I found some explanatory bar diagram, 21 600 is the number of AWOL + Desertion. AWOLs are usually much more likely to return as they also used as mechanism to transfer to another unit. Therefore, speculations about unofficial numbers are more complicated now
yes, trend is increasing, although strangely, it suspended during summer months .Moreover, Syrsky practices of ripping units apart, creation of ghost units and micromanagement lower cohesion and organisation of units, making them less efficient. Unfortunately, only way to fix it is to return trust to the army by at least starting to fight corruption, rather than encourage it. I fear Zelensky can replace Syrsky in the future, but it will be absolutely too late. Eh, it is really depressing
So, if the war ends sometimes next year, somewhere within your two red semi-circles, wouldn't that be a win for Ukraine? Assuming, of course, that the war really ends, not just pauses.
It's not like if it's 'hundreds' that get killed that way. More like 'a dozen here and a dozen there'.
But, considering the low number of new recruits, and how often are idiotic commanders letting the Russians hit such 'gatherings' of ZSU recruits, every such attack is more than painful - and further reducing the number of new recruits, as well as deserters.
We can judge indirectly. Previously UA was hiring Colombian mercenaries with a compulsory military background, now any mercenary ready to risk will do. That means there's indeed a shortage of manpower.
We hear about the shortage of personnel (and even transferring people from anti-drone TD AD teams to infantry units) since at least Autumn 23. Still, there were reserves for the Kursk offensive in 2024 and for the smaller Dobropillya operation now.
Therefore if the ZSU is being depleted of men, the process is very slow.
Tom, do not forget that there are many stylish and safe ways to desert. For example, one can bribe to go to Territorial Defence Forces and bravely...guard Polish border.
Even that is 'not working' - and then since longer. If you haven't noticed it yet: TO-brigades are regularly deployed along the frontline since... at least since late 2023.
At earlier times, it was TO-battalions that would've been assigned to frontline duties, too. For example, two such battalions assigned to the 92nd Mech, back in spring 2022, have bushwacked four Russian BTGs east of Kharkiv.
You idiot, you don't even know what the TRO troops are doing or where they are deployed, yet here you are acting all smart. Why don't you tell us how your liberators killed two people in a minibus in Kramatorsk, or how you constantly attack minibuses in the Sumy region?
I know you hate predictions, but reading between the lines of what you wrote I imagine by the end of 2026 the border will be on the Dnipro. Temporary until the next round in the early 2030s, which will aim at Odesa.
I agree with the exception of Budannov. As far as I know the Russians tried to poison him and his wife. They wouldn't do it, if he were just a waster of Ukrainian lives.
To be fair to Zaluzhny - he recognized this situation exactly at that point when Ukraine lost any strategic level initiative as well witnesses that the global West block considers other proxy wars more critical (e.g. Israel)...yes, two years ago.
The last semi good option would have been a Trump package by the beginning of 2025 - but he decided to distance himself politically from the now becoming liability Ukraine war - rather than at that point forcing all there parties - yes, the European mainstream is struggling to grasp reality and believes that it is better to remain consistent ( e.g. we do not give up hoping and supporting the Ukrainian regime) problem - they do it not because they have a strategy - ön the contrary - they have no exit strategy which would not annulate their political credibility within European public spheres.
It is sad as we are seeing the rules based order and West credible threat going down the sink (yes, I have not even bringing China to the equation)...
Trump is distancing himself from Ukraine because he realizes (finally?) that he won't be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for stopping his 37th war (Ukraine). Apparently ending 36 wars is not sufficently large for him to receive the Nobel Prize for Peace. **LOL**
Yep, he is populist and opportunist - but, he has full access from US C4ISR on the status of the Russian as well as the Ukrainian armies - he also knows the sad reality: there is no air superiority without air defenses thus the Ukrainian army is not only out numbered but out gunned...think about this
- ballistic missiles VS PAC 3 - deteriorated
- counter battery warfare - terrible Cost benefit ratio
- EW - not really a success Story
- heavy weapons MBT, IFV and APC - support does not even allow stabilization of force level - see MBT batallions to be degraded to company force level even for mech inf brigades
- FPV dron ops - well made in China plus deep adaptation on Russian side
Trump can read all this in crisp & clear reports - no media bias - he reads CIA plus NSA reports
I would like to stop reading your substack blog. At least I might sleep better at night. However, I have not seen anywhere among the professional news media, their onlinenews sites, or the web sites of other internet influencers who make me conclude that they know about what they are bloviating. I am no expert on the subject of land warfare, air warfare, the geo-politics and history of Eastern Europe, especially Ukraine, etc., but I want to try to be informed. Thus, I stay online here, reading about what eventually may end up turning into a Kafka-esque nightmare. Oh well, it could be worse. At least we don't have Trump back as President again. Oh wait! **dripping with my amateur version of your sarcasm**
I read both, and I would say that Tom has a better track record when it comes to timely recognition of trends. Although I would like the other way round...
That’s true. It’s fine to formulate offensives that would require much more troops and kit than the ZSU has or could control than make the call based on what the real ZSU is capable of.
Nobody in the "west", excluding some soviet occupied countries, never wanted Ukraine to win. I guess they are good with 10-15mil more refuges and while "west" is slowly preparing, muscovy will be at their door sooner than later, as a big big surprise to everyone and millions more move away fron east.
I always wanted to live in Spain, sure am glad I have enough property to cash in do just that, when required.
No. The «West» isn’t happy with what is going. But the problem is that there is really collective West. The Baltic and Nordic states are definitely not happy with the situation and the development. And though several of the governments doesn’t say it they would really really like a Russian collapse and an Ukrainian win. But it is difficult for them to change the outcome. Poland is not happy, but not willing to start a war either. Germany… same. Other parts of Europe… Ukraine is a long way ago and we have our own problems. But they are not happy with it. Say rather not sufficiently motivated.
I never said "happy", said OK. Poland might be the "happiest": Ukraine solved its demographic issue, lack of cheap labor issue and, above all, destroyed russia's soviet weapons stockpiles. win-win-win for Poland
"it is difficult for them to change the outcome"? Blocking the oil export through the Baltic sea would be a good start, but it's an escalation!!!
the key issue is that you guys don't realize that Ukraine is dying. Or maybe you do, but then the disappearance of Ukraine is acceptable, it once was, this time is no different.
Since you are Norwegians, just saw this comment from some Norwegian woman:
"Slike overskrifter bruker en til å bygge hat og hisse til krig i den norske befolkningen. Vær våkne. Husk at russere er snille, vakre, morsomme, fredelige og kloke mennesker, akkurat som oss ♥️"
These are well defined and explained analysis and conclusions. Of course, to a well informed analytical person such as yourself they will be obvious.
I will continue to follow this blog for those reasons.
The question in my mind becomes what happens after the war. After the First World War and the Cold War, Russia collapsed in such a way that they lost occupied territories back to their countries of origin. After the Second World War that did not happen. Which war will this look like in a few years I wonder.
