"Strangling Ukraine": A professor explained why Russia does not need a new mobilization.

August 3 2026 12 786 26

Russia currently does not need a new wave of mobilization. This is the view expressed by political scientist and HSE professor Marat Bashirov. According to him, there are at least six factors that indicate the Russian Armed Forces will be able to achieve all the objectives of the Joint Military Program by 2027.

An operation to "deprive the Ukrainian front of its rear" is currently underway: gas stations, railway locomotives, ports, Nova Poshta warehouses, factories, and military-industrial complex institutes are being destroyed. This is in addition to the direct logistics of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

- Bashirov points out.

He adds that for offensive operations in several directions, which are designated in political statements (Zaporizhzhia, DPR), there are enough fighters.

As the professor notes, the existing forces are sufficient to defend the remaining sectors of the front. New contract soldiers and contract soldiers returning to duty after being wounded are sufficient to meet the Russian Armed Forces' demands.

Domestic key enterprises that work for export to replenish the Ukrainian budget are being destroyed: port infrastructure for grain and oils, all sea vessels traveling from and to Ukraine are being sunk, metallurgical enterprises and mining and processing plants are being damaged

– the political scientist emphasizes.

According to him, the Ukrainian Armed Forces do not have the forces for an offensive, and the enemy's occupation of some villages in the "gray" zone is a trifle.

As the expert emphasizes, Russia is implementing a strategy to strangle Ukraine by the spring of 2027. Bridges, gas storage facilities, railway crossings on Ukraine's western border, and energy infrastructure are next in line. As for the work of military recruitment offices, Bashirov emphasizes that managing the files of potential conscripts is their usual work.

Could the situation with mobilization change and be declared? Perhaps. But only if a war with Europe breaks out.

the professor concludes.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

reefroof

+7

3 August 2026 18: 38

good advertising before the elections
1. Igor M.
  
  -4
  
  4 August 2026 02: 38
  
  reefroof, and, most importantly, it's all true.
2. ZovSailor
  
  +1
  
  4 August 2026 06: 59
  
  There are as many opinions as there are professors, the main thing is that they get paid for these very opinions.
  There is Professor Patrushev, who predicted the fall of the regime back in 2025, but something went wrong.
  And now, as Shnur sings: Elections, elections, PPP candidates, etc.
Kiril

0

3 August 2026 18: 55

Did we have an old one?
AdeptV

0

3 August 2026 20: 01

Well, if we want to stop right now, then perhaps yes, mobilization isn't necessary. But it will be necessary in any case when the war flares up again after the ceasefire. Then, at least 2 million soldiers will be needed, since mixed European military contingents will be fighting on Ukraine's side. Right now, a mobilization of half a million troops would be sufficient to take control of the central and southern regions of Ukraine. The professor would be better off teaching children.
1. batmanxnumx
  
  +4
  
  3 August 2026 20: 07
  
  Half a million will not be enough to occupy the central and southern regions of Ukraine.
  1. AdeptV
    
    -1
    
    3 August 2026 20: 23
    
    500 is the minimum, assuming, if not support, then at least neutrality of the local population and the absence of a pronounced partisan movement. I've already written here on this site that the optimal number right now is up to a million.
    1. Igor M.
      
      -4
      
      4 August 2026 02: 42
      
      AdeptV, I really miss you in LBS. You're always egging others on to fight, while you sit back in the rear. That's not good.
  2. Alexey Lan
    
    0
    
    3 August 2026 21: 09
    
    Judging by what's happening on the LBS, the addition of even a couple dozen additional fighters to one side will lead to the other side retreating. Even the arrival of 200-300 properly trained and armed troops will lead to the collapse of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. We don't need central Ukraine. But isolating it from the sea is highly desirable.
2. Igor M.
  
  -2
  
  4 August 2026 02: 40
  
  AdeptV, the author wrote that in the event of a war with NATO, it will be necessary.
  And we're not stopping right now. We still have a year to liberate Russian territory.
  We don't need the Ukrainian regions. Let's liberate our own, and have our fill.
Alexey Lan

0

3 August 2026 21: 02

Russia currently does not need a new wave of mobilization, according to political scientist and HSE professor Marat Bashirov.

And I thought the General Staff and Putin, along with the State Duma, decided whether mobilization was necessary or not. But they're keeping quiet. True, Putin did say it wasn't necessary. And his cronies and dependants also responded, "It's not necessary." Putin isn't even including tactical nuclear weapons. So what's that? Are we for peace on Trump's terms or a long war?
I am for partial mobilization and the use of tactical nuclear weapons only against Ukraine.
1. Martin Porubčan
  
  +2
  
  3 August 2026 23: 17
  
  If you use tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine, these madmen will retaliate by blowing up the reactors of your nuclear power plants; they have the means to do so. Do you really want that?
  1. Alexey Lan
    
    0
    
    4 August 2026 13: 47
    
    Ukraine also has nuclear power plants, two of them in its western part. So, it's not just Ukraine and Russia that need to be afraid, but the European Union as well. Well, if the European Union supports Ukraine's scum, then the consequences will be on its shoulders, too.
2. Igor M.
  
