In Sept 2022, VST did a then round-up of the Ritter and MacGregor views of Ukraine, in order to back test both later. That time has come.
In summary, both Ritter and MacGregor were largely right about the situation back in September 2022 and what it would mean in broad strokes for the future.
Ritter and MacGregor’s observations as VST recorded them in Sept 2022 are at the end of this article with an assessment of each statement.
However, Ritter’s prediction for a Russian breakthrough and blitzkrieg hasn’t come to pass. Instead, positional, attrition warfare punctuated by large scale and widespread long range missile strikes has been pursued on a largely stable frontline, which seems to have successfully furthered demilitarisation while limiting Russian risk and casualties. Continued use of artillery, missiles and ground forces with now increasing air power seems to be paying dividends that are recognised in western “intelligence leaks”, and Ukraine remains on the backfoot and increasingly desperate for weapons and manpower.
This goes to show the difficulty in predicting the dynamics of war despite doctrinal understanding and experience. Ritter described something that could happen at any time - an offensive manoeuvre resulting in breakthrough - but may not be necessary depending upon other factors such as basic attrition through other means. Given that Russia has understood the limitations affecting Ukraine’s combat capabilities and the kill ratios achieved on a fixed frontline, it may be that Russia inflicts enough damage to Ukraine to see it at the negotiating table without another offensive action, once Bakhmut/Artemovsk is concluded, for example. Now that the asymmetry in manpower, weaponry and airpower is stark, Russia has more options than it did come the end of 2022. However, Russia has employed combined arms operations that leads heavily with long range artillery and MRLS to huge effect, see here.
The Western narrative has now collapsed. Multiple official military sources are admitting that the war is unwinnable in conventional military terms for Ukraine, and this has now penetrated the mainstream media narrative. The “leaked” information serves to confirm at least the high numbers of estimated Ukrainian losses and the degree to which Ukraine is lying about Russian losses (they overestimate by ~3x or more).
As previously stated, VST believes that the “leaks” serve a purpose of laying down an escape and withdrawal narrative for the West. Mainstream reporting is admitting that the US suspects a counteroffensive will either fail or lead nowhere, begging the question of why anyone would waste the lives of the troops involved, although the same could be asked of the whole war.
VST believes that the Chinese will move towards mediation at a rate that is agreed with Russia that suits what Russia wants to achieve on the battlefield. Thus, Russia could inflict the damage it wants and possibly progress up to Odessa by September while nominally entertaining attempts at mediation. This will give Russia the strongest position from which to negotiate. On paper and likely soon on the battlefield, Ukraine will be further shown to be incapable of expelling Russia from its territory, which negates all of Zelensky’s, NATO’s and the USA’s claims and demands. The “intelligence leaks” confirm what analysts like MacGregor and Russia have said all along but VST suspects that the Western “intel” and narrative about a Ukrainian counteroffensive is unlikely to change Russia’s approach to the conflict and it will continue fighting on its terms as there is no critical time pressure working against it, and it seems able to absorb attacks. Whether this leads to capitulation or escalation by the West remains to be seen, but the admission that the war is “unwinnable” and the collapse in public support suggests capitulation while blaming Jack Teixeira for giving the game away.
Ritter’s Observations
A reabsorption of DPR and LPR into Russia profoundly changes the nature of the conflict because it would mean that any attack on that territory by Ukraine/US NATO would then be a direct attack on Russia itself, not the independent territories of DPR or LPR, meaning that the consequences of such an attack is to face the full might of Russia when under existential attack.
Ritter correctly understood the political situation that the referenda presented and a week after his statement Putin publicly confirmed this in an address following the treaty signings of the new territories:
I want the Kiev authorities and their true handlers in the West to hear me now, and I want everyone to remember this: the people living in Lugansk and Donetsk, in Kherson and Zaporozhye have become our citizens, forever.
We call on the Kiev regime to immediately cease fire and all hostilities; to end the war it unleashed back in 2014 and return to the negotiating table. We are ready for this, as we have said more than once. But the choice of the people in Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson will not be discussed. The decision has been made, and Russia will not betray it. Kiev’s current authorities should respect this free expression of the people’s will; there is no other way. This is the only way to peace.
