Russia invades Ukraine - 3 - from 23 Oct 2022

Current military and strategic goals are independent of whether the regime ends before, during or after. But the inclusion of “justice” including reparations and punishment of war criminals has implications that Russian fascism ends and a democratic regime gets established which get ignored by “many analysts”.

At every step the West has been dragged behind Ukraine’s objectives. Ukraine cannot move too far ahead but they are always ahead of what “many analysts” understand and are VERY conscious of the fact that the war started in 2014 due to the Maidan revolution whereas “many analysts” just don’t get what the war is about.

Post war recovery for Ukraine under the shadow of ongoing threat from a revanchist Russian fascist regime rebuilding its forces is NOT their strategic goal. It may get forced on them by dependency on Western aid but they will do everything they can to avoid it since it implies ongoing diversion of resources to military defence, delays return of refugees and obstructs necessary investments. They don’t want another war with Russian fascism and are fighting to avoid their children having to live under that threat.

I highlighted the quote re border zone from Budanov because it is the first official mention I have noticed about that particular aspect - which I have been emphasizing as relevant for drone enhancements remaining important even if they take too long for impact on current battles.

BTW is anybody aware of other mentions of border security zone by Ukrainian officials? Please provide links.

The implications for Russian armed struggle are from me and not something I would expect to see mentioned by Ukraine. But they are already doing far more than they are announcing.

eg There was an item linked from here with Ukraine Special Operations unit that crosses the border that mentioned they get help from Russians across the border “who want a different Russia”.

There are also both Russian and Belarus sections of the Ukraine Foreign Legion. They aren’t just “nascent” and “sheltering” - they are fighting. They are unlikely to stop fighting when Russia retreats from Ukraine. They may redesignate themselves as no longer part of the Ukrainian armed forces but it is unlikely they would be unable to obtain assistance from former comrades in arms.

My own view is that the end of the Putin regime may produce a more competent fascist regime that blames Putin and the circles that support him for total incompetence (if not being paid agents of the West trying to destroy Russia) and orders the immediate retreat from Ukraine that is clearly a military necessity that the incompetents are unable to order because it highlights their abysmal failure.

Such a retreat to recover would not be the end of the war, but a new phase.

I have not seen anything from Ukraine suggesting that is likely or even plausible. But neither have I seen anything from Ukraine to suggest that the war will end when Putin does. They do not seem to be expecting an anti-war government in Russia any time soon and neither do I.

2 Likes

Can you see this?:

The fact that Russian mobilization has to be done covertly is solid evidence that there is nowhere near the levels of support that the regime pretends and that others assume.

I’m more isolated but the only two people I know who don’t support Ukraine also have some Russian speaking Ukrainian family connections. In both cases I think it was far more a matter of them “blaming both sides” and especially thinking it was “America’s fault” rather than actually supporting the invasion.

My impression is that it is not uncommon for people with “ethnic” migrant backgrounds to remain more attached to the past than the people living in the present in their countries of origin.

It is also very common for people who became politically active during the Vietnam war to viscerally rather than rationally assume pretty well anything is “America’s fault”.

Again that rarely corresponds to actually supporting the invasion. It just gets in the way of thinking clearly about it.

I’m assuming this refers to my assertion that the reality of Republican party politics in the USA does not correspond to the “reality” understood by many others.

Unfortunately that “reality” includes quite seriously nutty claims, not from the usual fringe nutters but from Democrat mainstream and “reputable” media like NYT and Washington Post that the President of the United States was a Kremlin stooge and that a riot during a vote counting ceremony was an insurrection to overthrow the government of the United States from which the USA narrowly escaped.

When one has got used to that sort of stuff as “normal”, the rejection of it by really large numbers of mainstream Americans can seem really “weird”.

2 Likes

That is just what a Bde or Div recce sqn is and should operate uder the same umbrella. That’s in addition to the inf Pl uav or coy uav if resources are plenty.

It should not work as a capitalistic competitive system as those that need it most may not get them nor as a socialistic system as all the combat units are not equal, but guided by the commanders intent and priorities.
During the planning process at all levels down to Bg, the staff will produce an ISTAR matrix. This allocates and prioritize assets to areas (NAI) and units and to kill zones or engagement areas (TAI); there’s also a target list that prioritizes HVT and others.
Now, there’s always the ability to strike tgts of opportunity and it doesn’t take long for the FSCC staff to receive the request, check the targeting board, the status of nearby resources, and quickly decide yes or no for that unplanned mission.
The risk with an open market/stock market analogy is that units in the periphery may not get the resources needed and be overwhelmed quickly.

1 Like

Ok, so what I have been calling a Drone Army Coordinating Center - DACC (comparable to other CCs) should be called a Bde or Div level recce unit.

Suppose drones and their personnel currently part of the Bakhmut recce unit are needed temporarily to be attached to a maneuver force for a Spring offensive operation in some other area (eg Melitopol) because that operation requires a higher density of drones than are organic to the maneuver force or to the SPG and infantry units temporarily attached to it?

I would envisage those drone forces not being “returned” to Bakhmut but delivered to wherever they are needed.

What is the mechanism and terminology for that?

I elaborated on that here:

Hoping for a response to above link.

Will get back to rest of your response after sleep.

L8R gone

No, what you call the DACC would be a FSCC plus ISTAR cell ( a dedicated ISTAR cell only makes sense at the Bde level and up).
Now, that unit (Sqn, Coy, whatever) would have its Ops centre where they schedule maintenance, resupply, operators, etc. so that they can provide a certain level of service - that coordination centre is internal to them and not part of the targeting, dispatching, prioritizing that is done at the CP by the FSCC and ISTAR cells.

