POLITICS

Invasion Episode 2: Armies March on their Stomach

Pro-Russian troops in the separatist-controlled settlement of Mykolaivka, Ukraine, on March 1, 2022. Photo by Alexander Ermochenko/Reuters

BY MICHAEL GODWIN

Despite a massive build-up of forces, installations, and an infl ux of materials, the Russian military has reportedly been suffering from a litany of pains during its ongoing invasion of Ukraine. While pushing Ukrainian forces back to the major cities, they have suffered the same plague many armies going back to antiquity have suffered: supply and logistics.

Media and literature often depict the clash of nations as being composed only of valiant cavalry charges, steadfast lines of infantry, or battalions of heavily armored tanks. However, it is the veins and arteries of supporting units behind the lines that make the battles happen. Russia is now fi nding that the logistics framework for this invasion may not have been adequate enough to allow those battles to continue with the momentum needed.

Food, fuel, and vehicle parts have all come up short for many of the advancing Russian elements, leading to surprising encounters. Russian soldiers have been caught trying to steal local supplies from civilians, or simply surrendering to Ukrainian defenders. In several incidents confi rmed by the United States Department of Defense, Russian soldiers have even sabotaged their own vehicles and equipment so as to avoid being sent forward into combat. Many armored vehicles, abandoned by their Russian crew, have been restored by Ukraine.

This logistics oversight is rooted in the pre-conceived vision by Russian high command that Ukraine would fall quickly; that the social, economic, and political environment was unstable and yearning for a return to the heights of the Russian Empire under the tsars. Flowers, bread, and salt as they say, were to be thrown at the arriving liberation force. But as many young soldiers are learning the hard way, this is far from the truth. Instead, it is rifl e rounds, anti-tank rockets, and molotov cocktails.

Despite its many fl aws, the United States has mastered the art of foreign confl ict. Since virtually all combat takes place worlds away from their sovereign soil, the logistics framework of America’s fi ghting forces must be seamless. Forward bases and depots must be fully capable of restoring a fi ghting unit's capabilities at a moment's notice, and in the event of highly kinetic combat operations, immediately.

Russia has opted to bank on the concept of blitzkrieg. This idea reduces the need for overwhelming supply in lieu of a swift and sudden victory. Since this is no longer an option and Russian units fi nd themselves fi ghting a grinding and taxing war, they have been forced to opt for two new options. These options have been broadcast on the social media front of the war; steal from other Russian units, and steal from the enemy.

Images and video of Russian soldiers looting and ransacking shopping markets and family bazaars have made the rounds on the internet. This is an acceptable tactic in disparity, typically used by special operations and recon units in advance of regular forces, separated from normal routes of supply. However, these are Russian regular army units, ones that should be connected to a standard campaign supply network.

These units should be virtually overfl owing with an excess of arms, ammunition, water, and food. Ukrainian units have found many of the surrendering Russian soldiers to be suffering from malnutrition, seeking meals and warmth rather than being left with no other option in their own units. Russia has apparently left many of its forces on the front without the framework necessary to adequately provide for these young men.

Lieutenant Colonel, US Army (retired), Michael Phillips, a former logistics offi cer, frames it as a logistics-based problem, but not something that is suddenly new. This, he states, is something Russia has been building for months, particularly in the northern front. Units advancing from Belarus and western Russia were too far stretched from their original positions, with no advanced logistics bases. Since there was no mid-way logistics and supply point between their forward combat positions and the warehouses where the materials were stored, the units were left waiting as support units scrambled to move product.

In addition to the logistical woes, the Russian force has displayed a surprising distaste for aggression and direct combat. Commanders have limited their exposure and maintained an unusual standoff compared to the image much of the pre-invasion Russian military machine presented to the world. In a recent recruitment video, they likened the honing and training of a Russian service-member to that of the machining and precision in production of a rifl e.