We will defend our land with all the forces and resources we have, and we will do everything we can to ensure the safety of our people. This is the great liberating mission of our nation.
Partial mobilisation of 300,000 of a claimed possible total of 25 million, meaning that this draft is a fraction of the possible total manpower. NATO cannot mobilise and field equivalent manpower. The way this 300k will be used is in the backlines to free up combat ready forces in the original fighting force which has been constrained so far. Of the original circa 200k invasion force, only about 60k were employed in frontline combat over a 1000km long front, although that 200k was largely all combat capable. This additional 300k when used in the back line will, by Ritter’s reckoning, more than triple the frontline Russian force in Ukraine by freeing up the original 200k for full combat.
Ritter’s claim seems to roughly have held up. The Duran recently described up to 200k Russian troops along the frontline, and the mobilisation ran in Q4 2022, meaning that reserve has been in training and deployment for between 4 and 7 months. That force will be far better trained that Ukrainian conscripts who have received only weeks of basic training and are totally inexperienced. Russia’s reserve mobilisation took only veterans.
Ukraine is beyond six rounds of forced conscription of men aged 18 - 65, with rumours of some men below that age being pressganged. Intelligence leaks and the western press now admit to manpower problems and shortages.
Russia also has troops in Belorussia that could be deployed and claims to have deployed nuclear weapons into the country, around the time Finland’s entry to NATO was confirmed.
If the referenda pass, US NATO must now consider whether it is willing to engage with the entire Russian arsenal including nuclear by virtue of attacking actual Russian territory. Russia’s established doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons has two scenarios: direct nuclear attack by another state; an existential threat against Russia. This stance means that sufficient attack against the expanded Russian territory would satisfy the second scenario. This serves US NATO with an ultimatum: back off or be prepared to face the full consequences.
USEUNATO with Ukraine have repeatedly and deliberately attacked Russian territory employing terrorist and insurgency methods:
the murder of journalist Darya Dugina in terrorist bomb attack;
the murder of Vladlen Tatarsky in a terrorist bomb attack;
Kerch bridge attack using a civilian vehicle bomb with an unwitting driver, that killed civilians;
drone attacks on Russian military targets including an airfield;
drone attack on an airfield near Minsk, Belarus;
terrorist sabotage attack on civilians in Bryansk;
myriad insurgent attacks on targets in the Belgorod region and elsewhere.
These attacks are all broadly escalatory. Russia has responded by increasing and expanding its strikes across Ukraine to destroy infrastructure and military installations via conventional weapons. It is rumoured that a recent massive missile barrage totalling 81 missiles, including 6 Kinzhal hypersonic missiles may have destroyed a NATO bunker and killed NATO personnel and commanders, but this has not been confirmed.
Russia has maintained a consistent position since the invasion that it is prepared to use any means necessary to combat threats to Russian interests and lives. Its use of conventional force has been devastating, making the use of nuclear weapons irrelevant.
Jens Stoltenberg is little more than an Administrator of NATO and has no actual power. In contrast to Stoltenberg’s statements, NATO has said that it is not at war with Russia, which Ritter says demonstrates that Stoltenberg is speaking out of line with NATO’s formal position.
Ritter has generally been right that Stoltenberg’s public rhetoric has largely proven irrelevant next to money flows, weapon supply and the abundance of available information. The reality is that USEUNATO are in a proxy war against Russia and both sides are simply holding off from formally stating it to avoid legal ramifications, as has always been the case. That Ursula von der Leyen and Boris Johnson are both being considered to replace Stoltenberg tells us what the role is: a clown car for one.
The reconfiguration and reinforcement of Russian forces will result in an operational shift from tactics of a Special Military Operation to full scale doctrinal warfare on a combined arms basis. To date, Russian forces have waged limited and constrained war under the SMO. Once a doctrinal approach is employed:
“That means that when the First Guards Tank Army comes online it’s not going to be piecemeal, it will be what doctrine tells them to do, which is to blast a hole into Ukrainian lines, penetrate into their rear, spread out and annihilate everything… they’re going to have four combined arms armies online and there ain’t nothing that can stop it. To be frank, if they wanted to go to Berlin, they could go to Berlin and NATO’s got nothing to stop it short of nuclear weapons. Now, fortunately for NATO, they don’t want to go to Berlin.”
