That’s the sum of it. For weeks we’ve been hearing about coming Ukrainian “counteroffensives,” really simply counterattacks. The major focus, of course, was on the big “counteroffensive” against Kherson. That came off as expected and, as documented in the WaPo
FWIW, if I understood correctly, Alexander Mercouris said today on his videocast that the territory in question had been 'defended' by untrained and youthful Luhansk militia and that the Russians had intentionally retreated without engaging. In other words they didn't really engage in this Ukrainian 'offensive'. Apparently regular Russian troops are on the way. Mercouris didn't seem to be too concerned that the direction of the war has materially changed.
Definitely a serious military setback for RF. The worst part is not even the military but the message to civilians currently under Russian/LPR/DPR control - is it permanent or will change hands? If there is no certainty the number of "fence sitters" (at best) or Ukie informers (at worst) will increase, complicating the efforts to solidify longer term territorial control.
However, there may be a silver lining if finally top brass (including Putin) drop the ridiculous "SMO" nonsense and actually wage war. The main source of defeat is waging the wrong war (see: Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan) and so far that was happening here for Russia. The conduct was really puzzling - for example blowing up refineries and almost causing all diesel fuel to disappear, but then never following up and now Ukraine has enough fuel. Then attacking electric train traction stations causing train gridlock and then not finishing it and now all trains are running smoothly, carrying military materiel in the open. After that some strategic bridges were targeted (Zatoka) but never completely, they are now repaired. Seems absurd, unless these were really tentative "send the message" to get Ukraine back to the negotiating table. At this point, it should be obvious finally to everybody that Zelensky and co have no agency at all and that NATO is truly committed to wage war on Russia to the bitter end.
MOA’s narrative summary, on a superficial level sounds like Operation Uranus—the Soviet envelopment of the 6th Army in Stalingrad. I’m short, the Red Army was no match for the Wehrmacht units investing the city, so came up with a plan to strike at the allied Hungarian and Rumanian units holding the Germans flanks, which never saw them coming.
This left the 6th Army completely surrounded and the rest of the Germans scrambling to figure out how to relieve them—a task made nearly impossible by Hitler’s micromanagement of any unit larger than a regiment.
Of course the Germans were also thousands of miles from home with no local supporters, and the Nazis had already achieved full national mobilization, hence why I said “superficial” resemblance. Putin has LBJ like refused to mobilize his reserves or conscripts—something which ironically for a supposed dictatorship requires legislative approval unlike in the USA—and hasn’t even redeployed his eastern forces. He’s literally in Vladivostok right now with Xi supervising combined military exercises with China and other nations scheduled at least a year ago. Imagine FDR and Marshal in 1942 skipping off to watch half the army hold war games in Mexico.
That also means the regular military is going to be stretched thin, relying on lesser formations to hold what it believes to be secured areas. I have to admit surprise and being impressed by the Ukrainians that they figured this out and are exploiting it. And not doing anything stupid like launching long range missiles at Moscow that would immediately cause the Duma to declare war. Zelensky must be getting some high quality cocaine with his aid. Of course he’s still the underdog, but for the Acela Corridor audience he’s appealing to for weapons and financing that have never seen bled out soldiers or smelled burnt to a crisp human bodies, this just turned into a competitive sportsball game and everyone likes rooting for the underdog.
It's a little surprising to see MoA rush to this conclusion, and in such dramatic terms as disaster.
The best argument for MoA's reaction IMO is that units capable of responding forcefully are some distance away; a secondary argument would be that there's another PR opportunity for Ukraine to fake another Bucha.
But alternatively, Russia has demonstrated the tactic of luring UFA forces into cauldrons where they are then systematically destroyed; also, the river presents a solid defensible position for this purpose.
Until proven wrong, I too am going with the theory that the Ukrainian forces have moved forward too fast and too far and can't defend or maintain their position. Thus, the Russian counter-attack will be devastating.
