class=”sc-cffd1e67-0 fmXrkB”>
The Ukrainian counter-offensive did not lead to decisive successes. Although the army managed to recapture individual parts of the front, the major breakthrough to the Sea of Azov failed to materialize.
The “Washington Post” has done extensive research to find out what the reasons for the failure could be. Over a period of three months, reporters in Washington, London, Brussels and Riga, Latvia, as well as in Kiev and near the front lines, spoke with more than thirty senior officials from Ukraine, the United States and European countries.
The result: mistakes were made. Above all: Putin and his army were underestimated. Kiev’s new mobile armed forces, composed largely of untested recruits, were stymied by dense Russian minefields and brutal drone strikes. The problem: the counter-offensive apparently came too late. The Russians had plenty of time to prepare.
Different strategies for a counter-offensive
According to the US report, US military officials have called for a large, rapid push. Although this would lead to losses, a long war would cost even more casualties. The Ukrainian armed forces, led by General Valeri Salushni (50), were skeptical. They preferred to carry out offensives on several sectors of the front, partly because they had no air superiority and the Ukrainian soldiers had virtually no experience with such large attacks. They feared catastrophic losses.
The Ukrainian army wanted to engage the Russians in many small battles. Ultimately, the Americans let Kiev have its way. In reality it turned out that a combination of both methods was chosen. The Ukrainians tried to strike quickly, but scattered them over several points.
According to the Washington Post, the American secret services estimate the chance of success of a Ukrainian counter-offensive to be much lower than that of the American army.
Late delivery of weapons, tanks and fighter jets
After the failure, Ukraine and the US blame each other. According to the Washington Post, the US generals would have liked the Ukrainians to better concentrate their forces to allow a breakthrough towards Melitopol on the Sea of Azov. The Ukrainians, in turn, complain about the United States’ unwillingness to supply fighter jets and long-range missiles.
Former American four-star general and former CIA chief David Petraeus (71) also shares the same opinion. In a recent interview with BBC Russia, he explained that the West had taken too long to deliver the necessary material. Due to a lack of supplies, Ukraine “could not achieve the breakthrough that everyone had hoped for,” the ex-general said. There were delays in delivery. “Our tanks only recently reached them.”
Mistakes after the occupation of Crimea
The West also bears some of the blame for the fact that Vladimir Putin, 71, felt strong enough to attack Ukraine. “I think one of the reasons why Vladimir Putin decided to attack Ukraine is that we did not take sufficient measures after the occupation of Crimea,” the former CIA chief said.
Russia took control of the Crimean peninsula, which belongs to Ukraine, in the spring of 2014. The first armed clashes between supporters of the Ukrainian government and pro-Russian demonstrators on February 26, 2014 ultimately resulted in a Russian military intervention. A controlled referendum on integration into the Russian Federation led to Moscow’s annexation of Crimea in March.
Source: Blick
I am Amelia James, a passionate journalist with a deep-rooted interest in current affairs. I have more than five years of experience in the media industry, working both as an author and editor for 24 Instant News. My main focus lies in international news, particularly regional conflicts and political issues around the world.