A switch from SMO to full demilitarisation would see the destruction of the entire Ukrainian army (note: of 169k Ukrainian ground forces, 61k have been killed, 49k injured - source Russian MOD)
Russia still uses the label of SMO and has engaged in positional, attrition warfare on a stable frontline. In this mode, it has continued to inflict high casualties at ratios of 5:1 to possibly as high as 8:1 and maybe 10:1 in places. The West has been increasingly admitting this via the press and latterly through “leaked information”, which all makes a total mockery of the previous Western narrative over the last year and all of Zelensky’s speeches and claims about the war. Russia has brought updated hardware into theater including the latest T-90 and Armata tanks and is free to wage war as it sees fit. What it has yet to do is aggressively break through the frontline as Ritter predicted above. The obvious explanation is that it doesn’t need to because the way it is fighting and inflicting damage now seems to have minimised the risk to its own troops. Russia has systematically progressed through Artyomovsk/Bakhmut cauldron, held a stable frontline, prevented disasters at the nuclear facilities it controls and there has been no dam breach in the south, while Ukrainian casualties have been inflicted and its arsenal depleted, which meets the goal of “demilitarization”.
What remains to be seen is whether Ukraine can mount any meaningful offensive, how Russia responds and what comes after (see predictions, below). Russia, it would appear still operates at mid tempo.
Politically, this means that the Zelenskyy government will be removed and replaced. All the political infrastructure associated with the extreme right an Nazi units and political entities will be removed.
There have been wholesale theatrical clear outs following open accusations of widespread corruption. This is in line with the myriad reports from the Western frontline that Ukrainian forces and command were riddled with corruption and ineptitude, which continue today. CBS’ Arming Ukraine reportage seems to have understated the degree of corruption when it stated 30% of the weapons were going missing. It appears that the number is higher and the amounts of fraud across all areas is probably off-the-charts. Examples include systematic gross overcharging for food and supplies, and the refusal to admit that troops are KIA so that commanders can keep drawing and pocketing dead men’s wages.
The amateurish theatrics employed by Zelensky and the way it is bizarrely displayed and tolerated across Europe is as polarising as hearing the claim of “safe and effective”. There are those who lap it up and those who utterly reject it. This is yet again a barefaced demonstration of fascist propaganda at work across the US hegemony and almost all politicians are onboard with it.
Russia needs to treat with a legitimate Ukrainian government when the end comes and the documents are signed. Killing Zelensky before that time could be counterproductive.
MacGregor’s observations
Territory now occupied by Russia is 95% of Ukraine’s GDP. Economically, there is nothing else directly worth holding. The natural gas field under the DPR is larger than Norwegian gas reserves. These territories are historically and predominantly ethnic Russian and are the natural and intended limits of Russia’s SMO. The progress of the war has been determined by its original intent to minimise civilian casualties under the SMO in the hope that negotiations would be possible.
The 95% figure may have been an overestimate, but it’s hard to be sure. 65% - 95% seems to be the range cited by a mix of commentators since Sept 2022.
Russian casualties have recently been light. Like Ritter, MacGregor points out that Russian deliberate pullback manoeuvres from Kharkov to minimise losses while re-establishing a defensive line are what Ukraine capitalised on when re-taking territory in their advance towards Izyum. Once in range, Russia inflicted heavy losses on the advancing Ukrainians in the vicinity of Izyum.
This has been confirmed via Western casualty figures being far below Ukrainian fantasy claims. Roughly 40-60k Russian KIA was a Western estimate in the Teixeira leaks, compared to 175k claimed by the Ukrainian MOD (now over 185K).
Ukraine is running out of manpower.
Correct.
Russian offensive operations will focus on consolidation in the South and the taking of Odesa, leaving the remnants of Ukraine landlocked. Then Russia will retake Kharkov, which will be the total of the territory that is of interest to Russia.
This may be the way the war progresses this year should Russia go on the offensive. Missile strikes have spread across the country to Odessa, but the frontline has been stable since this statement.