In both the Cold War and WW1, Russia was at the tail end of a decade+ of degradation and the wars were lost when the government couldnt effectively hold onto coercive power at home.
In WW2, they were at the tail end of two decades of Stalin's consolidation and expansion of coercive power at home. His grip was so strong, that after the collapse of 41, the army was reconstituted, won the war, and afterwards 10,000,000 well armed slaves voluntarily gave up their guns and went home (!!!).
Putin is at the tail end of 20 years of consolidation and strengthening of coercive power at home, so if we go by historical analogies, this doesn't point to an imminent collapse.
But every war is different and as they say "past performance isn't indicative of future results".
The Russian empire collapes during WW I and not after. What followed after WW I was the Russian civil war, so Russia wasn't victorious at all.
WW II brought the rise of the USSR as the second super power an this is what the bloody vulture "Gollum" is aiming at.
But the economic costs for the USSR were enormous and they were always behind the USA, because the abillity to conduct wars (i.e. armed forces) is very expensive. Reagan with his "Star wars" vision drove the USSR into an arms race that the USSR could not afford economically. The outcome is well known and later resulted in Gorbachev's efforts to make the USSR economically more efficient (he had absolutely no interest in democracy, even if some idiots in the West still believe otherwise today).
I think this misses the true picture (too much war and personal death has made you grumpy). I read a few substacks about the war and this is the only one with such negativity (even Donald and Benjamin are optimistic).
For sure Ukraine has lost every cauldron... But can't you see they're still trading time and space to destroy Russia from within?
I bet the French were pretty grim during the fall of that coastal town I can't spell so I wrote this long description of it instead
There is no trade space casualties because Ukraine doesn’t pull its brigades from cauldrons. This afects Ukrainian mobilization because nobody wants a one way ticket to Vuhledar or Pokrovsk.
The only bright spot is Ukrainian fortification effort which is now running full speed.
Sure, you can destroy Russia within - but by when and in the meantime what Russia can do to Ukrain - there is no western umbrela and Ukraine is not Syria, which was on the edge of Russia's action radius...
You are right from the military point of view, but not so right with
> Pudding’s regime is firmer in control of the country than ever before ...
Many dictators seems holding their power firm and next day day fall. If Putin would believe he has a firm control, he would do full mobilisation intermediately. Why to mess around with "volunteers" and spend so much money on them, moreover when they are old, sick often and not trained? The simplest way is to send conscripts just after their 2 years duty right on the frontlines. Yes, covert mobilisation is being prepared in Russia. We will see the result next year.
Anyway, first rule of war is: PREPARE FOR THE WORST, hope for the best. Cannot understand that ZSU fails e.g. with proper training after 3,5 year of the war. Also, the problem is there's not enough press from lower ranking officers to Sirsky and from the public to Zelensky. Yes UA cannot afford elections now, but Zelensky is not a dictator, he is more like populist - he can change things if he feels strong public disagreement.
Well the judgement is subjective. E.g. is introducing tank and other heavy armour units to Rosgvardia sign of strength or weakness? My opinion is that's a weakness.
It's a sign that they drew lessons from what happened with Progozhins mutiny. Historically, the Kantimirovskay and Tamanskaya divisions, based outside of Moscow would provide the heavy firepower to quell uprisings and protect the Zar. Unfortunately for Putin, when Prigo broke bad, all of their combat elements were in Ukraine, and the NatGuard+various FSB/police forces are not equipped to fight soldiers.
Drawing a parallel with Stalin, he gave the NKVD artillery and armor in 1938/39, because someone would have to stop "revolutionary soldiers" if they decided they are tired of fighting for the boss.
Progozhins rebellion was definitely a sign of weakness and short sightedness, but we haven't seen anything like it since, despite the conditions at the front getting much worse..
I am not Nastradamus. It could all collapse tomorrow, and we will all be saying "it was obvious this would happen", but it's hard to see that possibility right now.
Progozhin's mutiny was in 2023, Rosgvardia's heavy units have been started just recently. Apparently, Putin was not afraid of another armed uprising until now. The current army is made of "volunteers" fighting for many, people nobody care of and incapable of any bigger action. Rosgvardia armor is against non-army rebellions or maybe against soldiers mobilized in near future. So, nobody knows how firm is Putin's rule, but apparently he himself is not so confident in it.
It equals more control up until the security forces dont follow orders. Historically in Russia this happened when the government had liberalized after a period of economic pain. Not "I now have to buy domestic cheese and a Chinese car" pain, but "There is no food for my family and what little money I have can't buy anything" pain.
Yes. The Preatorian Guard comes to mind. I also agree on the pain level. I still other domestic disturbances could create serious trouble, but I don’t find them likely.
And BTW Russian economic is in the worse shape that it seems. In the beginning of the war there was a shortage of labour (because of many men were in army or defence industry). Now, many gov. and private companies order unpaid leave, despite high inflation people take salaries as the last year, because they cannot find better jobs, engineers have to work as drivers, etc. Even defence industries are bankrupting or slowing down https://bsky.app/profile/noelreports.com/post/3m4zvwxeghc2r
Even if he is in firmer control than ever the system might break down for a variety of reasons. Caucasus, BeloRussia… something we don’t see now. Further, control is expensive. It isn’t easy to upkeep. But I am aware that I might be clutching for straws here.
Not loosing like Russian would take Kyiv soon. But loosing the possibility to retake at least some occupied land. The most probable outcome is slow Russian advance for some time and then freeze of frontlines would be agreed and then the Russian grab would be recognised either openly or silently by other countries and business will go on as usual. (Dumpf would declare it as a peace and finally get the Nobel price.)
Actually: Ukraine is now rapidly losing this war. The ZSU is melting down so quickly, that in 8-10 months it's going to cease being in condition to continue resisting.
...and the idiots at the top are doing nothing to stop this.
This sums up the problem with the Magyar type of people who are ruling the AFU across all levels.
Self-absorbed, short-sighted drama queens who are waging their own personal war, completely uninterested in the wider effort.
Magyar, that SOF corps commander who was fired after that infamous interview where he said only him and his SOF buddies are fighting the war, Syrskyi … it’s all the same BS.
Meanwhile, the Russians have built a stronger drone system by emphasizing economy of scale through their Rubicon program.
Magyar is doing an excellent job and sees the war from the limited POV (point of view) he is responsible for, which makes sense. Not more but also not less.
И что же ты - трусливое существо, боишься встретиться не на просторах интернета? Я тебе в личку написал, готов послушать о моём народе от тебя лично. Не прячься за спинами своих братьев, которых ты так легко отправляешь на смерть, не прячься за Путлером и мусорами. Будь мужиком и ответь за свои слова.
I am not sure that even if Russia captures rest if Donbas and gets at least some advances on other fronts, this wiil be a win for Russia... Or a win that Putin will be ready to accept.
For Ukraine, even if it loses 20 or 25 percent territory, it will be a win in a sense there will be Ukraine not run by governor sent by Moscow, regardless of actual title.
