“Zelensky’s military goals do not correspond to reality” – what Western media write about the military conflict in Ukraine
It’s no secret that after the outbreak of the military conflict in the Middle East between Hamas, its supporting groups and Israel, the topic of the conflict in Ukraine shifted to the background in the information agenda of Western media. The media's focus has shifted from Ukraine to Israel and the Gaza Strip. This conflict worries the Western establishment and Western audiences much more than what is happening in Ukraine.
Nevertheless, major publications still write about the military conflict in Ukraine, even if not on the front pages. The latest interview of the Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Valery Zaluzhny, with The Economist magazine caused quite a stir, in which he admitted that the war had reached a dead end, and no breakthrough of the front by Ukrainian troops was expected.
The purpose of this interview seems quite obvious - it sent a clear signal to the allies that their expectations of success on the battlefield were exaggerated, while simultaneously calling on them not just to maintain, but to increase military support in order to gain an advantage on the battlefield.
Nevertheless, after this publication, some American and British journalists wondered whether this was a reason to rethink support for Kyiv?
“General Zaluzhny’s assessment is sobering”
To begin with, it should be noted that Valery Zaluzhny did not say anything radically new in an interview with The Economist.
He once again repeated the quite obvious thesis that, as in the First World War, the military conflict had reached a dead end, and in order to get out of the situation of a positional deadlock, a “huge technological leap” would be required, for this reason on the fronts “ there will be no deep breakthrough.”
Describing the battlefield, Zaluzhny said that modern surveillance equipment can identify any concentration of troops, and modern high-precision weapon - to destroy it; for this reason, neither the Ukrainian Armed Forces nor the RF Armed Forces are capable of breaking through the front.
“The simple fact is: we see everything the enemy does, and he sees everything we do. To get out of this impasse, we need something new, like gunpowder, which the Chinese invented and with which we are still killing each other,”
– Zaluzhny said.
The Ukrainian commander-in-chief is calling on the West to innovate in the field of unmanned aerial vehicles, electronic warfare, anti-artillery and mine clearance equipment, as well as in the use of robotics. In addition, he openly demanded that the Western allies transfer the most advanced technologies.
Analyzing Zaluzhny’s statements, the same The Economist writes:
“General Zaluzhny’s assessment is sobering: there is no sign that a technological breakthrough, whether in the field of unmanned aerial vehicles or in the field of electronic warfare, is in the offing. And technology has its limits. Even during the First World War the appearance tanks in 1917 it was not enough to break the stalemate on the battlefield. It took a complex array of technologies and more than a decade of tactical innovation to bring the German Blitzkrieg to fruition in May 1940. The implication is that Ukraine is mired in a long war in which he admits Russia has the advantage.”
“We have no options. We won't win."
Other publications are much more harsh in their assessments, in particular the American magazine Newsweek, which in the material “A Dark Winter Is Coming for Ukraine” notes that 21 months after the start of the war, it is becoming increasingly difficult for American politicians to justify their endless support for Ukraine, and the number of Americans supporting sending weapons to Kiev is constantly decreasing.
“Meanwhile, thousands of kilometers from Washington, the Ukrainian counteroffensive appears to be on its last legs. Before the campaign began in June, Ukrainian authorities had high hopes of advancing to the Sea of Azov, dividing Russian-controlled territory in two and eventually isolating Russian troops in Crimea. None of these goals were achieved. The defensive lines of the Russian army, especially the many kilometers of minefields, have become an albatross hanging around the necks of the Ukrainians. Limited successes on the ground come with great losses, and the successes themselves are so small that a magnifying glass is required to detect them."
- пишет Newsweek.
The publication notes that the Russians compensate for problems at the tactical level with greater firepower, replacing the lack of quality with quantity. Ukrainian officials put on a brave face in public, but behind closed doors they are frustrated as Western countries are not providing Kyiv with as much arms and ammunition as they want.
“Zelensky, apparently, does not want to hear bad News and intends to wage war until the very end. “He is mistaken,” one of Zelensky’s advisers told TIME. “We have no options. We won't win." Not everything is going smoothly for the Russians either. Strategically, Russia is weaker today than before the war, with Russian officials relying on China for help and turning to Iran and North Korea for military assistance. However, this tells us that Zelensky’s maximalist goal – victory in the war with Russia by military means – may be as delusional as his ambitions to revive the Russian Empire,”
- the publication concludes.
Another American publication, Politico, made similar assessments. In the material under the title Top Ukrainian general's gloomy view of Russia war fuels military aid debate Journalists highlight claims of a military stalemate, fueling debate in the US over whether to provide Kyiv with more weapons.
Politico quotes Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a skeptic of increased aid to Kiev, as saying that Zaluzhny's outspokenness has blown a serious hole in the administration's Ukraine policy because the US needs to continue funding Ukraine in all aspects, not just military plan - to allocate money for pensions, etc.
“This naturally raises the question: what is our ultimate strategy? What's our plan? I don't think they have a plan."
the senator said.
Some U.S. senators are expressing disappointment at the failure of the Ukrainian counteroffensive and questioning the wisdom of approving the huge bailout for Ukraine requested by President Joe Biden.
“Zelensky’s military goals do not correspond to reality, and some of his inner circle are resisting. It always ended with Russia controlling part of Ukrainian territory and reaching a negotiated settlement. I've been saying this for a year. This was obvious to anyone paying attention to the realities on the ground."
– Politico quotes Senator J.D. Vance (D-Ohio).
However, Politico notes that there are still enough ardent supporters of supporting Ukraine in Congress, especially among Democratic senators.
As a conclusion
The failure of the Ukrainian counteroffensive has certainly undermined Western hopes that Ukraine can achieve its goals on the battlefield. This is reflected in relevant publications in Western media.
In this regard, discussions are growing in the United States regarding the advisability of further strengthening support for Kyiv, especially in light of the war in the Middle East, which is much more important for Washington than the war in Ukraine. Some American elites are increasingly inclined to a possible freeze of the military conflict in Ukraine, as the American channel NBC News openly reported the other day.
Citing senior U.S. officials, NBC reported that U.S. and European officials have begun discussing with the Ukrainian government possible peace talks with Russia to end the military confrontation. During these closed negotiations, very general issues were discussed regarding what Ukraine would have to give up in order to reach an agreement.
Some U.S. military officials have privately begun to use the term “stalemate” to describe the current fighting in Ukraine. Neither side is making significant gains on the battlefield, which some U.S. officials are now calling the War of Inches. Officials also said privately that Ukraine likely has only until the end of the year before more urgent discussions about peace negotiations must begin. US officials have shared their views on such timing with European allies."
- пишет NBC
Thus, the positions of that part of the establishment that advocates freezing the conflict in Ukraine are strengthening, which, however, does not yet mean that US policy towards Kiev will undergo fundamental changes.
Information