On the contrary, this Russian machine has been jammed. Their force has been stalled, clubbed into a protracted fi ght with asymmetric forces all too happy to fi ght the long war. These modern partisans have devoured offensive after offensive, consuming more young men of the Kremlin’s order. With everyone having a documentation device, a smart phone, in their pocket, it is all too obvious these Russian fi ghters have little fi ght in them.

This kaleidoscope of images, gleaned from intercepted communications, prisoners of war, and encounters by Ukrainian civilians, build a shocking view. Russia, who was marketed on the world military stage as a green monster incapable of defeat and fault, has faltered in a fi ght with what was supposed to be a lesser opponent. The image that Russia was a fi rst-rate military, on par with that of the United States, the UK, China, and India, quickly dissolved.

Now, with the cities in their sights, the Russian military will have to reckon with popular resistance and the inevitable “nation building” that the United States and NATO struggled with so much in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, unlike the people in those nations desperately trying to work with the current situation, the Ukrainian people are mobilizing against the very institutions Russia is imposing upon them. Forcing an undesirable regime on the very people that threw it off in 2014 is a mixture that only serves to invite another revolt, and, as a result, this will create Russia’s new “endless war” - an “Afghanistan” in Europe’s own back yard.

What a soldier needs most is two things: a full belly and a pair of shoes - Napoleon Bonaparte

Images uploaded to social media of alleged Russian soldiers. These pictures were posted by the Confl ict Intelligence Team (CIT) on Twitter

“Putin sees himself as a Tsar of all of Russia and Russians” - Exclusive Interview With Former Latvian President Vike-Freiberga

Continued from page 1

COULD WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW IN UKRAINE HAVE BEEN AVOIDED?

Well, again, remember how he claims it could have been avoided. I mean listen to the words coming from his own mouth. The Ukrainians should accept that they are not a nation, that they do not have a language, that they don't have a history, that they do not have a right to national independence, that the governments that they have chosen and elected are illegitimate, that they are Nazis, that they commit genocide against the Russian speakers and all sorts of insanities. They cannot accept that. These are outrageous and unfounded demands that he is making on them. So, if that's what it takes to prevent it, then no, it was impossible to prevent. I think he wanted to start a war to demonstrate a show of force and to scare the whole world in order to impose his demands. People have been trying to accommodate Russia, to pacify Russia, not to anger Russia. When we were a candidate country, I often heard the phrase: Russia is not going to be happy if the Baltic countries become members of NATO. President Chirac of France told me - “you should not be playing with the mustache of the bear, you shouldn't annoy him.” - I said, no, Mr. President, but we do not want to be eaten by the bear either. That is the point.

Putin sees himself as a Tsar of all of Russia and Russians. That is quite a broad domain. When he took South Ossetia and came within 49 kilometers of Tbilisi, the world said, oh, well, it's too bad, but what can we do? That's the way it is. Too bad for the Georgians. Then in 2014, he went further, and actually annexed a part of the country. He also denied that Russia was in Eastern Ukraine to start with. It's sort of an Alice in Wonderland, the world he lives in. Everything he tells his people or the world is a warped image of reality. I remember President Poroshenko, at the Munich security conference, showing a slew of Russian soldiers passports that had been obtained from the prisoners that they had taken. They had Russian passports, these little green men without insignia, but Putin will deny to his dying day and say no, no, they were not Russians. They are Russian. Television tells Russia's inhabitants that no, they are not shelling Ukraine, that these are lies by foreign newspapers.

WHAT SHOULD THE WEST’S RESPONSE BE AND WHAT ARE THEIR LIMITS?

