You are listening to a Podhoc podcast — a platform where anything can be turned into a Podcast to Learn in Motion.
The current military situation on the front lines is complex, with both sides claiming territorial gains. In the Sumy region, villages like Ryzhovka, Magritsa, and Malaya Slobodka have been reported captured. Similarly, in the Kharkov region, Yurchenkovo, Verovka, Olgovka, Baksheevka, Ustinovka, and Bely Kolodez are mentioned. The DPR reports Krasnoyarskaya and Stenka as captured, while Zaporozhskaya lists Lyubitskaya and Zarnitsa. However, the significance of these captures is often debated, as battles continue in many of these settlements.
The concept of declaring a settlement "occupied" seems to follow a specific, perhaps algorithmic, logic. It appears that once a certain number of houses are occupied, or when the invading force significantly outweighs the defending one, control is officially declared. This can lead to a situation where a settlement is announced as captured even while fighting is ongoing or has recently ceased, making it difficult to ascertain the true territorial control. The effectiveness of this declaration is questionable when the actual combat continues.
Focusing on specific areas, a large pocket of approximately 350 to 400 square kilometers has formed northeast of Bely Kolodez. This pocket reportedly contains a relatively small number of Ukrainian soldiers, around 500 to 600. This situation highlights modern military tactics where a smaller, well-equipped force, particularly with drone support, can control a significant area. However, if this pocket is cut off, supply lines would be severely disrupted, likely forcing a withdrawal.
The strategic value of this pocket is minimal from an offensive or air control perspective, making it more of a liability than an asset. Maintaining such a pocket requires resources and effort to prevent excessive losses among personnel. Therefore, a withdrawal might be a logical step. Yet, purely for political reasons, especially in the face of allies and figures like Trump, there's pressure to demonstrate an organized defense, even in an unfavorable configuration.
Moving to Kupyansk, while the city itself is considered practically taken from an operational standpoint, intense fighting continues in the northern and western outskirts. The Ukrainian forces lack the strength for a sustained defense, as many reserves have been diverted to other sectors. This depletion of operational reserves in the immediate area presents a significant challenge for the Ukrainian command, impacting their ability to reinforce threatened positions.
The Russian army is attempting to expand their newly established "bazaar" area, pushing westward beyond the river. Meanwhile, Liman, a strategically vital city blocking the operational direction to Slavyansk from the north, remains a point of contention. Ukrainian troops continue to advance through Ridkodub, facing supply challenges but still pushing forward. The direct threat of encirclement of the Russian 20th Army has receded with this movement.
Despite the shifting battlefield, Russian claims about the capture of Krasny Liman, as it's known in Russia, contrast with the ongoing reality on the ground. War is a constant confrontation of wills, and the situation can turn unexpectedly, as commanders face the will of their adversaries. Understanding who you're facing at the chessboard is crucial in such scenarios. The advance through Ridkodub, while a threat to the Russian 20th Army's rear, has effectively postponed the full capture of Liman.
The movement towards Slavyansk involves Ukrainian troops advancing through Nikolaevka, which houses a power plant. This location could serve as a stronghold for drone operators and troop accumulation, making it a crucial point on the path to Slavyansk. The Russian forces are defending it fiercely, leading to the near-total demolition of Nikolaevka. It's likely that its occupation by Russian forces is imminent, given the ease with which small Russian groups can advance into its center.
The current method of urban assault is a stark illustration of evolving tactics. The advance towards Kramatorsk, more of a movement than a full offensive, aims to outflank the city's defenses and begin penetration. Vasyutinskaya, a settlement just four to seven kilometers from Kramatorsk, is now a key objective. Its proximity means Kramatorsk is within the range of artillery, including regimental artillery, placing the entire city within the zone of effective fire.
Vasyutinskaya represents the final point before urban development, a crucial staging ground for any offensive push. Desperate battles are occurring there, as well as in Nikolaevka, with both settlements being heavily bombarded. The Ukrainian forces are clinging to these positions, making it difficult for the Russian army to advance. The rationale behind demolishing these settlements, which could otherwise provide cover, is perhaps to deny the enemy any potential advantages.
