
In this editorial, we try to assess the combat situation in Ukraine on the basis of available data. Meduza opposes the war and advocates the immediate return of Russian troops to their homeland. Meduza thanks Anna Razumnaya, author of the newsletter The Foreign Agent, for the following translation. The original text in Russian was published on May 6, 2022.
In April and early May, the main line of combat followed the river Siverskyi Donets, which happens to be a significant obstacle to moving military equipment. Each day of combat has left fewer fixed bridges connecting the two sides of the river, since both sides have bombed and destroyed the bridges in place.
In general, the Russian and Ukrainian armies control areas on “their” respective banks of Siverskyi Donets. The Russians control the left bank closest to the border. The Ukrainian forces maintain their positions on the bank opposite, but they also have three bridgeheads on the left bank closest to Russia. Likewise, the Russian army has a bridgehead on the right bank south of Izium. (This does not account for the older strategic footholds around Donetsk and Luhansk, where trench warfare has long been underway without much success on either side). The main forces of the two sides are concentrated around these positions. Reserves are being deployed to these areas, as well.
The Ukrainian command is trying to “patch holes” by redeploying troops between different sections of the Donbas front. For instance, units previously seen near Lyman have appeared near Velyka Novosilka, where local defenders found themselves in a vulnerable position about a week ago. Units that had previously fought north of Donetsk have been similarly redeployed in Lyman. No new brigades seem to be transferring to the Donbas front from the western and central regions. Still, there are resources for doing this in the future: sending new defense brigades to the Donbas from western Ukraine is currently under discussion.
We do not know how effective the Ukrainian offensive near Kharkiv will continue to be, whether it is only a temporary success due to the weakness of the Russian defense, or if it will gain even further momentum.
In any modern conflict, photos and videos published on social networks by eyewitnesses make it possible to compile at least a partial objective record of the events. We have created a map that reflects a significant part of available “documentary evidence” of the war.
This is difficult to judge. We do not know what reserves might yet be available to the Russian army. It’s possible that the resources needed for a major offensive have not been exhausted. Currently, the locations of up to a third of Russia’s military formations (based on the pre-war tallies) remain unknown. This includes the locations of formations sent toward Kyiv in February and March, and to Mariupol in April.
Still, even the possible availability of large reserves does not significantly increase the chances of success for Russia.
We can assume that Russian forces will occupy Lyman, where Ukrainian defenders have virtually no means of crossing over Siverskyi Donets to organize a supply of reinforcements. A new (and more effective) offensive from the Izium bridgehead is also quite possible (if the Russian command can address the open flank at Balakliia and Protopopivka). Less likely, but still possible, is a major offensive in Zaporizhzhia, which would nevertheless require a large infusion of reinforcements.
On the other hand, it’s difficult to believe in the success of the larger plan to surround the Ukrainian grouping in Donbas, even with full deployment of available reserves. The frontline that stretches from Staryi Saltiv near Kharkiv to Kamianske near Zaporizhzhia is close to 600 kilometers (approximately 400 miles) in length. If the Russian forces succeed in surrounding the Ukrainian fighters (and they would have to advance by about 120 kilometers, or roughly 75 miles, in order to accomplish this), the two encirclement fronts — the internal and the external one — would add more than 200 kilometers, or over 125 miles, to the frontline’s total length.
According to the theory taught in Russian military schools, a motorized infantry battalion’s offensive strip should not comprise more than two kilometers, or just over a mile (assuming that there is direct contact with neighbors on the flanks). It follows that an operation on the scale just discussed would require at least 400 such battalions. Meanwhile, each Russian battalion tactical group (the battalion with its support units: communications, electronics, and artillery) consists of 700–900 servicemen. In other words, a successful offensive in the Donbas alone would require at least 300,000 Russian soldiers.
Meanwhile, experts estimate that no more than 70–80 battalion tactical groups — that is, no more than 60,000 Russian servicemen — are operational in all of Ukraine. In early March, the overall grouping numbered no more than 100,000 combatants, albeit without considering the additional forces of the LNR, DNR, and Russia’s National Guard.
We have seen attempts to compensate for personnel shortages by making efficient use of artillery, but this has not been effective in recent weeks.
Making up for personnel shortages with more aviation also does not seem to be working; aviation’s role remains limited. These developments make apparent that no grandiose Russian offensive in the Donbas is possible without an expeditious replenishment of the available personnel. This brings us back to the subject of mobilization.
Not necessarily. Ukraine will answer the influx of fresh Russian forces with its own mobilization and with a supply of weapons (and probably intelligence, too) from the West. This scenario could even lead to Russia’s retreat from most of the Donbas region.
Additionally, Russia and Ukraine may embroil themselves in a perpetual war of attrition, where the Russian army’s only advantage will be its potential numerical superiority (due to Russia’s larger population and the proportional numbers of conscripts).
Still, Russia’s possibilities for mobilization are limited by at least two factors:
Another option for mobilization already has a legislative basis: urgently filling Russia’s Combat Army Reserve. Designated by the Russian acronym “BARS” (“snow leopard”), this reserve formation was created by presidential decree in early 2021 and intended to take at least 100,000 Russian men who had already fulfilled their army service. (Judging by the few available reports, Russia never actually achieved this enrollment goal.) BARS reservists are supposed to train for several months a year and to serve continuously in wartime. Even in their free months, they are paid a monthly stipend: officers receive 5,000 rubles ($70), and soldiers and sergeants up to 3,500 rubles ($50). It is unclear if it would be possible to replenish this fighting force in wartime. Given the immediate risk, evident to any new recruit, of being killed in action (and given that recruitment goals could not be met in peacetime), this remains an open question.
Text by the Meduza analytical team
Translation by Anna Razumnaya, author of the newsletter The Foreign Agent