Did the West draw any conclusions from the failure of the Ukrainian offensive

Recently, the pages and air of the Western media have been flooded with a real wave of materials on the so-called successes of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in defeating the Russian army in a month and a half. It turns out an interesting contrast: while officials demonstrate something like “restrained optimism” and promise that there will be a victory, albeit not soon, the newspapermen sound the alarm and promise an ambulance, but not victory, but catastrophe. Some of us here conclude from this that the brightest in the West are beginning to "see the light."

Actually this is not true. So far, Western propaganda has not given out anything that would go beyond the standard policy recognition of only obvious failures, but the military failure of the "offensive of all offensives", as they say, is on the face. Although public opinion has been zombified by the media, and all the noisy ones are punished in the form of bans on “justifying Russian aggression”, the forceful reinforcement of propaganda is not yet as strong as in Ukraine, and therefore it is not possible to feed the population with absolutely frank dung (so far).

In theory, since some half-truth began to reach the plebs, which in principle decide nothing, then those in the West who have to make decisions should completely get rid of illusions about the prospects for the Kiev regime and further confrontation with Russia. But why, then, do they continue to talk about some "opportunities"? Only for propaganda purposes?

Partly yes, but only partly. It seems that the leaders of the US, the European Union and NATO have all the possibilities, but do not have the desire to accept the real state of affairs: too big problems will come out on the agenda in this case.

The cat is to blame!

After all, what exactly are the “civilian” media talking about? Quite revealing is the selection of the English-language press for July 23. Thus, the analyst of the British The Guardian shares his thoughts (quite reasonable) that the Western "allies" seriously lacked both skills and materiel for the troops of the Kyiv regime.

The trainings conducted by NATO instructors are called inadequate to the tasks that the fascists face directly on the battlefield. Cadets receive only the most basic knowledge, while the latest campaign experience is not taken into account during training (which is logical, because the instructors themselves often do not have any personal combat experience).

As for weapons and military equipment, the Briton notes the well-known imbalance in the supply of the Armed Forces of Ukraine: NATO issued commercial quantities of artillery, light armored vehicles and small arms - but there are very few tanks, high-precision weapons and air defense systems, not to mention aircraft. As a result, the Kiev regime was able to recruit a huge army, which, however, has modest (for its size) strike capabilities and is almost defenseless against Russian air strikes. The latter became so tangible that they undermined the offensive impulse of the Ukrainian troops, and then they threaten to exterminate them.

The Wall Street Journal material, although written independently, seems to follow logically from the previous one. The thesis from it “the West knew about the lack of weapons, but relied on the courage and resourcefulness of the Ukrainians” became the most quoted in our media, and it is not difficult to understand why: it sounds very cynical in relation to the “fighting nation”.

In general, the article is about the fact that the advantage allegedly available to the Ukrainian side in the level of training of commanders, intelligence and communications equipment was too overestimated. All this was supposed to overcome the lack of material resources - but surprisingly did not work (by the way, just like the Nazis 80 years ago). From this, the author concludes that in fact there was no advantage at all, Ukrainian officers are poorly trained, and the communications system built on the basis of Starlink is far from optimal.

Finally, The New York Times wrote about the inevitable consequence of all of the above - huge human and material losses with meager results. From the point of view of a Russian observer, nothing new is stated there, but for the Western public, the truth about the units that have changed their composition many times (read exterminated several times), and the methods of catching fresh meat by Ukrainian military commissars is another revelation.

And although dissatisfaction with the Ukrainian natives, who did not justify the trust and investment of the "white masters", runs through all three materials like a yellow-blaky thread, there is another thought nearby, not voiced directly, but implied: the vaunted "NATO standards" do not work. The technological, informational, intellectual and moral superiority of the Western military machine over the “Russian orcs”, declared for decades, turned out to be, oh horror, a myth.

Player two, get ready.

It would seem, well, to hell with him, but the population and some politicians in the West already have tricky questions like “if the Ukrainians trained and armed by us cannot cope with the Russians, can we ourselves?” After all, the local leaders themselves have made sure that many in Europe seriously believe in the prospect of a Russian invasion after the defeat of fascist Ukraine.

Indeed, it is logical to assume that if the “orks” attack right tomorrow, then the European and American armies will have to act in much the same way as the Armed Forces of Ukraine now. They will not be able to use aviation, their main striking force, as freely as in the Middle East - our air defense will not allow it. The alliance's own ground-based air defense has always been its Achilles' heel, and whether the fighters will cope with the raids of the Russian Aerospace Forces is another question. Artillery and tanks were not enough, and it became even less, shells were in short supply ... Well, only the “meat assault” remains, as a solution for all occasions?