And especially with casualty rate on Russian side. I am increasingly putting estimate of 50 percent fatalities on Russian side, which will mean 2 -3 more years of same will result in total of million dead Russians, and another one disabled.
From EU point of view, nothing save complete collapse of Russia is closer to crippling it for decades.
Also, considering complete lack of succession plan (deliberately so on Putins part) , and the fact despite dreams of becoming foreverlinving God-Emperor he is due to his death within few years on natural causes (which include massive lead posioning of multiple organs by bullets), we can expect actual Russian civil war regardless of the war outcome. The moment last breat leaves Putins lungs, GRU, FSB, Rosgvardia, military, Chechens, you name it everyone starts fighting everyone.
just a question: who is negotiating for Ukraine? And who they are talking with?
I am asking because I have never seen this, not in the last 4 years.
I never seen Pudding saying a single serious word of negotiation.
One good example may be the last easter, when I remember Pudding declaring an air-warfare only ceasefire... just to throw the biggest bombing on Kiev during his own 'aerial ceasefire' declaration, in order to get the best surprise effect he could.
And Ukrainians are right in negotiating not, in my modest opinion.
You either negotiate with people you trust, or that you can force into facing consequences.
In my point of view Ukrainians never had no other choice than stopping invaders 'here', or 'there' because no concession would have never made any difference.
Earlier, there used to be 'low-footprint' negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow. Since Ukraine is losing, these have been reduced to negotiations for POW/civilians/body-exchanges.
As for Ukrainians being right to negotiate: sure - as long as they've had a serious chance of stopping the invaders. Meanwhile, Zele/Yermak - with Syrsky/Budannov help - have squandered the chance of achieving that: that's why the Russians de-facto stopped negotiating about them (so also about exchanges).
If at all, that's done by Dumpf - on on/off basis, and with 'well-known' results.
If you'll allow me to interrupt your whining "You're all against me because I know and understand everything and you don't," could you please present some sort of useful argument and, after months of arguing that everyone except you is stupid and incompetent, tell me what you would do in the place of the Ukrainian military leaders to resolve, for example, the situation in Pokrovsk? Excuse my somewhat naive tone, but you know, I've been hearing you say for months, maybe years, how idiotic and incompetent everyone is, but I've missed (at least in these undoubtedly authoritative opinions) what should be done instead.
To educate the brigade and lower level commanders /officers to forcefully pass up the line accurate daily reports of situation and stop being afraid of truthful feedback and current position.
Also, for Corps level planning and execution to allow much more proactive decision making down to battalions and for serious withdrawal planning ahead of time, to save troops and equipment sorely needed in the future.
e.g. stop this false optimism and operate realistically.
- learn from mistakes (i.e. stop getting your troops killed by rockets while giving them medals in the open, start pulling them from pockets before the gauntlet they have to go through is 2km wide and fully covered by drones)
- build a hierarchical pyramid of decision making with two-directional information flow - and stock to it even when a problem occurs, micromanaging doesn't scale
- mobilize the whole country (I'm sure the Christmas lights in Kharkiv will be beautiful again this year, but doubt they'll stop russians from throwing bombs at the city)
Those would be some high level objectives that Tom has mentioned about twenty times by now. Inability to reach them leads to inability to reach lower level objectives (have enough troops and material, have casualty rate ratio that is significantly skewed in Ukraine's favor).
It’ll be wonderful to see all these great ideas put into practice once you’re in the position of having to run a country and/or command an army.
Everyone seems convinced that all it takes is to do “what’s best” and everything will magically fall into place.
I’m not some optimist who believes things will eventually just work out on their own — I’m simply saying that reality is far more complex than we’d like it to be, and that surely both Syrsky and Zelensky know perfectly well what should be done, but for a number of reasons that we can't imagine, it’s not possible — and not because they’re stupid and incompetent, as Tom keeps repeating in every post. I subscribed to your newsletter to stay informed about the developments of the war, not to read a constant stream of insults directed at the Ukrainian administration.
It’s not that he can’t or shouldn’t write them — it’s just that there’s no need for that. Here in Italy, we already have Il Fatto Quotidiano doing plenty of that every single day.
So by extension of your first paragraph, the only people allowed to criticize Mr. Zelensky and Mr. Syrsky are other presidents and generals.
Re "they know perfectly well what has to be done, but for a number of reasons we can't imagine": that is how autocracy works, not democracy, "the tsar means well, he just doesn't know we're suffering here."
Let's abstract from the current situation to defuse. Let's think of a janitor that sees a surgeon never washing his hands before going to the operating theatre. Is he allowed to criticize the surgeon? Or should he shrug his shoulders and keep on mopping the floor, because the surgeon surely knows what has to be done and he is a simple janitor?
Any decision making process is a scaling process. If the CEO of Microsoft goes to the designer team responsible for the way the cursor looks and starts telling them what to do (micromanaging), he won't have the time to decide whether to build 1000 AI datacenters or not (his actual job). But, if he is getting reports about product launches failing all the time and doesn't act on it (sending his subordinate to investigate and find the systemic problem - e.g. missing beta tests - NOT investigating it himself), he is not doing his job. The higher up on seniority you go, the more you manage the system and processes and not their individual instances.
When the failure to address systemic issues leads to unnecessary lost lives, you shouldn't be surprised that people get angry
Just to be clear: I don't agree with Tom's view of them being incompetent. I believe they're both very competent, but at the same time, there are systemic problems they keep unaddressed.
that is exactly my point. What I’m questioning is the constantly negative tone of his assessments.
It doesn’t mean that everything should be seen in a positive light, but perhaps if Syrsky isn’t doing certain things that Cooper insists should be done, he might have his reasons.
What are they? That’s what would be interesting to examine, the answer can't be, constantly, "he's an idiot"
You’re taking my argument to its extreme and, in doing so, you’re distorting it — with what seems to be a new kind of reductio ad Hitlerum, your own reductio ad Putinum.
I’m not saying that the president and the commander of the Ukrainian forces cannot be criticized. I’m simply saying that all this negativity isn’t helpful.
These men may well be as idiotic and incompetent as Cooper insists on calling them in every single post, but they’re also the people keeping an army and a state functioning under the aggression of a country that is enormous both in size and in resources — and doing so while facing monstrous economic, political, and military difficulties (it’s no secret to anyone that Ukraine suffers from serious corruption issues).
Are they infallible? I’m not saying that. Are they invincible? Not in the slightest.
What I’m saying is that what would actually be useful is to understand why they’re making the choices that Cooper keeps finding questionable — what’s the reasoning behind them.
If they were truly as stupid and incapable as this blog seems to suggest, there wouldn’t be a single Ukrainian left alive by now. But that’s not the case, is it? How do you explain that? Because the Russians are even dumber and more inept? That seems far too easy.
Or maybe some of those questionable decisions were made in response to certain ongoing situations. Which ones?
That’s what would be interesting to understand — otherwise, anyone can just say “you’re not winning because you’re an idiot,” without being an authoritative commentator.