Today we know that it is definitely a disaster for the Russian side. But maybe - just maybe - that was exactly what was needed to turn the war around. Will see. The worst part is the fate of any civilians remaining on this territory, they will be subject to Nazi-style reprisals.
As you note, the most-pernicious consequence of this screw-up is the PR value for throwing more money, weapons and bodies at an unwinnable war effort, when suing for peace is the only rational option. This piece sums up the conflict in three words--intractable, resignation and bewilderment. Hard to disagree:
There is a large Ukrainian population here in Pittsburgh because 100 years ago they came to work in the coal mines and steel mills. When the steel industry collapsed in the 1970's, they collected their pensions, disability checks or unemployment checks and stayed put. So the local news covers Ukraine extensively. I've never heard how many went back to the Motherland to fight. I would guess very few because those that remained here are old and/or disabled. Their kids went elsewhere for better opportunities.
In any case, since NATO and the US refuse to go all in providing air support, what is the point of continuing this war? The Russian bear is patient and flush with cash.
I admire the Ukrainians' patriotism and grit, but they haven't a prayer of winning and the war is doing nothing except destroying Ukraine and maiming or killing off the brave men who still fight.
This war, as it's being waged, is nothing more than a PR excercise - a series of hopium press releases whose only result is to keep "caring" voters occupied, impoverishing the West's working and middle classes while the fat cats get richer. Meanwhile, while the West is single-mindedly concentrating on Ukraine, China is on the move.
I guess I do too. But weighed against that is the evidence of long-standing, deep, pervasive and systemic Ukraine corruption, the Azov brigade and other Nazi-esque institutions, the persecution of the Russian-speaking peoples in the Donbass and Luhansk, the deep involvement of American and Western intelligence apparatus in domestic Ukraine politics, the increasing anti-democratic actions of the Zelensky government, and the seeming inability of Zelensky and colleagues to stop the war and avoid needless Ukrainian casualties.
What is the point of patriotism and grit if it means fighting until 'the last Ukrainian dies'?
I wholeheartedly agree, Cassander. I would add that (in my view) Western politicians of all stripes have been using Ukraine's corruption to their own advantage as a way to move laundered cash into their own (or close relatives') bank accounts. Another clue toward solving the mystery of how they all got so rich while serving in a relatively low paying job in one of the highest cost-of-living cities in the country.
"10% for the Big Guy" wasn't a one-off for the CEFC deal in China - it was SOP in Ukraine too.
UniParty politicians are willing and eager to fight to the last Ukrainian to keep that little private piggy bank not only covered up but flourishing. (Also see illegal (CIA?) bioweapons labs located in Ukraine.)
Seems to me that Putin's allegations about Ukraine may all be true - he certainly was right about the Azov battalions.
I'd like to know how much of the $X Billion of "aid to Ukraine" round trips from Democratic support and approval to the US money printing machine to "Ukraine" to the US defense industry to payments to industry executives to contributions to political supporters?
That's the $64,000 question (please pardon the pun) isn't it? Keep in mind that politicians are permitted to keep unspent campaign funds when they leave public life.
Looking at the map, I wonder if this is not unlike the Battle of the Bulge with Ukraine throwing whatever is left of their forces at this? Question, where are they getting their fuel since rumor was they were having supply issues? Remember how the German army ran out of fuel and everything collapsed? Will be interesting to see how things play out in the next few days. My suspicion is not well for U forces once the dust settles...
One twist that Putin exposed, or knew about ahead of time, some of his generals were faking battalion strength and may have been skimming the payrolls. These were the generals that were killed early on, as they used press gangs to get up to strength before deployment. So there was Russian corruption, rather cynically "dealt with" by Putin ordering these units up first.
Now Ukraine is using press gangs in a wider age bracket than ever, but also pressing women into uniform. They're running out of people, in general. Awfully quiet about the Azov's, which is the odd part, as they love their own press clippings.
