Rob Dannenberg, Former CIA Chief of Central Eurasia Division
EXPERT PERSPECTIVE — There is currently much speculation about the possibility of an imminent Ukrainian counteroffensive. Much depends on its success or failure.
If Ukraine achieves its objectives, Russian President Vladimir Putin will be under tremendous pressure and perhaps temptation to do something dramatic to change the tide of battle or at a minimum to demonstrate the credibility of Russia’s status as a military superpower. He will need to act decisively to preserve his regime. Ukrainian military success that risks Russia’s overall defeat will put pressure on Xi Jinping to do something to ensure his friend and ideological ally is not humiliated and at risk of losing power.
A failed Ukrainian offensive has consequences as well. It would increase Russian troop morale and support for the long war. A Ukrainian military reversal would undermine US, NATO, and allied support both financial and military for Ukraine. It may help Putin snatch victory from the jaws of defeat if Ukraine is then forced into a land for peace negotiation. The world would become a much more dangerous place.
Some speculation on the Ukrainian offensive concerns its expected start date, possibly in the next few days or perhaps not until 9 May, the day Russians celebrate victory over fascist Germany in 1945.
According to some reports, US and NATO officials are assisting the Ukrainians in design and preparation of the operation. If so, let us hope the US is better able to keep Ukrainian secrets than its own.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said on 27 April that NATO has delivered nearly all of the promised material to Ukraine. “More than 98% of the combat vehicles promised to Ukraine have already been delivered. That means over 1,550 armored vehicles, 230 tanks and supplies and munitions…in total we have trained and equipped more than nine new armored brigades.” This should help Ukraine’s offensive capabilities.
There is also speculation about the objectives of the counteroffensive. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and other senior Ukrainian officials have consistently stated their goal of liberating Ukrainian territory currently occupied (and politically annexed) by Russia. This includes Crimea and the territories of the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk “Peoples Republics.”
This will be a daunting objective and unlikely to be achievable in a single offensive. In anticipation of the Ukrainian strike, there are reports of Russian preparations of extensive defensive fortifications in the areas where they consider Ukrainian attacks likely, particularly in the land corridor connecting Donetsk with Crimea.
There is some reason for optimism over the prospect of Ukrainian success in recapturing more territory with this offensive. The Ukrainian counteroffensive last autumn was highly effective. Despite all of the challenges faced by Ukraine as suggested in recently leaked US classified assessments (shortages in air defense capability, shortages of ammunition), the Ukrainians continue to fight with a high degree of skill and exceptionally high morale. The battle readiness of nine new armored brigades—if deployed with the skill the Ukrainians have shown in the war thus far—gives the Ukraine combat offensive mobility they have not yet possessed.
Looking for a way to get ahead of the week in cyber and tech? Sign up for the Cyber Initiatives Group Sunday newsletter to quickly get up to speed on the biggest cyber and tech headlines and be ready for the week ahead. Sign up today.
Judging from the conduct of Russian operations in the current battle for Bakhmut, the Russians have learned few lessons in the improvement of their military doctrine and tactics since May 1945.
Reports of Russian military successes there, especially those actually achieved by the Russian army and not paramilitary organizations such as Wagner Group, are incremental and almost nonexistent. Russia continues to use massive artillery bombardments followed by infantry attacks against dug-in forces with horrendous casualties taken by the attacking infantry. There is no credible evidence that despite multiple changes in the senior Russian chain of command there has been any improvement in Russian combined arms tactics, especially air-ground support, communications security or logistical support operations.
Most of Russia’s elite or most capable units have been decimated thus far in the conflict. Their replacements are poorly trained and equipped conscripts. As perhaps further evidence of lack of lessons learned in the conflict thus far, Moscow has resumed missile strikes against Ukrainian civilian infrastructure and targets in recent days. Russia wasted a lot of difficult-to-replace ordinance on attacking Ukrainian water and energy infrastructure targets this winter in an effort to force Ukrainian capitulation. However, Father Winter was against the Russian military this year and the effort failed.
Consequences of Failure
There is much at stake in the Ukrainian counteroffensive. Ukrainian manpower is not inexhaustible and a failed counteroffensive with high casualties will have a disproportionately negative effect on Ukraine’s ability to fight a war of attrition as Russia seems prepared to fight.
International political, economic, and military support tends to be tied to the prospect of the country receiving that support continuing to show results. Certainly, with an election season approaching in the US and many countries in Europe, doubters of the high cost of supporting Ukraine will gain greater voice (especially given the cost in arms and munitions with the prospect of conflict in Asia over Taiwan on the horizon). So will appeasers who are looking for an excuse to force Ukraine to accept a “land for peace” deal or those who would like to ingratiate themselves to Chinese President Xi Jinping by forcing Ukraine to accept China’s “Peace Plan.”
