Ukrainian Military Commander Laments Stalemate in Conflict with Russia

The Economist:  Valery Zaluzhny, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, has offered a candid assessment of the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, likening the current situation to the entrenched warfare of World War I. In an interview with The Economist, Zaluzhny expressed his concerns about the technological parity between the two sides, which has led to a frustrating stalemate on the front lines.

Zaluzhny's sobering assessment revealed that during a five-month counteroffensive, Ukraine managed to advance merely 17 kilometers. Meanwhile, Russia dedicated ten months of intense combat near Bakhmut in the east to gain a meager six kilometers of territory. This slow and costly progress has reminded Zaluzhny of a bygone era of protracted conflict.

"We have reached such a level of technology development that puts us at a dead end... There will most likely not be a deep and beautiful breakthrough," Zaluzhny commented, highlighting the need for a substantial technological leap to break the deadlock.

This assessment, coming from a seasoned military leader, casts doubt on Western hopes that Ukraine's counteroffensive would demonstrate the futility of continuing the war, potentially pushing Russian President Vladimir Putin towards negotiations.

General Zaluzhny also candidly admitted his earlier miscalculation regarding Russia's willingness to continue the conflict despite significant casualties. "Russia lost at least 150 thousand people killed. In any other country, such losses would have stopped the war," Zaluzhny stated. However, he acknowledged that Russia's historical resilience and willingness to endure heavy casualties differentiate it from other nations.

The initial expectation was for the Ukrainian army to advance at a rate of 30 kilometers per day, swiftly breaching Russian defense lines. However, the reality has been vastly different, with Ukrainian forces encountering minefields and coming under relentless artillery and drone attacks.

The Economist noted that similar challenges were faced by newly formed and inexperienced Ukrainian brigades, despite being equipped with modern Western weaponry. Zaluzhny recounted his attempts to address these issues, including personnel and command changes, but found that the fundamental problem was the technological impasse between the opposing forces.

He described a battlefield where advanced sensors and high-precision weapons allowed both sides to detect and destroy any concentration of forces. This level of mutual visibility has led to a state of deadlock.

To navigate this new stage of positional warfare, Zaluzhny outlined five priorities that Ukraine needs to pursue for survival. These priorities include achieving air superiority, enhancing electronic warfare capabilities, developing counter-battery fire capabilities, advancing mine clearance technologies, and bolstering mobilization reserves.

Zaluzhny's candid assessment highlights the evolving nature of modern warfare, where technological parity can lead to protracted conflicts reminiscent of earlier eras, challenging traditional notions of battlefield superiority and strategy. As Ukraine continues to grapple with these challenges, the world watches closely for any developments that could impact the ongoing conflict in the region.