This tactic of widespread destruction aims to eliminate all possible shelters and fortifications, inflicting maximum damage. Even without the Ukrainian army actively present, the intense shelling makes the area hellish. While the Ukrainian forces hold on tenaciously, it's unlikely they can maintain their positions for long, and a retreat from Vasyutinskaya seems probable without fresh reserves. The sheer volume of aerial bombs dropped signifies the strategic importance of this location for the Russian command.
Simultaneously, the movement towards Druzhkovka from the opposite side, through the valley where Krasny Kut is located, has completely halted. Russian troops have entered Alexeyevka-Druzhkovka, and urban battles are now underway. This situation is comparable to what occurred in Konstantinovka, where the fight is now within the city itself. However, penetrating deep into enemy territory in a narrow salient is fraught with danger due to flanking fire.
In the north of Druzhkovka, specifically near Afyar, battles continue as Ukrainian forces attempt to hold the last houses on the outskirts. Despite being heavily outnumbered, they manage to hold their ground, with supplies being delivered via drones. The Dobropol direction, now under the command of Ivanaev, represents a significant thrust for the "Center" group. This area has become the main focus of the offensive, with crucial battles taking place towards Dobropol.
A pocket has formed between Vodyanoye and Dobropol, which could potentially be cut off, making it a key objective of the ongoing fighting. Within this pocket lies a terricon, an artificial mountain created from mine waste. These terricons, unique to Donbas, offer a significant tactical advantage due to their height, allowing for drone control, observation posts, and troop placement. The control of this terricon could be decisive.
Terricons are a distinctive feature of the Donbas landscape, rising like mountains from the flat steppe. Some, like the one near Gagarin mine in Gorlovka, reach heights of 200 meters, offering an unparalleled operational view. These elevated positions have become leading heights, and control over them is a significant factor in military operations. The battles for these terricons are often fierce and critical to controlling the surrounding terrain.
Dobropol itself is a crucial objective for the "Center" group because an offensive there could allow them to bypass Kramatorsk and move towards Slavyansk. This maneuver would effectively bypass Krasny Kut and Druzhkovka, creating a powerful flanking movement towards Kramatorsk's rear. While this is a long-term prospect, it's the most important direction from a strategic perspective, one that the Ukrainian command may not fully perceive as a major threat.
The Ukrainian command has placed substantial forces in this direction, anticipating a significant thrust and repelling Russian attacks over the past three months. The advance in this sector is slow, precisely because of the tactical dangers inherent in the chosen direction of the strike. This suggests that while progress is being made, it's a gradual and challenging endeavor, requiring careful strategic planning and execution.
The strategic defense implemented by Ukraine involves a day-by-day approach, with decisions made as circumstances evolve. While they have managed to halt the enemy's advance, the question of future offensive actions remains open. This approach emphasizes immediate tactical gains and adaptation rather than a rigid, long-term offensive plan. The focus is on maintaining defensive integrity and responding to the immediate situation on the ground.
Reports from July 31st indicate that the "Vostok" group engaged and destroyed a Ukrainian armored group during an attempted attack. This event, involving the loss of armored vehicles and personnel, is one of many such instances. It highlights the ongoing experimentation by both Ukrainian and Russian commanders regarding armored assaults. The idea of armored columns remains a persistent tactical concept, despite past failures.
The commanders of the "Vostok" and "Dnipro" groups appear confident in their ability to control the situation and prevent retreats. Their defensive actions against Ukrainian offensives demonstrate a strong belief in their capabilities. This confidence is reflected in their methods and overall approach to the conflict. However, it is important to note that Ukraine's strategic defense remains a key element of their overall war effort.
The past week has seen significant rearrangements within the Russian Armed Forces' command structure. Andrey Ivanov, previously heading the "Vostok" group, has been transferred to the "Center" group. Pyotr Bolgarev now leads the "Vostok" group, and Valery Solochuk has moved to the Department of Defense to oversee rear supply operations. Denis Lyamin is the new head of the "Center" army group's headquarters.