There is much to be commended in the approach the US, under the Biden Administration, has taken to support Ukraine thus far. While a bit slow in providing military support and cautious in the types of systems provided to avoid “provoking” Putin, the amount of support has been significant and has made a difference. Though the most important form of support the US and the West could give Ukraine is still missing. That is a clear definitional statement of what victory looks like.
The US should without equivocation state that it will support Ukrainian independence and their right to reclaim all lands occupied by Russia since 2014. The US, along with its allies and supporters in the international community, should also demand reparations from Russia for lives lost and the overwhelming damage caused by this invasion and should demand the remanding to justice of those responsible for war crimes.
To date, this clear statement of conditions of victory is lacking and this puts even more pressure on Ukraine for success in the expected counteroffensive.
Consequences of Success
What if the Ukrainians succeed in defeating the Russian occupying forces and recapture enough territory to threaten the eventual liberation of all of Ukraine including Crimea? It is hard to imagine Putin would not resort to dramatic escalation of the Russian war effort, including the use of weapons of mass destruction.
Putin’s regime is not currently at risk. Much more attention is now being paid by Western media to reports of political murders, suicides, arrests and disappearances in Russia than in years past. But political violence has been a hallmark of governance under Putin’s tenure as ruler. Putin is now receiving justified but unprecedented criticism from the political right in Russia over the conduct of the war and failure to use all means necessary to defeat if not destroy Ukraine. That pressure would likely reach a critical mass if the Russian forces in Ukraine are soundly defeated in the coming weeks. A crushing military defeat as a consequence of the Ukrainian counteroffensive would raise the specter of revolution in Russia as was the case after the collapse of the Russian army in World War I.
Opening Pandora’s Box
We know enough about Putin’s belief in his strategic brilliance, his belief in Russia’s right to be a global superpower and of his distorted interpretations of history and his ego, to be confident that he would likely use a tactical nuclear weapon to avoid defeat and his regime’s collapse. He has consistently set the information stage for nuclear escalation since well before the invasion began. He has now deployed tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus (where launch systems for those weapons have been deployed for months). Putin’s equivalent of a National Security Advisor, Nikolai Patrushev affirmed publicly that Russia is now fighting NATO in Ukraine.
As recently noted by a friend and former Defense Attaché in Moscow, one of the “red lines” for Russian nuclear use is “aggression with conventional weapons against the Russian Federation, when the very existence of the state is threatened.” Let’s not forget that the territory Ukraine is trying to liberate is, according to Putin, territory of the Russian Federation. As absurd as it might seem, Putin could use a tactical nuclear weapon against Ukrainian armored forces and claim that he used the weapon on the territory of the Russian Federation. Putin is perfectly capable and may even secretly want to open the nuclear Pandora’s Box and claim some sort of cynical moral equivalence with America’s use of nuclear weapons against Japan at the end of the World War II.
Chinese Maskirovka
Don’t believe Xi Jinping and China’s maskirovka on Ukraine. The prospect of Russian defeat in Ukraine is consequential for Xi, who despite his recent “Peace Plan” and overtures to Zelenskiy, is exceptionally close to Putin and without a doubt, fully on Russia’s side in this war.
Putin and Xi have had over forty meetings during Xi’s tenure as President. Reportedly, Xi has said to Putin, “Our characters are alike” Xi’s first trip as President of China in 2013, was to Moscow. During their recent meeting there (after two state banquets in the Kremlin), the Chinese leader said, “There are changes happening, the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years. Let’s drive those changes together.” Putin responded, “I agree.”
I’m confident that what Xi and Putin discussed in their closed sessions concerned China helping Putin win the war and thus present the world with a confident and victorious ideological alternative to the West.
China’s support to Russia thus far in the conflict (as far as we know) has included dual use and non-lethal support. That could change quickly if Russia’s military faces disaster in Ukraine as a consequence of Ukraine’s military success. Xi wants Putin to win and Xi’s definition of victory is outlined in China’s 12 Point “Peace Plan.” That is, Russia keeps the territory it has occupied and likely the territory it has annexed. Ukraine and the World get a ceasefire that many seem to want, no matter the cost to Ukraine. Xi and China get credit for bringing about the peace and China gets a leg up in the competition for contacts to rebuild Ukraine. Another potential consequence of a Russian defeat in Ukraine was suggested a week ago, by China’s ambassador to France, Lu Shaye, who questioned the legitimacy of the independence of the states of the former Soviet Union including Ukraine.
In the back of his mind, Ambassador Lu was probably thinking about Tibet, Manchuria, Hong Kong and potentially in the future Taiwan, should there ever be independence movements in those places or any other once sovereign nations now occupied by the PRC. The ambassador’s comments certainly represent Xi’s private thoughts.
We are indeed on the eve of changes not seen in 100 years as predicted by Xi. It is incumbent on the US and its Allies to do everything possible to ensure those changes don’t mean the end of representative government and a return of the age of empires.
Sharing informed opinions is important. Opinion pieces represent the diverse views of The Cipher Brief audience and do not represent views of The Cipher Brief.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief because National Security is Everyone’s Business.