Staying up to strength is a problem for all Western militaries--in which I include Ukraine and Russia. There are demographics involved as well as the issue of training people to use the technically advanced systems. As a result none of these countries can afford heavy casualties, which explains the methodical Russian approach and the fact that they've been shifting forces around geographically and appear to have been caught with their guard/pants down in this sector. For the long haul, as you suggest, Ukraine is tragically taking far more casualties than they can afford. Many younger men fled to Poland and points west once the fighting started, which also put dents in Ukrainian manpower.
Re Azov, I heard some weeks ago that they had a significant presence near Kharkov but got decimated trying to advance when the Russians for a time pulled back.
If this is all true - always a big if these days - then heads will roll and the Russians will come back stronger. That's the difference between us and them: when our top brass screw up, they remain in place or even get promoted (looking at you, Milley and Austen!)
Tactical nuke is in deed a possibility - in the Ugledar direction where AFU may try to cut off land bridge to Crimea (infiltration strategy in that area won't work, only concentrated armor / mechanized infantry might, which is prime target to tactical nuke). On one side AFU are high on the recent victory, and on the other very much in rush before winter - with UA economy is already in shambles, they fear if western support during the winter evaporates, they will lose a window of opportunity.
Brian Berletic makes an interesting suggestion. Recall that I've said that there's no way the Russians didn't know this was coming--we've been hearing about this in the West for a week or more. Berletic agrees with that, and suggests that they made a strategic choice to withdraw in the Izyum region and concentrate their available forces to deal with the Kherson region--which is politically more important as a key part of Novorossiya. This recognizes the resource constraints of the SMO v. declared war. Having utterly decimated the Kherson "offensive--leaving Ukraine incapable of further action--they will give some ground near Izyum while shifting forces to deal with that. He also points out, as I have, that a similar thing happened when Russia withdrew forces from north of Kharkov to support their Donbass push. Ukrainians flowed into the vacated areas, but were later decimated in detail when the Russians returned.
Remains to be seen but I seriously doubt it. Withdrawal from Izyum means that there is no way Slavyansk or Kramatorsk can be approached (the advance from the south is either very slow or stalled) so half of DNR remains under Ukrainian control. Liberation of full territory of DNR and LNR was an explicitly stated goal on Feb 24th so even from that perspective this looks like a strategic defeat.
For Kherson (or more accurately the whole area on the northern bank of Dnieper) much stronger logistics connections to southern side would be needed (only 2 very damaged bridges remain, with some pontoon crossings) for a serious offensive. Yes, some of the best RF troops are there, but it can be just as disastrous for them to move over open terrain towards north, like it was for AFU to try to move south. The most fundamental problem remains: too much territory to hold with too few troops. This problem is less acute when advancing, but now AFU has initiative (and morale boost of a real and not a twitter victory) it becomes really serious problem.
Spot on. Will see where the new front line will stabilize, at Oskol river or even further east. The bigger and crucial question is what will RF learn from this defeat and how will they conduct the war further.
It will definitely - and at least indirectly - affect regular US citizens. Ukraine is an economic basket case, it will be reliant for years to come on foreign aid, not just for military but to pay pensions, teachers, civil servants of all kinds. EU talks big but with energy crisis looming they will first have to spend billions to prop up own economies, so the burden will be on US tax payers. It is one thing to prop-up Kosovo or Kurdish enclave in NE Syria, but a completely different thing to keep a country of 40+ million afloat.
"RF has been using mobile defensive tactics to preseve lifes and to draw ukronazis out from the fortifications"
This is true, and in fact the RF did exactly this when., a couple months ago, they withdrew from north of Kharkov all the way to the Russian border--and then decimated the AFU units that came forward.
"Going this deep and this fast makes the attacking Ukrainian troops vulnerable."
As a non-expert I'm nevertheless surprised that the RF would allow such a fast deep advance, in comparison to the Kherson attack that was much larger but was allowed a much more limited advance before it was crushed.