These appointments reflect a broader trend of restructuring and a search for effective leadership. The military personnel and front-line sources have been keenly observing these changes, with various names circulating for command positions. The inclusion of individuals from civilian backgrounds alongside experienced military personnel signifies a shift in how leadership roles are being filled. This suggests an evolving approach to command and control within the Russian military.
The current situation presents two distinct paths for appointing commanders. One involves selecting advanced civilians with technological expertise and modern business practices, as seen in Ukraine's approach. The other involves appointing seasoned military leaders with extensive battlefield experience and a broad operational view, which is Russia's current focus. This creates a dynamic where different leadership philosophies are being tested.
The Ukrainian Minister of Defense, a young businessman, has focused on creating a feedback system through a military marketplace, aiming to ensure that only effective equipment reaches the front lines. This approach faced challenges from those who profited from existing contracts. A similar dynamic may be playing out within the Russian Ministry of Defense, with various factions vying for influence in the appointment of commanders.
The selection of Ivanaev, who has a strong track record and achievements comparable to other distinguished figures, to lead the "Center" group is seen as a strategic move. This appointment suggests that preparations for a significant offensive operation are underway within this group. The involvement of such a capable commander indicates a deliberate and potentially impactful upcoming action.
The 40-day plan initiated by Zelensky, aimed at coercing a peace settlement from a position of strength, appears to have concluded with ambiguous results. Zelensky's background in show business has influenced his approach, often tailoring his statements for specific audiences. This public-facing strategy, however, can be a double-edged sword, as announcing intentions to the enemy can elicit a direct response.
The economic impact of the conflict is profound, with Ukraine's external sea trade being a critical bottleneck. The paralysis of its ports significantly hinders the export of essential goods like grain, impacting not only profits but also employment within industries such as steel and lithium production. This economic strain poses a severe challenge to Ukraine's overall stability and recovery.
The idea that Ukraine can simply rely on Western aid and cease industrial production is a dangerous misconception. The industries being discussed are vital to the livelihoods of many, and their shutdown would have far-reaching consequences. The current paralysis of Ukraine's export capacity, affecting railways, cars, and transport, demonstrates the critical nature of its maritime trade routes.
The effectiveness of the Ukrainian 40-day campaign is questionable, as Zelensky's success in achieving his objectives is not clearly evident. The possibility of future agreements, particularly regarding grain exports, remains, potentially involving mutual consent between Russia and Ukraine to ensure unimpeded passage through designated routes. This would be a return to a mutually beneficial arrangement rather than a forced outcome.
During this period, Russia has increased its use of ballistic missiles in single raids, culminating in a significant strike on Kyiv. This response, employing advanced and costly CIRCON missiles, suggests a shift in Russia's retaliatory strategy. The initiative for de-escalation, publicly proposed by an aide to Zelensky, indicates a potential shift in the conflict's dynamics.
The public nature of diplomatic proposals can complicate negotiations, as it forces an opponent into a reactive stance. A more effective approach might involve discreet channels to convey proposals, allowing for a less confrontational negotiation process. The simultaneous release of public and private messages can create conflicting signals and hinder genuine dialogue.
Zelensky's subsequent statement about forcing Russia to cease military action before winter indicates a continuation of this strategic approach, extending the timeline. The Russian Air Force's reported use of 8,300 guided aerial bombs in July signifies a substantial increase in production and deployment. This record number highlights a strategic focus on air-based munitions as a primary means of destruction in the rear areas.
These guided air bombs, with their range of up to 150 kilometers, offer a significant advantage over unmanned aerial vehicles. Their lower production cost and greater destructive power make them a highly effective weapon. Ukraine's limited supply of similar munitions, whether French or American, prevents them from matching this scale of aerial bombardment. The continuous production of these bombs suggests a sustained advantage for Russia.
The issue of ammunition shortages, particularly anti-missile munitions for the Patriot system, has become a critical concern for Ukraine. Despite prior promises, Trump indicated that he would not provide rockets, citing licensing issues with European manufacturers. Germany and Poland have licenses for production, but significant output is not expected for several years.