We have heard from Prime Minister Johnson and from President Biden on numerous occasions that we do not wish to have a third world war with nuclear weapons, but at the same time agree that Putin is threatening the world. I think that the borders of the NATO Alliance are absolute red lines that Mr. Putin must not cross. He thinks that by dangling his nuclear weapons in front of us, he is going to impose his completely unjustifi ed and unreasonable will on the rest of the world. We cannot go on accepting that. I think people are beginning to realize that his demands are unreasonable and are to appease Russia. This has been the song and dance that we've been hearing ever since our renewed independence - appeasing Russia, not making them angry, not annoying the bear. Western powers were not willing to give a Membership Action Plan to Georgia, nor to Ukraine at the 2008 NATO Summit. As soon as they did that, Georgia was invaded. They should have given the Membership Action Plan and let both countries proceed with the necessary reforms and to declare and accept their readiness. But they were weak. They did not want to annoy the bear. Russia took this as a sign. Our hands are free, they're not going to oppose us. I think that the West has to draw a line in the sand and show them where the limits are. So far the borders of the NATO Alliance are defi nitely the limit.

NO LIMITS OUTSIDE NATO BORDERS THEN? LET’S TAKE THE WORST CASE SCENARIO - WHAT HAPPENS IF PUTIN DECIDES TO USE NUCLEAR STRIKES ON UKRAINE?

Then Western powers will have some very serious thinking to do. Frankly, I would not advise Mr. Putin to test the resolve of the West or to push them too far. They of course do have a responsibility towards their citizens. Using nuclear weapons is considered a taboo – then again, attacking a country without reason is also a taboo, but he has done it.

HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE SANCTIONS THAT WE HAVE SEEN SO FAR?

if the ruble tumbles down in value, every citizen of the Russian Federation, no matter what kind of propaganda you feed them, is going to go to bed hungry. They'll be told that it's the fault of the West, but they need to start wondering about the decisions that their own leaders have actually been making. Some of them will probably continue thinking that they've been wronged and nobody loves them, because they're so wonderful and better than anybody else. But there will also be people who start wondering, what on earth is this? Is this the direction we're being given by our leaders?

This is why more sanctions should be added.

ON RUSSIA & UKRAINE NEGOTIATIONS- WHEN FACING AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT, WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE FOR UKRAINE TO NEGOTIATE ON?

That’s a good question. I think that what they are hoping for is that at some point a ceasefi re, at least, could be agreed on, as the humanitarian crisis is getting bigger by the day. If a ceasefi re could somehow be agreed, that would be the fi rst step. Then one could start thinking about how Putin can withdraw without losing face, and how Ukraine can accept some potential conditions, for instance, neutrality for the next 20 years. They could potentially offer that sort of thing, but I doubt Mr. Putin would settle for that. Austria, Finland, Switzerland, Sweden and Ireland wish to remain neutral but then again, if my country’s example is anything to go by, Latvia tried to be neutral. Before the Second World War, it didn't do it any good. We were occupied fi rst by the Soviets, then by the Nazis, and then annexed by the Soviets and stayed that way for 50 years against our will, and against international law. So in our case, having a collective defense alliance was crucial for us, extremely important for our sense of security.

That is where the West should come in: priority number one is a ceasefi re. The second priority would be to get the Russian army out of Ukraine. That's what should happen. Ceasefi re fi rst, withdrawal of troops later. I’m sure that NATO, who Mr. Putin claims to be threatening Russia, can give him written assurances that they do have no plans whatsoever of attacking him. Latvia, with our huge army and our massive population, can promise the Russian Federation that we are not about to attack them. So if he is so scared, and if Mr. Lavrov is shaking in his boots, I am sure that written assurances can be given that there is no intent to attack Russia on anybody's part.

WHEN SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT IS REACHED, WILL THE DOORS OF WESTERN CAPITALS STILL BE OPEN FOR MR. PUTIN FOR A LOVELY CHAT WITH EUROPEAN LEADERS?

I think that Mr. Putin has lost more than he counted on with this adventure; his prestige is forever damaged. He has been labeled as a war criminal, as somebody committing crimes against humanity. As such, he will have diffi culty reintegrating with what is called polite international society, he will have very, very few friends left outside of his own country, Belarus and, possibly, Venezuela.