Proof Russia underestimated Ukraine

Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine looked like an attempt at a lightning war; a massive buildup of troops along Ukraine’s borders with Russia and Belarus followed by a unified offensive. The failure of that lightning war, and the ensuing tactics, prove that Russia overestimated its capabilities while underestimating Ukraine.

In no way does this insist Ukraine is winning outright, or that a clear victory is in sight. Rather, it suggests what Russia’s short-term goals might be.

As of this writing, I have seen various estimates of Russian casualties, ranging from 70–100,000. In terms of aircraft, tanks, and support vehicles destroyed or captured, it is uncertain. But, for reference, one Dutch group, Oryx, put its estimated as nearly 1,500 tanks lost (900 destroyed).

We should also consider, broadly, some major factors that are contributing to Russia’s weakened position:

• Logistical failure — Lack of food, fuel, and munitions being sent to combat units
• Nationwide mobilization/draft — Russia is desperate for more soldiers to carry out a ground scheme of maneuver
• Economic roadblocks — Russia’s economy is in ruin; a lack of oil export to the US and Europe and foreign companies exiting the Russian market have impacted this greatly
• Lack of air superiority — all airspace is contested, but Russia failed to achieve air superiority over areas it controlled on the ground; Western Command and Control and surface-to-air weapons sent to Ukraine defied Russia’s ability to achieve this

The reason I bring up these factors is because as a whole, they reasonably explain Russia’s recent tactics. Tactics that, in the big picture, also reveal that Russia overestimated itself, underestimated Ukraine, and outpaced their capabilities.

The tactics I am specifically referring to are Russia’s use of missiles and artillery strikes against Ukrainian civilian structures and points of key infrastructure. We can think of this, oddly, as an attempt at offensive scorched earth — a tactic not unfamiliar to the Russian military.

Photos: Russia hits cities across Ukraine with wave of missiles

The northern hemisphere is at the beginning of Winter, and Russia knows Europe and Ukraine are struggling to manage their infrastructure. By targeting civilian structures and points of infrastructure, Russia does two things well:

1. Makes the management of towns and cities more difficult and costly which, in turn
2. Depletes the morale, resolve, and capability of Ukrainian forces and civilian supporters in resisting Russia

It could very well be that Russia, in doing this, wants to slow the counterattacks by Ukrainian forces. It is possible that in making civilians suffer, they become desperate to meet their needs and turn to protest, riot, or steal from one another — a major attempt at sowing disunity. I would also supplement this point that some 7.8 million Ukrainians have fled their country; this tactic inflates the humanitarian crisis as well.

But lastly, by making Ukraine — and Europe to an extent — desperate, Russia seems to be making the proposition of negotiations more feasible.

Ukraine says half its energy system crippled by Russian attacks, Kyiv could 'shutdown'

Swaths of Ukraine left without power after heavy Russian missile attacks

Consider this: If Russia is too prideful to admit it is losing, and too invested to hand over territory, it makes sense that they would want to put Ukraine in a position that makes approaching Russia for negotiations more enticing and justifiable.

There can be no winner at the pace the conflict is going. All indications, besides Russia’s seasonal change in tactics, point to the conflict being drawn out. Ukraine claims to be nearly out of ammunition for its weapon systems and Russia has surely exceeded its projected losses. If anything, the slower pace allows Russian troops to reconsolidate personnel and equipment in order to be ready for a Springtime offensive.

That is just my two cents, but I do think Russia’s tactics are a sign of desperation and bid at making Ukraine more susceptible to wanting a ceasefire.

Whether or not those tactics have been as effective as Russia wants is an entirely different question. It seems certain that from a propaganda or narrative perspective, that the strategy is somewhat of a mistake. The EU, for example, recently declared Russia a state-sponsor of terrorism because of it. You can read about it below.

Is Russia a terrorist state?

What do you think? Let me know in the comments. But before you do, don’t forget to sign up for my newsletter. In it, I send you my best articles as well as some major news updates throughout the week so you can easily stay informed and up to date on the world.

The Countermeasure