I'll bite - they haven't collapsed yet because of two factors:
voluntary mobilization by the country's people (those who didn't leave) who are desperate to not live in a larger version of DNR/LNR. and the enormous aid that's being
A decade of gigantic investment by allies both in terms of materiel/money and in terms of organization/institutional building.
You don't seem to grasp that Ukraine is not Russia, they are a bottom-up society with many diffuse centers of power, and despite Zelensky's unprecedented wartime consolidation of control over the government, the government itself is not free to control civil society, rather the reverse - they are afraid of pissing off the people, which is one of the drivers of those bad decisions on mobilization (both human and economic). Every gvt in Ukraine since 91 knows that if they push too hard, there will be a Maidan, and in Zelensky's case, it'll be a Maidan led by tens of thousands of heavily armed, well organized, war hardened veterans.
TLDR, Ukraine holds despite the incompetence of current leadership, not because of its brilliance.
There should be added more ZSU combat effectiveness destruction facts:
- nobody wants to serve under the command they do not trust, even worse, if they are confident the command is acting in the best interest of the enemy. Destructive "combat immunity" in ZSU i.e. total release of command from any legal charges for any losses of men or weaponry in the war has shifted the distrust of troops to complete confidence of Ukrainian men and international volunteer fighting units, "The Chosen One" as an example, - they are all just a cannon fodder in the enemy hands in "Ukrainian" (kremlin) military-political leadership. Moreover, total absence of any "after action review"of operational, tactical or strategic failure addressing procedure in ZSU command combined with "combat immunity" strictly leaded to the outcome we now see in ZSU - desertions in masse;
- bloody unfair "busification" of disenfranchised low-income civilians only (who are the main Pudding enemy btw) in Ukraine instead of: trained law enforcement personnel, as they are all free of conscription in spite of article 24 of the Law of Ukraine "On the National Police", paid volunteer enlistment, including international mercenaries, what enemy is doing massively all the time;
- there is still no real war economy and whole society mobilisation in Ukraine to overcome the kremlin aggression but Zelensky, Syrsky, Yermak with buddies immense corruption, looting and country's fundamental institutional foundations destruction in masse;
- Zelensky, Syrsky, Yermak and buddies in charge of the country with strong traitorous ruzzian ties.
Tom has done so numerous times. The most important would be learn from your failures. Reorganize the UA and get rid of Syrsky and other old school. I might be wrong, but the main point here is that Tom has consistently over at least two years provided advice. It is ignored. He has provided analysis, it has been proved right. He has even provided predictions. Also right. It is unsurprising that he becomes frustrated.
As always, thanks for this Tom. I think that the war don't going to finish because the interest of those who are involved (except the people of Ukraine, of course) are in keeping it as long as possible. Zelensky and his gang needs it to remain in power. No war means elections and he is living about the real state of the war. Britain, the Bálticos, Sweden and Finland had the theory that if the russians stop the war, they are going to focus onctheir countries, so prefer that Ukraine drained it's blood and not of them. Germany is embarked on a recontitution of the Bundeswher to recover their heavy industry and some decision place in Europe, but need lot of time to do so. France needs to get every french thinking in absolutely anything but no un domestic politics, to avoid Macron beeing ousted. Trump want to set the point that only the USA have the power to back another country to "win" Wars and the europeans need HIM if the wanted to do something.
And there was the Alaska summit. I think that it was something like (and saving the differencies between the leaders present) like "Trump Yalta". Why? Look what's going on in Venezuela. In the caribbean, with the military bombing of small crafts in open sea. There are currently deploying two Carrier strike groups to that zone. Years before, this was contested with some Tu-160 flies and Submarine deployments to "show support for the friend" PR activity. Some declaration in the UN. Now, is mostly silence
Look my country, Argentina. They are pounding lots of money to keep a "friendly" government in place, to avert more "chinese economic and military expansion". The current government have used 50.000.000.000 of US dollars in one and a half year to keep finances working, the current exchange rate between our Peso and the allmigthy dollar, and still need to go running to ask for help directly from Trump.
10 days ago or so, Trump meets Xi Xinping. In the mind of the US president, 3 guys have right to Say something: Xi, Putin, and himself. And he wants Putin suficiently away from Xi to keep balance.
Personally, I think we are witnessing the end of the post Yalta World. Decorated with ukranian blood, because their oun leaders are mostly ocupes with gripping to power.
This guys are setting lines, Spheres of influence and redefining the new zones of contact. In their oun interest.
Потрібно врахувати, що у російськіої армії теж є запас деградації: втрата артилерії, втрата важкої техніки, втрата РЗСВ, втрата ППО. Також призахопленні території України, до ворога потрапляють повністю зруйновані поселення, це призводить до погіршення логістики і забезпечення.
Таким чином темпи захоплення територій мають поступово знижуватися.
Але дійсно залишається питання: хто швидше деградує ЗСУ чи русня?
That's the point: at the current rate of ZSU's losses, one can predict it's going to lose the capability to resist in 8-10 months.
The rate of the VSRF's losses is magnitudes higher (at least as claimed by official Kyiv). But, one cannot predict it losing its capability to continue making (at least minimal) advances.
I found some explanatory bar diagram, 21 600 is the number of AWOL + Desertion. AWOLs are usually much more likely to return as they also used as mechanism to transfer to another unit. Therefore, speculations about unofficial numbers are more complicated now
yes, trend is increasing, although strangely, it suspended during summer months .Moreover, Syrsky practices of ripping units apart, creation of ghost units and micromanagement lower cohesion and organisation of units, making them less efficient. Unfortunately, only way to fix it is to return trust to the army by at least starting to fight corruption, rather than encourage it. I fear Zelensky can replace Syrsky in the future, but it will be absolutely too late. Eh, it is really depressing
So, if the war ends sometimes next year, somewhere within your two red semi-circles, wouldn't that be a win for Ukraine? Assuming, of course, that the war really ends, not just pauses.
Ukraine has no time left to wait for this.
The last month the ZSU lost 21,602 registered defectors. It's melting away.
At this rate, in 10 months there will be no ZSU left worth talking about.
They seem to be "recruiting" 20-30K men per month. Therefore the balance boils down to the rate of combat losses.
Ukraine is recruiting as many?
In Zelensky & Yermak's wet dreams: sure.
If it does not, how did they get that many killed by missile strikes on training centers?
It's not like if it's 'hundreds' that get killed that way. More like 'a dozen here and a dozen there'.
But, considering the low number of new recruits, and how often are idiotic commanders letting the Russians hit such 'gatherings' of ZSU recruits, every such attack is more than painful - and further reducing the number of new recruits, as well as deserters.
Last Iskander strike was especially juicy: drones' operators of 35th Marine Brigade were hit.
Military all over the world are the same, such gatherings are part of the game, no matter how senseless they are.
I read somewhere, that net loss rate for UA army is about 10K per month. Consription can't even compensate
We can judge indirectly. Previously UA was hiring Colombian mercenaries with a compulsory military background, now any mercenary ready to risk will do. That means there's indeed a shortage of manpower.