From what I see, RF have much more difficulty this time with the tactic that you describe. AFU units move dispersed in smaller numbers across terrain in which is easy to hide and hit and run if needed, confusing the defenders and never concentrating unless protected by mechanized and AA units with are in 2nd echelons (total of 4 echelons of forces in the offensive). Such tactics can only succeed while woods still have the foliage (in one month or less forest floor will be visible from drones) and before the fall rains and land turns to mud. Idea is to grab as much land as possible as they probably expect some of it will have to be given back as not consolidated gain. If Izyum (on higher ground, almost like a fortress with the moat formed by the deep curve of Northern Donets river) falls that means RF eff-up was truly epic and may even impact the course of the war. But if it holds, AFU may end up overextended and in very vulnerable position this autumn.
Unfortunately, I didn't have to count for that long. RF abandoned all positions to the west of Oskol river (including Izyum), because they were obviously untenable due to AFU infiltration behind the lines, making supply impossible. This is a serious defeat for RF, but it was better to retreat orderly than be surrounded without supplies.
No, I'm not sure. I read that same stuff, and it is a caution. If this is a cauldron, it would appear to be the most ambitious so far. As I said, it's hard to understand how the Russians could have been unaware.
10k for all 4 echelons seems plausible but not more than that. That number stands to reason as it can be still somewhat masked in huge urban area of Kharkov, and can be effectively directly commanded by best officers available (and AFU may still be in short supply of that after 6 months of attritions).
FWIW, if I understood correctly, Alexander Mercouris said today on his videocast that the territory in question had been 'defended' by untrained and youthful Luhansk militia and that the Russians had intentionally retreated without engaging. In other words they didn't really engage in this Ukrainian 'offensive'. Apparently regular Russian troops are on the way. Mercouris didn't seem to be too concerned that the direction of the war has materially changed.
Definitely a serious military setback for RF. The worst part is not even the military but the message to civilians currently under Russian/LPR/DPR control - is it permanent or will change hands? If there is no certainty the number of "fence sitters" (at best) or Ukie informers (at worst) will increase, complicating the efforts to solidify longer term territorial control.
However, there may be a silver lining if finally top brass (including Putin) drop the ridiculous "SMO" nonsense and actually wage war. The main source of defeat is waging the wrong war (see: Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan) and so far that was happening here for Russia. The conduct was really puzzling - for example blowing up refineries and almost causing all diesel fuel to disappear, but then never following up and now Ukraine has enough fuel. Then attacking electric train traction stations causing train gridlock and then not finishing it and now all trains are running smoothly, carrying military materiel in the open. After that some strategic bridges were targeted (Zatoka) but never completely, they are now repaired. Seems absurd, unless these were really tentative "send the message" to get Ukraine back to the negotiating table. At this point, it should be obvious finally to everybody that Zelensky and co have no agency at all and that NATO is truly committed to wage war on Russia to the bitter end.
This guy has a pretty good take. I still prefer the story of the boy, the horse, and the zen master. “We’ll see…” But his predictions have been accurate 2-4 moves ahead on the chess board: https://mobile.twitter.com/imetatronink/status/1568377064197361666
MOA’s narrative summary, on a superficial level sounds like Operation Uranus—the Soviet envelopment of the 6th Army in Stalingrad. I’m short, the Red Army was no match for the Wehrmacht units investing the city, so came up with a plan to strike at the allied Hungarian and Rumanian units holding the Germans flanks, which never saw them coming.
This left the 6th Army completely surrounded and the rest of the Germans scrambling to figure out how to relieve them—a task made nearly impossible by Hitler’s micromanagement of any unit larger than a regiment.