Yes!
Imagine that recce Bn at the Corps or Div level has several Sqn - one armoured, one light (special recce / rangers - not quite tier 2 SOF) and one UAV. Then this UAV Sqn has several troops/Pl: long range uav (the very expensive ones) with both armed (for HVT) and just unarmed; a couple of medium UAV Tps (any medium armed UAV or single use UAV should belong to the Arty); and a support Tp (supply, maintenance).
The Div then assigns a Tp to a Bde for a specific OP and the other Tp to another Bde or kept as reserve (to respond to events lets say); and the long range Tp supports the operations with long range recce, (ELINT and all that) and provides early warning to the Bdes doing the fightting. Once that support is not required from the Bdes, the Div/Corps will re-allocate them to other tasks. In some cases, the only thing that moves could be the officers and NCOs that sit with the FSCC/ISTAR cell. Occasionally, the AO may be too big and the trucs carrying the UAV and equipment for that Tp may nee to reallocate to be colser to the supported formation and this could happen independently of the Bde/BG being supported (but they need to know to coord the terrain).
The comms ppl should be able to transfer the video feed from these UAV directly to the HQ being supported (they control the spectrum and the devices, from sat links, microwave, to secured/clear radios and wire - That’s their job and as a comd I don’t get involved with the details and I don’t care until it doesn’t work :slight_smile: )

The higher comd has the right to reach in and reallocate resources as s/he sees fit. Perfectly fine. That’s where the higher HQ staff keeps track of where resources are and for how long and who is next in priority, but that can’t be done in isolation, it has to involve all the advisers and cells for that Comd. For example, a Bde is defending a certain area, comd wants to allocate he/rs Bn or Bg in the best possible locations. The Eng adviser (CO of the Eng Bn or regiment) with the Int cell will do a terrain analysis and tey will point out the En avenues of approach, their probable courses of action (COA), what areas or routes we could use for counter-attack, and suggest ways to channel the En into kill zones using the terrain and obstacles. The armoured CO will say what the tanks would need and how they will operate; the Arty CO will say what he can support wit fire (depending on the allocation of ammo). Now, based on the En COAs, the ISTAR guys will figure out what resources they need to look for indications of the En actions, what En COA they are going for and what would indicate their main effort - They will draw the Named Areas of Interest (NAI) and allocate a sensor to it for a specific timeframe (in the woods you could use recce soldiers or trail cameras, in the more open area the UAV or camera mounted on a mast from a truck, the sights from the Anti tank veh like TOW or javelin, etc.) ; those NAI are usually paired with a Target Area of Interest (TAI), so you detect it, say a tank pl or something, it takes 5 min to react, they traveled 2km but it takes 1 min for the arty round to fly so another 500mm and that’s where you register your guns (or killer drone, or anti tank section with Javelins); if they are moving too fast, the Eng adviser could say that they would put a minefield in canalizing terrain so they bunch up and the Arty and CAS can take them out. So now the staff is formulating our COAs, we compare them to the En COAs using some criteria based on the higher Comd intent and principles of war and we pick one to base the plan on. Now everyone goes and develops a detailed plan based on that COA but keeping in mind that the En may react differently so you also have contingency plans, sequel plans, and a decision support matrix to activate those if the ISTAR sources detect the appropriate indication. Orders are issued, rehearsals are made, and off we go. The plan must have forces in reserve including UAVs so that when one of those decision points in the matrix are hit you can react appropriately and also hit targets of opportunity with whatever resource is available. Similarly goes for when we are in the offence; then we are looking for weaknesses to exploit or strengths to avoid or mitigate.

All that to say that flexibility is your friend, stove-piping resources is not, coordination and prioritization is Key but, when all hell breaks lose, everyone should know what we want to accomplish and set out to do that based on own initiative.
Also, I’m not as much interested in the tech details as in the employment and effects they provide.

Also, you said “manoeuvre force and infantry ;” infantry is a manoeuvre force, also the tanks, regardles if they are stuck in trenches or not. They may be static or mobile :wink:

oops, I went over my 5 sentence limit on that one.

3 Likes
1 Like
5 Likes

The SU-25 downed over Belorod was another Russian own-goal.

5 Likes

9 Likes

That’s very telling

6 Likes

The Ukraine Ambassador’s NPC address should be televised live on ABC TV news or IV around 1pm ( not QLD curtains time).
He was interviewed by Sarah Ferguson last night on the 7.30 report.

1 Like

9 Likes

https://mil.in.ua/en/news/bucha-gyurza-class-gunboat-to-lead-kyiv-river-flotilla/

2 Likes
1 Like

The toothless talkfest called the UN issues another resolution

Ukraine: UN members endorse resolution to end war – DW – 02/23/2023

re China in the UN: By their ongoing abstention on the matter - just another demonstration of its duplicitous, self-serving, contradictory global diplomacy - wants any and all benefits of a global rules-based order but doesn’t agree with or believe in a global rules-based order and white ants it at every opportunity. So much for their stillborn, farcical Ukraine ‘Peace Plan’…

4 Likes
5 Likes

The 141 vote for the resolution is among the highest .
The only shifts in votes were

  • South Sudan from abstention to yes
  • Mali and Eritrea from abstention to against

Despite intensive lobbying, India did not move from abstention.

While some may label the UN a toothless tiger, its non binding resolutions have more impact than the Carlton Bluebirds on outcomes.

4 Likes
4 Likes