The refusal by companies holding the production secrets for critical components, like warheads, to supply Ukraine further exacerbates the problem. This situation highlights the complex geopolitical and commercial factors influencing military aid. The inability to secure these essential munitions directly impacts Ukraine's defensive capabilities.
A decrease in the effectiveness of Russian air defense, from 94% to 88%, has been observed, potentially due to dwindling anti-aircraft missile supplies. Conversely, Ukraine's air defense effectiveness has sharply declined from 68-64% to 54%, largely attributed to a depletion of missiles. This disparity suggests that Russian air raids are largely unpunished, allowing them to strike targets with increasing impunity.
This strategic advantage allows Russia to select targets and timing with greater freedom, indicating a significant shift in the air war. The pressure on Ukraine to secure more air defense capabilities is immense, as their current stock is insufficient to counter the ongoing aerial assault. The lack of effective air defense leaves Ukrainian positions vulnerable to devastating strikes.
In Greenland, a mobilization effort has been initiated in response to perceived threats from Trump regarding the territory's potential annexation. The military service duration has been extended, signaling a heightened state of alert. This move by Denmark can be interpreted as a firm stance against any territorial claims, emphasizing their readiness to defend Greenland.
This development can be seen as a direct message to Trump, indicating that Greenland will not be surrendered without a fight. The extended military service and mobilization signal Denmark's resolve and commitment to defending its sovereign territory. It's a clear statement of defiance against any external pressure or perceived threats to their territorial integrity.
The recent successful Ukrainian attacks on ships in the Black and Azov Seas might stem from Russia's historical experience in escorting large convoys, particularly during World War II. The memory of these operations, like the British convoys in polar latitudes, could inform current defensive strategies. However, the continued vulnerability of tankers and dry cargo ships suggests that these lessons are not being fully applied.
The story of the PQ-17 convoy, one of the most tragic in history, serves as a stark reminder of the perils of maritime warfare. This convoy, carrying vital supplies to Murmansk and Arkhangelsk, suffered immense losses from German aviation and submarines. The narrative highlights the devastating consequences of insufficient protection for merchant shipping.
A remarkable event occurred during a memorial voyage for the PQ-17 convoy, where a former commander of the German bombers that attacked it, Haya Herman, participated in a ceremony of remembrance. He joined survivors and veterans to pay tribute to the fallen sailors. This act of reconciliation, decades after the war, underscores a profound shift in historical perspective and a desire for peace.
Herman's participation, however, became complicated when he discovered that Alexander Moiseevich Gorodnitsky, a renowned bard and scientist who also survived the blockade of Leningrad, was Jewish. Herman's shocked reaction and subsequent withdrawal reveal the deeply ingrained nature of antisemitic ideology, even after significant societal change and personal reconciliation. This incident illustrates how ideology can persist and resurface unexpectedly.
Gorodnitsky's sharp retort to Herman, highlighting the indiscriminate nature of Nazi persecution, underscores the moral bankruptcy of such ideologies. Herman's profound distress at discovering his newfound friend's Jewish heritage led him to isolate himself for days, demonstrating the powerful and destructive grip of deeply held prejudices. This reaction showcases the irrationality and emotional toll of such beliefs.
This profound incident reveals how deeply ingrained and persistent an inhuman ideology can be, even in individuals who have seemingly moved beyond it. The fact that Herman, a decorated officer in a defeated regime, still harbored such sentiments after so many years, and after building a new life, is a testament to the enduring power of ingrained beliefs. This highlights the struggle to eradicate such ideologies from society.
Gorodnitsky's life itself is a testament to resilience and a poignant counterpoint to the darkness of such ideologies. His biography is filled with extraordinary stories that read like legends. This particular narrative serves as a powerful illustration of how ideology can remain dormant within individuals, only to resurface and dictate their reactions and beliefs, even decades later.
The ideology that influences actions on the current front lines, whether in Ukraine or Russia, does not simply vanish. It can be passed down through generations, shaping future beliefs and actions. Understanding the persistent nature of such ideologies is crucial for comprehending the ongoing conflict and its potential long-term consequences.
Thank you for listening to this Podhoc podcast.