We hear about the shortage of personnel (and even transferring people from anti-drone TD AD teams to infantry units) since at least Autumn 23. Still, there were reserves for the Kursk offensive in 2024 and for the smaller Dobropillya operation now.
Therefore if the ZSU is being depleted of men, the process is very slow.
Tom, do not forget that there are many stylish and safe ways to desert. For example, one can bribe to go to Territorial Defence Forces and bravely...guard Polish border.
Even that is 'not working' - and then since longer. If you haven't noticed it yet: TO-brigades are regularly deployed along the frontline since... at least since late 2023.
At earlier times, it was TO-battalions that would've been assigned to frontline duties, too. For example, two such battalions assigned to the 92nd Mech, back in spring 2022, have bushwacked four Russian BTGs east of Kharkiv.
Some indeed could be sent to the frontline, however, majority of them are still in the certain kind of safety.
You idiot, you don't even know what the TRO troops are doing or where they are deployed, yet here you are acting all smart. Why don't you tell us how your liberators killed two people in a minibus in Kramatorsk, or how you constantly attack minibuses in the Sumy region?
I know you hate predictions, but reading between the lines of what you wrote I imagine by the end of 2026 the border will be on the Dnipro. Temporary until the next round in the early 2030s, which will aim at Odesa.
Yes.
Though: provided the ZSU retains at least some of its capability to continue resisting.
Under Zele/Yermak, Syrsky/Budannov, it's losing the same at such a rate that right now I'm giving it some 8-10 months...
A ZSU officer cited the same number: https://nv.ua/opinion/szch-skolko-ubegaet-lyudey-voennyy-igor-lucenko-o-glavnoy-probleme-armii-50558861.html
He also said "there are solutions, I've seen them last week" - any chance you know what solutions he was talking about?
Tom, well, the forecast is good — so what now, give up? Zelensky and his team won’t change anyway. It’s too early to write us off; we’ll fight on…
Protest. Loudly. Especially in the social media. Demand Yermak, Syrsky, and Budannov to go. Pronto.
I agree with the exception of Budannov. As far as I know the Russians tried to poison him and his wife. They wouldn't do it, if he were just a waster of Ukrainian lives.
To be fair to Zaluzhny - he recognized this situation exactly at that point when Ukraine lost any strategic level initiative as well witnesses that the global West block considers other proxy wars more critical (e.g. Israel)...yes, two years ago.
The last semi good option would have been a Trump package by the beginning of 2025 - but he decided to distance himself politically from the now becoming liability Ukraine war - rather than at that point forcing all there parties - yes, the European mainstream is struggling to grasp reality and believes that it is better to remain consistent ( e.g. we do not give up hoping and supporting the Ukrainian regime) problem - they do it not because they have a strategy - ön the contrary - they have no exit strategy which would not annulate their political credibility within European public spheres.
It is sad as we are seeing the rules based order and West credible threat going down the sink (yes, I have not even bringing China to the equation)...
Trump is distancing himself from Ukraine because he realizes (finally?) that he won't be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for stopping his 37th war (Ukraine). Apparently ending 36 wars is not sufficently large for him to receive the Nobel Prize for Peace. **LOL**
Yep, he is populist and opportunist - but, he has full access from US C4ISR on the status of the Russian as well as the Ukrainian armies - he also knows the sad reality: there is no air superiority without air defenses thus the Ukrainian army is not only out numbered but out gunned...think about this
- ballistic missiles VS PAC 3 - deteriorated
- counter battery warfare - terrible Cost benefit ratio
- EW - not really a success Story
- heavy weapons MBT, IFV and APC - support does not even allow stabilization of force level - see MBT batallions to be degraded to company force level even for mech inf brigades
- FPV dron ops - well made in China plus deep adaptation on Russian side
Trump can read all this in crisp & clear reports - no media bias - he reads CIA plus NSA reports
Trump doesn’t read. Maybe the military can put it in simple terms that he can understand. That is if he even consults them.
I would like to stop reading your substack blog. At least I might sleep better at night. However, I have not seen anywhere among the professional news media, their onlinenews sites, or the web sites of other internet influencers who make me conclude that they know about what they are bloviating. I am no expert on the subject of land warfare, air warfare, the geo-politics and history of Eastern Europe, especially Ukraine, etc., but I want to try to be informed. Thus, I stay online here, reading about what eventually may end up turning into a Kafka-esque nightmare. Oh well, it could be worse. At least we don't have Trump back as President again. Oh wait! **dripping with my amateur version of your sarcasm**
Try Andrew Tanner's Substack for an alternative viewpoint.
I read both, and I would say that Tom has a better track record when it comes to timely recognition of trends. Although I would like the other way round...
That’s true. It’s fine to formulate offensives that would require much more troops and kit than the ZSU has or could control than make the call based on what the real ZSU is capable of.
Sums it up nicely.
And Stefan Korshak.
I disagree, his early posts were fanfiction disguised as analisys. Perhaps this has changed?
Nobody in the "west", excluding some soviet occupied countries, never wanted Ukraine to win. I guess they are good with 10-15mil more refuges and while "west" is slowly preparing, muscovy will be at their door sooner than later, as a big big surprise to everyone and millions more move away fron east.
I always wanted to live in Spain, sure am glad I have enough property to cash in do just that, when required.
the "west" is quite OK with what's going on. As long as there is no "escalation"
No. The «West» isn’t happy with what is going. But the problem is that there is really collective West. The Baltic and Nordic states are definitely not happy with the situation and the development. And though several of the governments doesn’t say it they would really really like a Russian collapse and an Ukrainian win. But it is difficult for them to change the outcome. Poland is not happy, but not willing to start a war either. Germany… same. Other parts of Europe… Ukraine is a long way ago and we have our own problems. But they are not happy with it. Say rather not sufficiently motivated.
I never said "happy", said OK. Poland might be the "happiest": Ukraine solved its demographic issue, lack of cheap labor issue and, above all, destroyed russia's soviet weapons stockpiles. win-win-win for Poland
"it is difficult for them to change the outcome"? Blocking the oil export through the Baltic sea would be a good start, but it's an escalation!!!
the key issue is that you guys don't realize that Ukraine is dying. Or maybe you do, but then the disappearance of Ukraine is acceptable, it once was, this time is no different.
Since you are Norwegians, just saw this comment from some Norwegian woman:
"Slike overskrifter bruker en til å bygge hat og hisse til krig i den norske befolkningen. Vær våkne. Husk at russere er snille, vakre, morsomme, fredelige og kloke mennesker, akkurat som oss ♥️"
Yes, we have Putin apologists, idiots and possibly bots here as well. Not much to do about it. The majority is supporting Ukraine.
These are well defined and explained analysis and conclusions. Of course, to a well informed analytical person such as yourself they will be obvious.
I will continue to follow this blog for those reasons.
The question in my mind becomes what happens after the war. After the First World War and the Cold War, Russia collapsed in such a way that they lost occupied territories back to their countries of origin. After the Second World War that did not happen. Which war will this look like in a few years I wonder.