Of course the Germans were also thousands of miles from home with no local supporters, and the Nazis had already achieved full national mobilization, hence why I said “superficial” resemblance. Putin has LBJ like refused to mobilize his reserves or conscripts—something which ironically for a supposed dictatorship requires legislative approval unlike in the USA—and hasn’t even redeployed his eastern forces. He’s literally in Vladivostok right now with Xi supervising combined military exercises with China and other nations scheduled at least a year ago. Imagine FDR and Marshal in 1942 skipping off to watch half the army hold war games in Mexico.
That also means the regular military is going to be stretched thin, relying on lesser formations to hold what it believes to be secured areas. I have to admit surprise and being impressed by the Ukrainians that they figured this out and are exploiting it. And not doing anything stupid like launching long range missiles at Moscow that would immediately cause the Duma to declare war. Zelensky must be getting some high quality cocaine with his aid. Of course he’s still the underdog, but for the Acela Corridor audience he’s appealing to for weapons and financing that have never seen bled out soldiers or smelled burnt to a crisp human bodies, this just turned into a competitive sportsball game and everyone likes rooting for the underdog.
It's a little surprising to see MoA rush to this conclusion, and in such dramatic terms as disaster.
The best argument for MoA's reaction IMO is that units capable of responding forcefully are some distance away; a secondary argument would be that there's another PR opportunity for Ukraine to fake another Bucha.
But alternatively, Russia has demonstrated the tactic of luring UFA forces into cauldrons where they are then systematically destroyed; also, the river presents a solid defensible position for this purpose.
Until proven wrong, I too am going with the theory that the Ukrainian forces have moved forward too fast and too far and can't defend or maintain their position. Thus, the Russian counter-attack will be devastating.
Yes, that's the solid argument.
Today we know that it is definitely a disaster for the Russian side. But maybe - just maybe - that was exactly what was needed to turn the war around. Will see. The worst part is the fate of any civilians remaining on this territory, they will be subject to Nazi-style reprisals.
As you note, the most-pernicious consequence of this screw-up is the PR value for throwing more money, weapons and bodies at an unwinnable war effort, when suing for peace is the only rational option. This piece sums up the conflict in three words--intractable, resignation and bewilderment. Hard to disagree:
https://original.antiwar.com/Jim_Fitzgerald/2022/09/07/three-words-that-describe-the-russo-ukrainian-war/
There is a large Ukrainian population here in Pittsburgh because 100 years ago they came to work in the coal mines and steel mills. When the steel industry collapsed in the 1970's, they collected their pensions, disability checks or unemployment checks and stayed put. So the local news covers Ukraine extensively. I've never heard how many went back to the Motherland to fight. I would guess very few because those that remained here are old and/or disabled. Their kids went elsewhere for better opportunities.
In any case, since NATO and the US refuse to go all in providing air support, what is the point of continuing this war? The Russian bear is patient and flush with cash.
I admire the Ukrainians' patriotism and grit, but they haven't a prayer of winning and the war is doing nothing except destroying Ukraine and maiming or killing off the brave men who still fight.
This war, as it's being waged, is nothing more than a PR excercise - a series of hopium press releases whose only result is to keep "caring" voters occupied, impoverishing the West's working and middle classes while the fat cats get richer. Meanwhile, while the West is single-mindedly concentrating on Ukraine, China is on the move.
@Anne
"I admire the Ukrainians' patriotism and grit..."
I guess I do too. But weighed against that is the evidence of long-standing, deep, pervasive and systemic Ukraine corruption, the Azov brigade and other Nazi-esque institutions, the persecution of the Russian-speaking peoples in the Donbass and Luhansk, the deep involvement of American and Western intelligence apparatus in domestic Ukraine politics, the increasing anti-democratic actions of the Zelensky government, and the seeming inability of Zelensky and colleagues to stop the war and avoid needless Ukrainian casualties.
What is the point of patriotism and grit if it means fighting until 'the last Ukrainian dies'?
I wholeheartedly agree, Cassander. I would add that (in my view) Western politicians of all stripes have been using Ukraine's corruption to their own advantage as a way to move laundered cash into their own (or close relatives') bank accounts. Another clue toward solving the mystery of how they all got so rich while serving in a relatively low paying job in one of the highest cost-of-living cities in the country.