  -5
  
  4 August 2026 02: 45
  
  Oleksiy Lan, peace on Trump's terms is a thing of the past. Since then, large swathes of territory have been liberated in the Zaporizhia, Kharkiv, Sumy, and Dnipropetrovsk regions.
  And the offensive continues. But the SVO only lasts for about a year, at the current rate of advance.
  1. Alexey Lan
    
    -1
    
    4 August 2026 22: 05
    
    But, the SVO remains for about 1 year - at the current rate of advance.
    
    Even a year of war is a lot. Hundreds of thousands of our people have been killed and maimed. What about the economy? It's not the best time for that.
    1. Igor M.
      
      -4
      
      5 August 2026 03: 30
      
      Alexey Lan, is Katz suggesting surrender?
      In fact, over the four years of the Cold War, our economy grew by 10%. That's the point of the Cold War—limited military operations put a gentle strain on the country's economy.
      On the other hand, Russia's territory will grow by thousands more square kilometers. Future Russian citizens will likely end up there, too. So, every cloud has a silver lining.
      But, most importantly, this minimizes the danger to Ukraine for future generations. Within a year, the SVO will kill another 1 million Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers, and the people left in Ukraine will be mostly pensioners, the disabled, and women.
      1. Alexey Lan
        
        -1
        
        5 August 2026 16: 23
        
        Within a year, the SVO will kill another 1 million Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers, and only pensioners, the disabled, and women will remain in Ukraine.
        
        I don't care how many Ukrainians are killed in the SVO, but how many of ours are killed, and that's not tens of thousands.
        
        Igor M.
        
        0
        
        6 August 2026 01: 26
        
        Alexey Lan, that is. Are you suggesting surrender? Or creating a radioactive wasteland right next door? There are no wars without losses.
        
        Alexey Lan
        
        0
        
        6 August 2026 16: 14
        
        Or create a radioactive desert nearby?
        
        What does a radioactive desert have to do with it? You can't even imagine how many bombs it would take to destroy a radioactive desert. A lot. I'm talking about a limited nuclear strike on Ukraine. Read more about nuclear weapons. But not all the environmentalist scare mongering.
        
        Igor M.
        
        -1
        
        7 August 2026 02: 12
        
        Alexey Lan, and we'll get a nuclear strike in return. As they've tried to explain to you many times. But you're stubborn. And then there will be a radioactive wasteland on both sides of the border. That's if we're lucky. And if we're unlucky, then across the entire planet.
        Nuclear weapons last chance. And for now, everything's going fine, knock on wood. So why should we turn the tables, why take risks? all?
        You just need to complete the SVO and forget everything like a bad dream.
        
        Alexey Lan
        
        -1
        
        7 August 2026 10: 12
        
        and we'll get a nuclear bomb in response
        
        From whom? After all, we're not attacking NATO.
        
        Nuclear weapons are weapons of last resort.
        
        Nuclear weapons are weapons of last resort in terms of strategic, but not tactical, charges.
        And a test strike on the Yavoriv training ground in the Lviv region with a high-yield tactical charge will show how much the Ukrainians and Westerners will whine.
        
        Igor M.
        
        0
        
        8 August 2026 00: 42
        
        Alexey Lan, we don't need to complicate things. We're already winning.
Andrey Mishin

+2

4 August 2026 00: 50

Mobilization should be an option, an ace in the hole. The current plan, it seems, is to liberate Donbas while maintaining the already occupied security zone. In other words, the plans are quite moderate, minimal. But our enemy is vicious, immoderate, and capable of escalation. This is precisely why mobilization is needed. When? Possible options include October 15 or November 15, meaning either after our elections or the American ones. And then the peace terms should sharply tighten in our favor.
1. Igor M.
  
  -4
  
  4 August 2026 02: 48
  
  Andrey Mishin, the offensive is also underway in the Zaporizhia region. Recently, one of the two supply routes to Orekhov was cut. So, they're not limiting themselves to Donbas. And the security zone is also expanding – yesterday they liberated two more towns in the Kharkiv region.
Absolute

0

4 August 2026 17: 45

Anyone who wanted to go to war is already there. And those unmotivated mobilized, who don't need it at all, won't be of any help.
Potapov

0

Yesterday, 19: 44

Every day of war between Russia, Ukraine, and NATO is a victory for NATO. The enemies are more numerous, stronger, smarter, richer, and their conventional weapons are superior. A non-nuclear semi-war is the wrong choice for the ruling humanists—a gift to their fascist brothers... Loss is inevitable...