In both the Cold War and WW1, Russia was at the tail end of a decade+ of degradation and the wars were lost when the government couldnt effectively hold onto coercive power at home.
In WW2, they were at the tail end of two decades of Stalin's consolidation and expansion of coercive power at home. His grip was so strong, that after the collapse of 41, the army was reconstituted, won the war, and afterwards 10,000,000 well armed slaves voluntarily gave up their guns and went home (!!!).
Putin is at the tail end of 20 years of consolidation and strengthening of coercive power at home, so if we go by historical analogies, this doesn't point to an imminent collapse.
But every war is different and as they say "past performance isn't indicative of future results".
WW I & WW II are 2 different pair of shoes.
The Russian empire collapes during WW I and not after. What followed after WW I was the Russian civil war, so Russia wasn't victorious at all.
WW II brought the rise of the USSR as the second super power an this is what the bloody vulture "Gollum" is aiming at.
But the economic costs for the USSR were enormous and they were always behind the USA, because the abillity to conduct wars (i.e. armed forces) is very expensive. Reagan with his "Star wars" vision drove the USSR into an arms race that the USSR could not afford economically. The outcome is well known and later resulted in Gorbachev's efforts to make the USSR economically more efficient (he had absolutely no interest in democracy, even if some idiots in the West still believe otherwise today).
The "train" to the possible train wreck can be seen then IF no changes occur that will really improve the U Gen stab and ZSU radically.
I think this misses the true picture (too much war and personal death has made you grumpy). I read a few substacks about the war and this is the only one with such negativity (even Donald and Benjamin are optimistic).
For sure Ukraine has lost every cauldron... But can't you see they're still trading time and space to destroy Russia from within?
I bet the French were pretty grim during the fall of that coastal town I can't spell so I wrote this long description of it instead
Siegreiche Abwehrschlachten?
Diese enden spätestens in Lemberg.
There is no trade space casualties because Ukraine doesn’t pull its brigades from cauldrons. This afects Ukrainian mobilization because nobody wants a one way ticket to Vuhledar or Pokrovsk.
The only bright spot is Ukrainian fortification effort which is now running full speed.
Sure, you can destroy Russia within - but by when and in the meantime what Russia can do to Ukrain - there is no western umbrela and Ukraine is not Syria, which was on the edge of Russia's action radius...
You are right from the military point of view, but not so right with
> Pudding’s regime is firmer in control of the country than ever before ...
Many dictators seems holding their power firm and next day day fall. If Putin would believe he has a firm control, he would do full mobilisation intermediately. Why to mess around with "volunteers" and spend so much money on them, moreover when they are old, sick often and not trained? The simplest way is to send conscripts just after their 2 years duty right on the frontlines. Yes, covert mobilisation is being prepared in Russia. We will see the result next year.
Anyway, first rule of war is: PREPARE FOR THE WORST, hope for the best. Cannot understand that ZSU fails e.g. with proper training after 3,5 year of the war. Also, the problem is there's not enough press from lower ranking officers to Sirsky and from the public to Zelensky. Yes UA cannot afford elections now, but Zelensky is not a dictator, he is more like populist - he can change things if he feels strong public disagreement.
If that statement is incorrect, then you could please provide an example of a time when Putin's regime had a firmer control of the country than now.
Well the judgement is subjective. E.g. is introducing tank and other heavy armour units to Rosgvardia sign of strength or weakness? My opinion is that's a weakness.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/09/11/russias-national-guard-revives-tank-units-chief-says-a90506
It's a sign that they drew lessons from what happened with Progozhins mutiny. Historically, the Kantimirovskay and Tamanskaya divisions, based outside of Moscow would provide the heavy firepower to quell uprisings and protect the Zar. Unfortunately for Putin, when Prigo broke bad, all of their combat elements were in Ukraine, and the NatGuard+various FSB/police forces are not equipped to fight soldiers.
Drawing a parallel with Stalin, he gave the NKVD artillery and armor in 1938/39, because someone would have to stop "revolutionary soldiers" if they decided they are tired of fighting for the boss.
Progozhins rebellion was definitely a sign of weakness and short sightedness, but we haven't seen anything like it since, despite the conditions at the front getting much worse..
I am not Nastradamus. It could all collapse tomorrow, and we will all be saying "it was obvious this would happen", but it's hard to see that possibility right now.
Progozhin's mutiny was in 2023, Rosgvardia's heavy units have been started just recently. Apparently, Putin was not afraid of another armed uprising until now. The current army is made of "volunteers" fighting for many, people nobody care of and incapable of any bigger action. Rosgvardia armor is against non-army rebellions or maybe against soldiers mobilized in near future. So, nobody knows how firm is Putin's rule, but apparently he himself is not so confident in it.
They were announced in autumn 2023, took em awhile to stand em up I guess.
Agree on almost all, but he is really putting lots of emphasis on security. Does that equal control? Unsure.
It equals more control up until the security forces dont follow orders. Historically in Russia this happened when the government had liberalized after a period of economic pain. Not "I now have to buy domestic cheese and a Chinese car" pain, but "There is no food for my family and what little money I have can't buy anything" pain.
Yes. The Preatorian Guard comes to mind. I also agree on the pain level. I still other domestic disturbances could create serious trouble, but I don’t find them likely.
And BTW Russian economic is in the worse shape that it seems. In the beginning of the war there was a shortage of labour (because of many men were in army or defence industry). Now, many gov. and private companies order unpaid leave, despite high inflation people take salaries as the last year, because they cannot find better jobs, engineers have to work as drivers, etc. Even defence industries are bankrupting or slowing down https://bsky.app/profile/noelreports.com/post/3m4zvwxeghc2r
Oh ya. They have two economies. MIC and Moscow/StPete are rolling in cash, everyone else is screwed, private business and workers alike.
Even if he is in firmer control than ever the system might break down for a variety of reasons. Caucasus, BeloRussia… something we don’t see now. Further, control is expensive. It isn’t easy to upkeep. But I am aware that I might be clutching for straws here.
So by all metrics, Ukraine is losing the attrition warfare ?
Not loosing like Russian would take Kyiv soon. But loosing the possibility to retake at least some occupied land. The most probable outcome is slow Russian advance for some time and then freeze of frontlines would be agreed and then the Russian grab would be recognised either openly or silently by other countries and business will go on as usual. (Dumpf would declare it as a peace and finally get the Nobel price.)
Actually: Ukraine is now rapidly losing this war. The ZSU is melting down so quickly, that in 8-10 months it's going to cease being in condition to continue resisting.
...and the idiots at the top are doing nothing to stop this.
Magyar thinks tbe opposite:
"Over those 18 months, the Birds lost 27 comrades (less than 1% of the unit’s personnel) – eternal memory to the fallen Heroes.
During the same period, we destroyed 24,895 worms and struck or neutralized 76,950 targets – the forces and means of two full enemy army corps.
For each of our Bird comrades, the enemy paid with 1,000 worms – that is the price of retribution."