"10% for the Big Guy" wasn't a one-off for the CEFC deal in China - it was SOP in Ukraine too.
UniParty politicians are willing and eager to fight to the last Ukrainian to keep that little private piggy bank not only covered up but flourishing. (Also see illegal (CIA?) bioweapons labs located in Ukraine.)
Seems to me that Putin's allegations about Ukraine may all be true - he certainly was right about the Azov battalions.
I'd like to know how much of the $X Billion of "aid to Ukraine" round trips from Democratic support and approval to the US money printing machine to "Ukraine" to the US defense industry to payments to industry executives to contributions to political supporters?
That's the $64,000 question (please pardon the pun) isn't it? Keep in mind that politicians are permitted to keep unspent campaign funds when they leave public life.
Looking at the map, I wonder if this is not unlike the Battle of the Bulge with Ukraine throwing whatever is left of their forces at this? Question, where are they getting their fuel since rumor was they were having supply issues? Remember how the German army ran out of fuel and everything collapsed? Will be interesting to see how things play out in the next few days. My suspicion is not well for U forces once the dust settles...
I agree that this attack was almost certainly driven by PR concerns rather than military realities.
If true, that's a pretty cynical approach to the lives of Ukrainian soldiers.
One twist that Putin exposed, or knew about ahead of time, some of his generals were faking battalion strength and may have been skimming the payrolls. These were the generals that were killed early on, as they used press gangs to get up to strength before deployment. So there was Russian corruption, rather cynically "dealt with" by Putin ordering these units up first.
Now Ukraine is using press gangs in a wider age bracket than ever, but also pressing women into uniform. They're running out of people, in general. Awfully quiet about the Azov's, which is the odd part, as they love their own press clippings.
Staying up to strength is a problem for all Western militaries--in which I include Ukraine and Russia. There are demographics involved as well as the issue of training people to use the technically advanced systems. As a result none of these countries can afford heavy casualties, which explains the methodical Russian approach and the fact that they've been shifting forces around geographically and appear to have been caught with their guard/pants down in this sector. For the long haul, as you suggest, Ukraine is tragically taking far more casualties than they can afford. Many younger men fled to Poland and points west once the fighting started, which also put dents in Ukrainian manpower.
Re Azov, I heard some weeks ago that they had a significant presence near Kharkov but got decimated trying to advance when the Russians for a time pulled back.
If this is all true - always a big if these days - then heads will roll and the Russians will come back stronger. That's the difference between us and them: when our top brass screw up, they remain in place or even get promoted (looking at you, Milley and Austen!)
Thanks for the heads up.
Tactical nuke is in deed a possibility - in the Ugledar direction where AFU may try to cut off land bridge to Crimea (infiltration strategy in that area won't work, only concentrated armor / mechanized infantry might, which is prime target to tactical nuke). On one side AFU are high on the recent victory, and on the other very much in rush before winter - with UA economy is already in shambles, they fear if western support during the winter evaporates, they will lose a window of opportunity.
Oh I meant Russian tactical nuke stike on accumulated AFU units in small area.
Brian Berletic makes an interesting suggestion. Recall that I've said that there's no way the Russians didn't know this was coming--we've been hearing about this in the West for a week or more. Berletic agrees with that, and suggests that they made a strategic choice to withdraw in the Izyum region and concentrate their available forces to deal with the Kherson region--which is politically more important as a key part of Novorossiya. This recognizes the resource constraints of the SMO v. declared war. Having utterly decimated the Kherson "offensive--leaving Ukraine incapable of further action--they will give some ground near Izyum while shifting forces to deal with that. He also points out, as I have, that a similar thing happened when Russia withdrew forces from north of Kharkov to support their Donbass push. Ukrainians flowed into the vacated areas, but were later decimated in detail when the Russians returned.