The US and UK completely and deliberately crushed the chances of a negotiated settlement that was being discussed up to April. The war has progressed too long and morphed too far for any negotiation to now be possible.
Russia has repeatedly stated it would negotiate under certain conditions. Zelensky decreed that negotiations would not occur while Putin remained in power, and yet now he is willing to talk to the Chinese whose openly stated objective is to mediate peace talks.
US NATO has run down its war stocks and this is a major profit-making opportunity for the arms industry and all those who are connected to it throughout the administrations.
Correct.
Sanctions have not hurt Russia. Europe is bearing the brunt of the sanctions it helped impose. US and Europe are “three meals away from chaos” and political turmoil and turnover is coming. The biggest mistake that could be made is failure to end the war and feed citizens.
Mostly correct. Russia’s economy is largely stable in comparison to the West and it is actively partnering in trade and strategic alliances globally, while de-dollarizing. Meanwhile, the West is doing what the “conspiracy theorists” said it would: prepping CBDCs, destroying the middle class, distracting people with various propaganda e.g. gender identity agendas, and enforcing nonsense policies around the Green New Deal, Net Zero and ESGs, which are all impossible, unworkable and nonsense for everyone but the 0.1% who are the architects of that wealth transfer. Increasingly draconian measures and legislation is being employed to control the populace across Europe and the US.
Zelenskyy will be removed, the West will, like Afghan, Iraq and eventually Syria, eventually walk off and just stop talking about the conflict.
To be confirmed.
> This goes to show the difficulty in predicting the dynamics of war despite doctrinal understanding and experience ... it may be that Russia inflicts enough damage to Ukraine to see it at the negotiating table without another offensive action, once Bakhmut/Artemovsk is concluded, for example.
I have no expertise. I deeply respect the time you take to consider various subjects. I have followed the Ukraine conflict with interest also Ritter and MacGregor views of Ukraine and Gonzo Lira.
Russia may be making a point to the Global South that it is not an imperialist, it may be holding the line (though may push to control everything east of the Dnieper river), rather than take control of all Ukraine.
> begging the question of why anyone would waste the lives of the troops involved, although the same could be asked of the whole war.
I grew up during the Cuban Missile Crisis and was puzzled by the US/NATO response toward Russia as result of encroachment on Russian borders by NATO via Ukraine. Why is Russian concern for the safety of it citizens not being respected. Had we not learned anything from the Cuban Missile crisis? So created a time line to see what happened and when. Discovered a possible "why".
July 2013 Ukraine Black Sea Gas, Euromaidan November 21, 2013 – 23 February 2014,
Feb 24, 2022 special military operation declared by Russia in Ukraine Donbas
Good day all,
A time line for the current Ukraine and SMO of Russia.
1) Gas some oil found of the Black Sea coast of Ukraine, Jul 19, 2013
2) Euromaidan November 21, 2013 – 23 February 2014
So the coup starts 6 months after finding Gas. The coup puts Zelensky etal in power. Zelensky starts borrowing money, and the West starts building up Ukraine's military so it can take back the republics of Lugansk Donetsk and Crimea. These republics became independent of Ukraine as a result of the EU/Zelensky coup.
Since the Russian SMO what collateral does the Ukraine have to borrow so much from the IMF? Why did the IMF loan any money to the already deeply in debt Ukraine? Why is the US so heavily invested in support of the Ukraine? Why is the EU shooting itself in the foot regarding energy? None of this made any sense to me.
Unless the EU was told by US and Ukraine that all the gas they would ever need is in the gas field off the Ukraine coast. Then it makes some kind of sense what is happening. Support Ukraine and make it an EU member after defeating Russia and the gas is the EUs. Also helps explain why the US is all dug in and NATO/EU too as well as UK in defeating Russia. Without the pipe dream of Ukrainian Gas none of this makes any sense to me. Links follow.
July 2013 https://www.offshore-mag.com/drilling-completion/article/16791765/ukraine-black-sea-gas-discovery-reported
***
much more on the time line.
> Territory now occupied by Russia is 95% of Ukraine’s GDP.
For me the key to understanding this comment is the term GDP. Not 95% of the Ukraine Land mass but 95% in terms of Ukraine GDP.
I may have failed to understand your reply. If so I am sorry for that.