I can bet Don will repost this crap on Monday.
This sums up the problem with the Magyar type of people who are ruling the AFU across all levels.
Self-absorbed, short-sighted drama queens who are waging their own personal war, completely uninterested in the wider effort.
Magyar, that SOF corps commander who was fired after that infamous interview where he said only him and his SOF buddies are fighting the war, Syrskyi … it’s all the same BS.
Meanwhile, the Russians have built a stronger drone system by emphasizing economy of scale through their Rubicon program.
Peace ASAP until Magyars from both sides suck lives of many more thousands of cannon fodder....
Я заметил, что престарелые гомосексуалисты самые воинствующие люди на планете...
Magyar is doing an excellent job and sees the war from the limited POV (point of view) he is responsible for, which makes sense. Not more but also not less.
Ответить на вопрос не судьба?
Очень хорошо - пусть соседи умирают, главное чтоб боевому Пете в интернете было с кем повоевать
И что же ты - трусливое существо, боишься встретиться не на просторах интернета? Я тебе в личку написал, готов послушать о моём народе от тебя лично. Не прячься за спинами своих братьев, которых ты так легко отправляешь на смерть, не прячься за Путлером и мусорами. Будь мужиком и ответь за свои слова.
I am not sure that even if Russia captures rest if Donbas and gets at least some advances on other fronts, this wiil be a win for Russia... Or a win that Putin will be ready to accept.
For Ukraine, even if it loses 20 or 25 percent territory, it will be a win in a sense there will be Ukraine not run by governor sent by Moscow, regardless of actual title.
And especially with casualty rate on Russian side. I am increasingly putting estimate of 50 percent fatalities on Russian side, which will mean 2 -3 more years of same will result in total of million dead Russians, and another one disabled.
From EU point of view, nothing save complete collapse of Russia is closer to crippling it for decades.
Also, considering complete lack of succession plan (deliberately so on Putins part) , and the fact despite dreams of becoming foreverlinving God-Emperor he is due to his death within few years on natural causes (which include massive lead posioning of multiple organs by bullets), we can expect actual Russian civil war regardless of the war outcome. The moment last breat leaves Putins lungs, GRU, FSB, Rosgvardia, military, Chechens, you name it everyone starts fighting everyone.
Think Sudan , but with 5000 loose nukes.
just a question: who is negotiating for Ukraine? And who they are talking with?
I am asking because I have never seen this, not in the last 4 years.
I never seen Pudding saying a single serious word of negotiation.
One good example may be the last easter, when I remember Pudding declaring an air-warfare only ceasefire... just to throw the biggest bombing on Kiev during his own 'aerial ceasefire' declaration, in order to get the best surprise effect he could.
And Ukrainians are right in negotiating not, in my modest opinion.
You either negotiate with people you trust, or that you can force into facing consequences.
In my point of view Ukrainians never had no other choice than stopping invaders 'here', or 'there' because no concession would have never made any difference.
Very good points, often not made strongly enough 👍
Earlier, there used to be 'low-footprint' negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow. Since Ukraine is losing, these have been reduced to negotiations for POW/civilians/body-exchanges.
As for Ukrainians being right to negotiate: sure - as long as they've had a serious chance of stopping the invaders. Meanwhile, Zele/Yermak - with Syrsky/Budannov help - have squandered the chance of achieving that: that's why the Russians de-facto stopped negotiating about them (so also about exchanges).
If at all, that's done by Dumpf - on on/off basis, and with 'well-known' results.
"ZSU is suffering from mass-defections" I assume you mean desertions not defections?
If you'll allow me to interrupt your whining "You're all against me because I know and understand everything and you don't," could you please present some sort of useful argument and, after months of arguing that everyone except you is stupid and incompetent, tell me what you would do in the place of the Ukrainian military leaders to resolve, for example, the situation in Pokrovsk? Excuse my somewhat naive tone, but you know, I've been hearing you say for months, maybe years, how idiotic and incompetent everyone is, but I've missed (at least in these undoubtedly authoritative opinions) what should be done instead.
I think Sarcs main suggestion might be:
To educate the brigade and lower level commanders /officers to forcefully pass up the line accurate daily reports of situation and stop being afraid of truthful feedback and current position.
Also, for Corps level planning and execution to allow much more proactive decision making down to battalions and for serious withdrawal planning ahead of time, to save troops and equipment sorely needed in the future.
e.g. stop this false optimism and operate realistically.
But it is all there on the previous blogs:
- learn from mistakes (i.e. stop getting your troops killed by rockets while giving them medals in the open, start pulling them from pockets before the gauntlet they have to go through is 2km wide and fully covered by drones)
- build a hierarchical pyramid of decision making with two-directional information flow - and stock to it even when a problem occurs, micromanaging doesn't scale
- mobilize the whole country (I'm sure the Christmas lights in Kharkiv will be beautiful again this year, but doubt they'll stop russians from throwing bombs at the city)
Those would be some high level objectives that Tom has mentioned about twenty times by now. Inability to reach them leads to inability to reach lower level objectives (have enough troops and material, have casualty rate ratio that is significantly skewed in Ukraine's favor).
It’ll be wonderful to see all these great ideas put into practice once you’re in the position of having to run a country and/or command an army.
Everyone seems convinced that all it takes is to do “what’s best” and everything will magically fall into place.
I’m not some optimist who believes things will eventually just work out on their own — I’m simply saying that reality is far more complex than we’d like it to be, and that surely both Syrsky and Zelensky know perfectly well what should be done, but for a number of reasons that we can't imagine, it’s not possible — and not because they’re stupid and incompetent, as Tom keeps repeating in every post. I subscribed to your newsletter to stay informed about the developments of the war, not to read a constant stream of insults directed at the Ukrainian administration.
It’s not that he can’t or shouldn’t write them — it’s just that there’s no need for that. Here in Italy, we already have Il Fatto Quotidiano doing plenty of that every single day.
So by extension of your first paragraph, the only people allowed to criticize Mr. Zelensky and Mr. Syrsky are other presidents and generals.
Re "they know perfectly well what has to be done, but for a number of reasons we can't imagine": that is how autocracy works, not democracy, "the tsar means well, he just doesn't know we're suffering here."
Let's abstract from the current situation to defuse. Let's think of a janitor that sees a surgeon never washing his hands before going to the operating theatre. Is he allowed to criticize the surgeon? Or should he shrug his shoulders and keep on mopping the floor, because the surgeon surely knows what has to be done and he is a simple janitor?
Any decision making process is a scaling process. If the CEO of Microsoft goes to the designer team responsible for the way the cursor looks and starts telling them what to do (micromanaging), he won't have the time to decide whether to build 1000 AI datacenters or not (his actual job). But, if he is getting reports about product launches failing all the time and doesn't act on it (sending his subordinate to investigate and find the systemic problem - e.g. missing beta tests - NOT investigating it himself), he is not doing his job. The higher up on seniority you go, the more you manage the system and processes and not their individual instances.