Remains to be seen but I seriously doubt it. Withdrawal from Izyum means that there is no way Slavyansk or Kramatorsk can be approached (the advance from the south is either very slow or stalled) so half of DNR remains under Ukrainian control. Liberation of full territory of DNR and LNR was an explicitly stated goal on Feb 24th so even from that perspective this looks like a strategic defeat.
For Kherson (or more accurately the whole area on the northern bank of Dnieper) much stronger logistics connections to southern side would be needed (only 2 very damaged bridges remain, with some pontoon crossings) for a serious offensive. Yes, some of the best RF troops are there, but it can be just as disastrous for them to move over open terrain towards north, like it was for AFU to try to move south. The most fundamental problem remains: too much territory to hold with too few troops. This problem is less acute when advancing, but now AFU has initiative (and morale boost of a real and not a twitter victory) it becomes really serious problem.
Spot on. Will see where the new front line will stabilize, at Oskol river or even further east. The bigger and crucial question is what will RF learn from this defeat and how will they conduct the war further.
It will definitely - and at least indirectly - affect regular US citizens. Ukraine is an economic basket case, it will be reliant for years to come on foreign aid, not just for military but to pay pensions, teachers, civil servants of all kinds. EU talks big but with energy crisis looming they will first have to spend billions to prop up own economies, so the burden will be on US tax payers. It is one thing to prop-up Kosovo or Kurdish enclave in NE Syria, but a completely different thing to keep a country of 40+ million afloat.
https://adamtooze.substack.com/p/chartbook-149-success-on-the-battlefield
"RF has been using mobile defensive tactics to preseve lifes and to draw ukronazis out from the fortifications"
This is true, and in fact the RF did exactly this when., a couple months ago, they withdrew from north of Kharkov all the way to the Russian border--and then decimated the AFU units that came forward.
"Going this deep and this fast makes the attacking Ukrainian troops vulnerable."
As a non-expert I'm nevertheless surprised that the RF would allow such a fast deep advance, in comparison to the Kherson attack that was much larger but was allowed a much more limited advance before it was crushed.
As you say, too early to tell..
Who is AR?
From what I see, RF have much more difficulty this time with the tactic that you describe. AFU units move dispersed in smaller numbers across terrain in which is easy to hide and hit and run if needed, confusing the defenders and never concentrating unless protected by mechanized and AA units with are in 2nd echelons (total of 4 echelons of forces in the offensive). Such tactics can only succeed while woods still have the foliage (in one month or less forest floor will be visible from drones) and before the fall rains and land turns to mud. Idea is to grab as much land as possible as they probably expect some of it will have to be given back as not consolidated gain. If Izyum (on higher ground, almost like a fortress with the moat formed by the deep curve of Northern Donets river) falls that means RF eff-up was truly epic and may even impact the course of the war. But if it holds, AFU may end up overextended and in very vulnerable position this autumn.
Unfortunately, I didn't have to count for that long. RF abandoned all positions to the west of Oskol river (including Izyum), because they were obviously untenable due to AFU infiltration behind the lines, making supply impossible. This is a serious defeat for RF, but it was better to retreat orderly than be surrounded without supplies.
Do you have a source for abandonment of Izyum?
No, I'm not sure. I read that same stuff, and it is a caution. If this is a cauldron, it would appear to be the most ambitious so far. As I said, it's hard to understand how the Russians could have been unaware.
I'm very skeptical of those numbers.
10k for all 4 echelons seems plausible but not more than that. That number stands to reason as it can be still somewhat masked in huge urban area of Kharkov, and can be effectively directly commanded by best officers available (and AFU may still be in short supply of that after 6 months of attritions).
That's the number I've heard.
The guy on The New Atlas site had the take of--yes--a cauldron.
Anything is possible, could be the RF was caught with it's pants down. But my money is on them rectifying the situation.
That's a possibility, but if so it's on a very large scale.