Strategic Shift: As Russia Advances, Western Analysts Brace for Ukrainian Collapse

by Simplicius

Russian forces continue advancing along the southeastern front as Western headlines descend into ever-more-hopeless pleas. Moon of Alabama covered this angle well today, showcasing the NY Times’ gradual descent in pessimism in particular.

The epitomizing article that’s been making the rounds happens to be this one, and it provides many revealing new details:

 
First of all, recall last time I had mentioned how the Western press is finally beginning to call a spade by its name; they’ve been loosening restrictions on previous propaganda diktats from above, such has the situation deteriorated. So this NYT article opens with the following declarative shocker:

American military and intelligence officials have concluded that the war in Ukraine is no longer a stalemate as Russia makes steady gains, and the sense of pessimism in Kyiv and Washington is deepening.

For months they tried desperately to sell the situation as a “stalemate” despite all obvious signs pointing to Russia gaining strength with Kiev merely conjuring the appearance of empty action by launching futile, showy assaults in places like Khrynki or Kursk. Now the reality has finally hit home and hard—for the first time officials are uttering the truth as it is.

Of course, they still couch it with the ridiculous lie that Ukraine has now lost “only” 57,000 troops while Russia’s losses “double that.”

 
Another major admission which demonstrates the quality of US official statements and assessments:

U.S. government analysts concluded this summer that Russia was unlikely to make significant gains in Ukraine in the coming months, as its poorly trained forces struggled to break through Ukrainian defenses. But that assessment proved wrong.

The most ironic part of that is in the adjacent paragraph they again state that Russian forces could be depleted by summer 2025, at which point Kiev could ‘capitalize’ on that. Who are they kidding? They just admitted their assessments are useless. That’s not to mention that just a few paragraphs later they contradict themselves with this viral bombshell:

 
You should know the standard formula by now: season in a few lies to soften the blow, then unleash the difficult to swallow truth in the following paragraphs. It is interesting though, isn’t it, how everyone continues to predict the war’s end by spring-summer of 2025, and here the Pentagon admits that Ukraine may run out of troops precisely by that time, which would initiate what we can only assume is a complete collapse.

At the same time they admit that despite claims of high losses, Russia continues to recruit adequate numbers:

Other Western diplomats dispute that the development is a sign of desperation and say it is a move meant to scare the West. Whatever the motivation, U.S. officials acknowledge that Russia is finding more troops and continues to sign up 25,000 to 30,000 new contracted recruits per month.

 
“Hero of Ukraine” Major General Marchenko confirms most of the above in two new videos where he says there are shortages of everything, from troops to ammunition, and that brigades are extremely exhausted:

 
Their opening paragraph stencils over NYT’s exact earlier sentiment:

“AFTER 970 days of war,” said Lloyd Austin, America’s defence secretary, visiting Kyiv on October 21st, “Putin has not achieved one single strategic objective.” And Mr Austin offered confidence: “Moscow will never prevail in Ukraine.” In private, however, his colleagues in the Pentagon, Western officials and many Ukrainian commanders are increasingly worried about the direction of the war and Ukraine’s ability to hold back Russian advances over the next six months.

The article claims Russia too has problems and if a large breakthrough was created soon, they would not be able to ‘exploit it’:

“If they achieved a breakthrough they could not exploit it.” There is little short-term risk of Russian troops streaming west to Dnipro or Odessa.

Note the qualifier “short-term”—so they admit that on a slightly longer time-scale, Odessa is already in danger?

The article’s main thesis echoes what’s now a common refrain across the pro-Ukrainian landscape:

Russia cannot fight for ever. But the worry among American, European and Ukrainian officials is that Ukraine’s breaking point will come first.

Ukrainian officer Tatarigami said no less himself just earlier today when he wrote:

 
Some may recall this was my own common calling card since last year. I repeatedly wrote that Russia is suffering huge problems in this war, but they simply pale in comparison to those of Ukraine and the West—and in a race to the bottom, it is Ukraine that will unquestionably win.

The Economist article ends with:

The gloomy mood is evident in a shift in America’s language. Senior officials like Mr Austin still strike a confident note, promising that Ukraine will win. Those involved in the guts of planning in the Pentagon say that, in practice, the ambitions of early 2023—a Ukrainian force that could take back its territory or shock Russia into talks through a well-crafted armoured punch—have given way to a narrow focus on preventing defeat. “At this point we are thinking more and more about how Ukraine can survive,” says a person involved in that planning.

As a final major source joining in on this new bent of accepting reality, we have the latest article from Mykola Bielieskov, whom some of you may know as a senior analyst that appears on Phillips O’Brien’s podcast and has worked in a variety of NGOs and think-tanks, including under the Ukrainian President’s Office and RUSI. I’ve listened to the O’Brien podcast just to hear Bielieskov talk because he is exceptionally knowledgeable and adept at analysis, remaining fairly grounded compared to many other more ‘famous’ analysts, while still being compelled to inflate Ukraine’s hopes. However, it seems even he has finally come around:

 
Writing for the Atlantic Council, he underscores the same thesis at discussion here:

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is often depicted in the Western media as a bloody stalemate with neither side able to achieve a decisive military breakthrough. While this has been the case for much of the war, there are growing indications that Russia may now be creating the conditions for victory in Ukraine.

The article ends with:

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is now at a critical juncture. Unless steps are taken in the coming few months to reverse today’s negative dynamics, Russia’s advantages will continue to grow until the military situation reaches the point of no return.

Much will depend on the outcome of the United States presidential election on November 5. Whoever wins the race for the White House, they will inherit a war in Ukraine that requires their urgent attention to prevent a Russian victory that would signal the decline of the West and transform the geopolitical landscape for decades to come.

Well, I think that’s pretty self-explanatory. In short, the West’s top analysts now understand the severity of the situation. For a variety of converging reasons, Ukraine seems to have 6-12 months left of fighting at this pace, with this level of “support” from the West.

Read more