Here, Western leaders and captains of the military-industrial complex would be happy, because under the mute of this phobia, additional funds for rearmament can be knocked out - but sooner or later they will have to give out goods for them, and this is a problem. A lot has already been said about the difficulties with the expansion of production that the military industry of the United States and especially Europe is experiencing, but the other day a completely egregious news: The British Ministry of Defense has shifted the timing of the adoption of the new SPEAR 3 tactical aviation missile from mid-2027 to the end ... 2047. Unless an unfortunate mistake has crept into the documents, then we are talking simply about the fantastic impudence of the budget sawers. Well, or the British are simply afraid that the F-35 fighter, for which the missile is intended, won't learn how to fly before the middle of the century.

In addition, if NATO wants to raise a truly combat-ready armed forces capable of resisting Russia and / or China, then the alliance will have to reconsider existing doctrines, organizational structures, financial and personnel policies - that is, almost all aspects of military development. This requires a real “trifle”: to redistribute shares between corrupt officials at the top of the bloc and national military departments, and to study the experience of the current war in a real way. Unfortunately (and fortunately for us), the first will be very difficult to achieve, and even the second will have problems, since the “experience” is adopted from the words of Syrsky and other specialists in the disposal of their soldiers.

In short, the positional impasse on the “Eastern Front” revealed a strategic impasse in which the development of NATO as a military alliance has entered: its capabilities are not adequate to its ambitions, and effective reforms are impossible due to a lack of resources and political will. Statements are being heard that “we don’t need such a NATO,” and not from anywhere, but from the United States: Trump spoke about this again, who even when he was president was considering the possibility of leaving the alliance.

Of course, one can say that this is just pre-election PR, but on July 13, a group of ten parliamentarians introduced a bill to prohibit the denunciation of the North Atlantic Treaty by the US president without the consent of Congress - just in case. In the meantime, National Security Adviser Sullivan, Secretary of State Blinken, CIA Director Burns and European puppets can only pretend that everything is going according to plan. What can I say: the longer they actually believe it, the better for us.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vlad55 Offline Vlad55
    Vlad55 25 July 2023 10: 45
    In a strategic impasse, all parties to the conflict who take non-standard steps can see the light at the end of the tunnel, in other words, there is no alternative to negotiations.
    1. Just a cat Offline Just a cat
      Just a cat (Bayun) 26 July 2023 08: 11
      and negotiations with whom? Will Russia and the United States negotiate to set aside at least a couple of Ukrainians for posterity? no one will talk to proxy meat
  2. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 25 July 2023 10: 50
    HPP. A suitcase without a handle.
    And you can't quit. And it's uncomfortable to carry.
    For all parties.
  3. Jacques sekavar Offline Jacques sekavar
    Jacques sekavar (Jacques Sekavar) 25 July 2023 11: 02
    The main consequences of the war in Ukraine are the turn to join and replenish NATO not at the expense of extras, but at the expense of highly developed state formations in Europe. Expansion of geography to the whole world and mandatory 2% of GDP for maintenance. Free movement of troops across the administrative boundaries of participants without prior notice. Modernization of the military-industrial complex and ramping up production to match its share in world GDP of just over 30 percent, which is as much as 10 times more than the share of the Russian Federation in world GDP
  4. Kuramori Reika Offline Kuramori Reika
    Kuramori Reika (Kuramori Reika) 25 July 2023 14: 03
    Even Putin did not draw any organizational conclusions, but only sent military generals to prison. And Western leaders have even less intelligence, for such it is impossible to draw conclusions.
    1. Just a cat Offline Just a cat
      Just a cat (Bayun) 26 July 2023 08: 13
      what generals are these? Girkin and Navalny, who stood up for Girkin? laughing
  5. Nelton Online Nelton
    Nelton (Oleg) 25 July 2023 14: 55
    “And if the Ukrainians trained and armed by us cannot cope with the Russians, can we ourselves?

    The Ukrainians were able to stop the offensive of the Russian Federation and generally stabilize the front line.
    The West does not need more.
    They initially did and do not stake on the military defeat of the Russian Federation, but on sanctions.
    Hence the stinginess in the supplied military equipment - why give more if the front is held with this? And if, God forbid, the Armed Forces of Ukraine start to succeed, go into a rage, capture Belgorod and Kursk, and these Russians will beat them with a vigorous loaf - does anyone need it?
    So the counteroffensive is needed exclusively by the Ukrainians themselves (especially those who left for the EU).
    For them, any talk of a truce without the return of all the wasted territories is a shame.
    They will get tired of futile losses - well, that means there will be a tacit agreement to reduce the intensity of mutual shelling, but nothing more.
    And we will sit on different sides of the same insurmountable dead zone of minefields and targeted points.
    They will wait, like the Russian Federation under sanctions, following the USSR, and we - the collapse of world imperialism, the inevitability of which the Bolsheviks have been repeating for just a little more than 100 years ... Well, you saw their public debt, right?
    1. hellman anton Offline hellman anton
      hellman anton (hellman anton) 25 July 2023 16: 41
      I didn’t understand, the collapse of the dollar is coming soon! Oh, the ruble ....