When the failure to address systemic issues leads to unnecessary lost lives, you shouldn't be surprised that people get angry
Just to be clear: I don't agree with Tom's view of them being incompetent. I believe they're both very competent, but at the same time, there are systemic problems they keep unaddressed.
that is exactly my point. What I’m questioning is the constantly negative tone of his assessments.
It doesn’t mean that everything should be seen in a positive light, but perhaps if Syrsky isn’t doing certain things that Cooper insists should be done, he might have his reasons.
What are they? That’s what would be interesting to examine, the answer can't be, constantly, "he's an idiot"
And at the same time, it can't be constantly "there is a reason for it that we may never know".
You’re taking my argument to its extreme and, in doing so, you’re distorting it — with what seems to be a new kind of reductio ad Hitlerum, your own reductio ad Putinum.
I’m not saying that the president and the commander of the Ukrainian forces cannot be criticized. I’m simply saying that all this negativity isn’t helpful.
These men may well be as idiotic and incompetent as Cooper insists on calling them in every single post, but they’re also the people keeping an army and a state functioning under the aggression of a country that is enormous both in size and in resources — and doing so while facing monstrous economic, political, and military difficulties (it’s no secret to anyone that Ukraine suffers from serious corruption issues).
Are they infallible? I’m not saying that. Are they invincible? Not in the slightest.
What I’m saying is that what would actually be useful is to understand why they’re making the choices that Cooper keeps finding questionable — what’s the reasoning behind them.
If they were truly as stupid and incapable as this blog seems to suggest, there wouldn’t be a single Ukrainian left alive by now. But that’s not the case, is it? How do you explain that? Because the Russians are even dumber and more inept? That seems far too easy.
Or maybe some of those questionable decisions were made in response to certain ongoing situations. Which ones?
That’s what would be interesting to understand — otherwise, anyone can just say “you’re not winning because you’re an idiot,” without being an authoritative commentator.
I'll bite - they haven't collapsed yet because of two factors:
voluntary mobilization by the country's people (those who didn't leave) who are desperate to not live in a larger version of DNR/LNR. and the enormous aid that's being
A decade of gigantic investment by allies both in terms of materiel/money and in terms of organization/institutional building.
You don't seem to grasp that Ukraine is not Russia, they are a bottom-up society with many diffuse centers of power, and despite Zelensky's unprecedented wartime consolidation of control over the government, the government itself is not free to control civil society, rather the reverse - they are afraid of pissing off the people, which is one of the drivers of those bad decisions on mobilization (both human and economic). Every gvt in Ukraine since 91 knows that if they push too hard, there will be a Maidan, and in Zelensky's case, it'll be a Maidan led by tens of thousands of heavily armed, well organized, war hardened veterans.
TLDR, Ukraine holds despite the incompetence of current leadership, not because of its brilliance.
Ok, that being said? What?
There should be added more ZSU combat effectiveness destruction facts:
- nobody wants to serve under the command they do not trust, even worse, if they are confident the command is acting in the best interest of the enemy. Destructive "combat immunity" in ZSU i.e. total release of command from any legal charges for any losses of men or weaponry in the war has shifted the distrust of troops to complete confidence of Ukrainian men and international volunteer fighting units, "The Chosen One" as an example, - they are all just a cannon fodder in the enemy hands in "Ukrainian" (kremlin) military-political leadership. Moreover, total absence of any "after action review"of operational, tactical or strategic failure addressing procedure in ZSU command combined with "combat immunity" strictly leaded to the outcome we now see in ZSU - desertions in masse;
- bloody unfair "busification" of disenfranchised low-income civilians only (who are the main Pudding enemy btw) in Ukraine instead of: trained law enforcement personnel, as they are all free of conscription in spite of article 24 of the Law of Ukraine "On the National Police", paid volunteer enlistment, including international mercenaries, what enemy is doing massively all the time;
- there is still no real war economy and whole society mobilisation in Ukraine to overcome the kremlin aggression but Zelensky, Syrsky, Yermak with buddies immense corruption, looting and country's fundamental institutional foundations destruction in masse;
- Zelensky, Syrsky, Yermak and buddies in charge of the country with strong traitorous ruzzian ties.
Tom has done so numerous times. The most important would be learn from your failures. Reorganize the UA and get rid of Syrsky and other old school. I might be wrong, but the main point here is that Tom has consistently over at least two years provided advice. It is ignored. He has provided analysis, it has been proved right. He has even provided predictions. Also right. It is unsurprising that he becomes frustrated.
As always, thanks for this Tom. I think that the war don't going to finish because the interest of those who are involved (except the people of Ukraine, of course) are in keeping it as long as possible. Zelensky and his gang needs it to remain in power. No war means elections and he is living about the real state of the war. Britain, the Bálticos, Sweden and Finland had the theory that if the russians stop the war, they are going to focus onctheir countries, so prefer that Ukraine drained it's blood and not of them. Germany is embarked on a recontitution of the Bundeswher to recover their heavy industry and some decision place in Europe, but need lot of time to do so. France needs to get every french thinking in absolutely anything but no un domestic politics, to avoid Macron beeing ousted. Trump want to set the point that only the USA have the power to back another country to "win" Wars and the europeans need HIM if the wanted to do something.
And there was the Alaska summit. I think that it was something like (and saving the differencies between the leaders present) like "Trump Yalta". Why? Look what's going on in Venezuela. In the caribbean, with the military bombing of small crafts in open sea. There are currently deploying two Carrier strike groups to that zone. Years before, this was contested with some Tu-160 flies and Submarine deployments to "show support for the friend" PR activity. Some declaration in the UN. Now, is mostly silence
Look my country, Argentina. They are pounding lots of money to keep a "friendly" government in place, to avert more "chinese economic and military expansion". The current government have used 50.000.000.000 of US dollars in one and a half year to keep finances working, the current exchange rate between our Peso and the allmigthy dollar, and still need to go running to ask for help directly from Trump.
10 days ago or so, Trump meets Xi Xinping. In the mind of the US president, 3 guys have right to Say something: Xi, Putin, and himself. And he wants Putin suficiently away from Xi to keep balance.
Personally, I think we are witnessing the end of the post Yalta World. Decorated with ukranian blood, because their oun leaders are mostly ocupes with gripping to power.
This guys are setting lines, Spheres of influence and redefining the new zones of contact. In their oun interest.
Потрібно врахувати, що у російськіої армії теж є запас деградації: втрата артилерії, втрата важкої техніки, втрата РЗСВ, втрата ППО. Також призахопленні території України, до ворога потрапляють повністю зруйновані поселення, це призводить до погіршення логістики і забезпечення.
Таким чином темпи захоплення територій мають поступово знижуватися.
Але дійсно залишається питання: хто швидше деградує ЗСУ чи русня?
That's the point: at the current rate of ZSU's losses, one can predict it's going to lose the capability to resist in 8-10 months.
The rate of the VSRF's losses is magnitudes higher (at least as claimed by official Kyiv). But, one cannot predict it losing its capability to continue making (at least minimal) advances.