrainian counter-offensive progressing?

Franz Stefan Gady: Slow steady progress, likely with significant casualties and characterized by heavy use of artillery. In the first few days, the offensive was mainly characterized by attacks by mechanized units, i.e. by battle tanks and armored personnel carriers. This has not led to any resounding success. In the meantime, they have switched to attacks that rely heavily on the infantry, i.e. attacks by companies, groups or platoons.

“Higher Level Error”

tagesschau.de: What were the reasons for the failures in the first phase of the offensive – tactical mistakes or a lack of training in the new weapon systems?

Gady: The faults are mainly to be found at the higher level. The operation was poorly planned and organized. There was a lack of coordination of the advancing units.

Combined combat is about synchronization, about the concise and simultaneous application of different military approaches. The artillery fired, and in this guise the Ukrainian infantry advanced. Shortly before that, the mines are cleared out of the way, and at the same time pressure and anti-missile defense systems are deployed to provide protection against helicopter or other air attacks. At the same time, electromagnetic protection is built up with jammers.

The strength of one system offsets the weakness of the other. If this is done quickly and simultaneously, it increases the chance of breaking through and reducing your losses.

“The Russians were able to prepare”

tagesschau.de: What happened instead?

Gady: We have often heard that the deployments took place sequentially, i.e. one after the other and with large intervals. The artillery fired at Russian positions, sometimes hit badly, and the attack came sometime later. This allowed the Russians to know an attack was coming, prepare for it, and move their units accordingly.

In addition, the mechanized formations have attracted the use of Russian kamikaze drones, which disable the vehicles, and then artillery, which destroys the vehicles.

Too little Weapons shipments? “The problem is the lack of connected approach”

tagesschau.de: The Ukrainians have repeatedly pointed out their lack of anti-aircraft defenses. Has that also made itself felt here?

Gady: Of course, the lack of short- and medium-range anti-aircraft systems is noticeable here, as well as sapper equipment and mine clearance equipment. But the main problem is the lack of connected approach. For political reasons, some security experts explain the course of the offensive by saying that the West is delivering too little. But it’s not always military analysts who have insight into the situation on the ground. That’s why I don’t want to leave the monocausal explanation as it is.

The course of the offensive can be explained above all by the fact that the device supplied was not used in a network where the individual system can best develop its capabilities. Incidentally, this would also apply to the required delivery of combat aircraft. Without effective combined arms combat, the potential of such weapons would not be fully exploited.

“Hardly anyone can offer expertise”

tagesschau.de: You also emphasized the importance of the struggle of the associated units in earlier talks, but at that time you mainly emphasized Russian deficits. Were the Ukrainians already deficient at the beginning of the war, or did they worsen?

Gady: No armed force in the world currently has practical experience of using combined arms combat to overcome such a dense and deep defense system as the Russians have established in southern and eastern Ukraine. We have not seen such a type of defense in Europe since the end of the Second World War.

Hardly anyone can offer their expertise to Ukraine here. The only ones with limited experience of using large organizations in a coordinated manner is the United States, and they can’t do everything. That’s why the first phase of the counteroffensive was all about “trial and error”. But the Ukrainians learned their lessons.

Structural reform in the middle of the war

tagesschau.de: That also means that training on the new weapon systems wasn’t the problem?

Gady: The quality of equipment and training of individual soldiers was very good. We were told this several times, and we could also observe it. The problem may lie more in staff training for senior officers.

You also have to consider the starting position. The Ukrainian armed forces are engaged in a high-intensity war against one of the world’s most important armed forces, a vastly outnumbered opponent. They have suffered enormous losses and at the same time are in the midst of structural reform.

They switch to new equipment, weapon systems and platforms, have to build new logistics chains, integrate everything well with each other and then develop new tactics that do justice to their strengths. That would challenge and pose similar problems to any armed force in the world.

“Progress is measured in meters”

tagesschau.de: What does the change in strategy mean for the timing of the offensive?

Gady: Now everything is switched to infantry, to operations that are carried out on foot. Each attack and progress is not measured in kilometers, but in meters. Ammunition has to be brought forward on foot, the wounded have to be transported away on foot, because you don’t want to expose your own vehicles to Russian artillery or kamikaze drones. This radius of the foot rather than the wheel or chain naturally slows down operations.

“Soldiers and officers remain optimistic”

tagesschau.de: How is this perceived by the soldiers and officers at the front?

gady: Morale is basically still very good. You do hear some criticism, but that’s in the nature of things and happens in every armed force. Our impression was that the officers and soldiers understand where their problems are coming from, but remain optimistic and believe that progress is possible. But they also know that it will probably take much longer than expected and that this offensive will most likely go into the fall.

“Someday it will ammo shortage give”

tagesschau.de: Will the issue of ammunition play a bigger role as a result?

Gady: Ukraine has decidedly chosen a strategy of attrition. They try to soften up the Russian positions with massive artillery fire and then slowly break through Russian defenses with infantry attacks. But it’s a heavily fire-based approach, and as such, the ammunition allocated for the offensive is being used up faster than thought.

Therefore, the decision to supply cluster munitions ensures that the offensive can continue for longer. At the same time, this is a clear signal that the Europeans and Americans can no longer give that much. At some point there will likely be some ammo shortage.

“Russian forces defend themselves tenaciously”

tagesschau.de: Do you have the impression that the unrest in the Russian army, the dispute over leadership, the rebellion of the Wagner troops and the dismissal of leading officers have influenced the effectiveness of the Russian armed forces?

Gady: I think the hopes of the Russian armed forces collapsing are slim, but it’s entirely possible. Morale in the armed forces has been low since the aggressive war began. At the front we have heard anecdotes about outbreaks of cholera, malnutrition, and disobeying orders.

But the fact is: the Russian armed forces are defending themselves tenaciously and are holding their positions. We could see that. And there is respect among Ukrainians for the efficiency and tenacity of the Russian army.

Of course, the Russians also have ammunition deficits and have reduced their rate of fire. But because the Ukrainians are now acting in smaller formations, it is often sufficient to delay small-scale Ukrainian attacks with the remaining artillery ammunition – unlike last summer, when the Russians were on the offensive. Now they are on the defensive. These are all indications that the Russian positions will hold despite all the shortcomings.

tagesschau.de: It sounds like the war is going into a third year.

Gady: From a purely military perspective, I don’t see the fighting coming to an end in the coming months. In all likelihood, this war will continue into the next year.

Convoys on the Black Sea? “I would be very careful with that”

tagesschau.de: At the same time, it is being discussed whether western convoys could secure grain deliveries across the Black Sea after the end of the grain deal. Is that a realistic option?

Gady: Should such convoys exist, the likelihood of a military confrontation between the Russian Navy and the states assembling these convoys increases. The Russian Black Sea Fleet is isolated and there are sometimes significant shortcomings in terms of the operational readiness of individual ships and submarines. But it still has great destructive potential.

It is extremely difficult to break a naval blockade, clear the mines and open the sea to civilian shipping. You have to be aware that this can result in direct confrontation – and losses. So I would be very careful with such ideas.

The conversation was led by Eckart Aretz, tagesschau.de