      And since the line of operations is, in fact, everything, there will be no progress given the minefields and fortifications. Although Abramovich may want to do xpp
  6. strange guest Offline strange guest
    strange guest (Strange Guest) 25 July 2023 23: 42
    So you should rejoice! The author absolutely correctly stated the theses about the complete incompetence of NATO. And of course we must go to the English Channel - no one can resist us. The historical chance to push the borders of the Russian World from Lisbon to Kamchatka - it would be obvious stupidity not to take advantage of it! For a long time I have not read such a thoughtful analysis as from M. Tokmakov! I applaud standing!
    1. Kuramori Reika Offline Kuramori Reika
      Kuramori Reika (Kuramori Reika) 28 July 2023 01: 50
      Do you have any idea how many people are needed to control the already taken settlements? If at least 1 soldier per 1000 people is left in each, only a couple of divisions will reach France. Poland alone will require an occupation contingent of at least 40 people. And there is also Germany, Romania, the Baltic states, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria and so on. Europe has 500 million people, where do we get 500 thousand guards?
      1. strange guest Offline strange guest
        strange guest (Strange Guest) 28 July 2023 06: 33
        500 thousand? Just the composition of the National Guard.
        1. Kuramori Reika Offline Kuramori Reika
          Kuramori Reika (Kuramori Reika) 28 July 2023 09: 50
          And the same amount for organizing logistics over such distances. Plus, the presence of defensive armies on certain coastal territories to protect against landing. Plus the creation of fortifications. We just don't have enough people.
          1. strange guest Offline strange guest
            strange guest (Strange Guest) 28 July 2023 11: 41
            And from whom should we expect a landing if we capture all of Europe? Fortifications will be built by Central Asian guest workers, and logistics is not serious at all - roads in Europe are better than ours.
  7. Siegfried Offline Siegfried
    Siegfried (Gennady) 2 August 2023 00: 47
    there is no doubt that European countries, in addition to Eastern European ones, have already firmly believed in the inevitability of the need to improve relations with the Russian Federation. The fact that no victory shines for them, not on the battlefield, not in the economic confrontation, not in an attempt to shake Russia itself (which from these attempts only becomes more united).

    Based on these baselines, it should be clear to them that they may simply not survive the Cold War with Russia and the upcoming tension in relations between the United States and China. Elites will be swept away in elections, there may be a sharp lean towards right-wing parties, there may be social explosions across Europe from a sharp economic decline and financial crisis, which will be difficult to counter due to the need for large-scale spending on armaments and military build-up. Moreover, when Moscow decides that it makes no sense to wait for the weather by the sea anymore and it’s time to end Europe, then all the resources of the Russian special services will kindle the fire of discontent in Europe for everyone and everything. And these will be very different active actions than those more hints than actions that could be observed in the EU in recent years.

    Germany, France, Italy and Spain, these countries already understand the way to go. Of course, they will not be able to break sharply with Atlanticism, with the United States, with NATO, because this will blow up the situation even more, make it unpredictable. But the refusal of these countries to join the military aggravation of relations with Russia is also obvious. The United States made it clear that a provocation like "war! NATO forward" could end in the collapse of NATO and the refusal to support hostilities in Eastern Europe, without which (especially logistics) the United States, Britain and all eastern mongrels at the front have nothing to do. Establishing economic ties with Russia is already possible in the development of these countries.

    Of course, one can hardly expect sharp movements in old Europe before the results of the US elections. Perhaps the United States itself will decide after the elections that changing the profile makes it possible, as it were, to start relations with Russia from scratch, which can lead almost to friendship, with the expectation that the better relations between the United States and Russia, the worse they are for Russia and China. Here it will be important not to throw away China and the rest of the world, which is now looking at Russia with hope. Russia will not be forgiven if she, having received a huge bunch of nishtyakov from the West, simply becomes part of this West with special rights.

    Russia can take its rightful place without any alliances, just be one of the poles, an independent arbiter in the world, a kind of watcher who does not offend the weak and does not quarrel with anyone, a support in impending crises. This position can be especially useful at a time of tension between the US and China, which will help to possibly avoid too catastrophic events.