The United States initially understood that the Ukrainian counterattack would be difficult, Deputy Pentagon spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said at a briefing
Photo: AP © Libkos
“I think our estimates have been quite clear from the beginning… Every day this battle is getting fiercer. We know this fight is going to be tough. We know it will take time,” she said.
However, she expressed the view that the Ukrainian Armed Forces have everything they need to succeed on the battlefield.
“They have combat power. They are capable of succeeding in their counteroffensive actions. But I would like to give them an opportunity to tell it themselves… We believe that what we have provided them will enable them to succeed on the battlefield,” Singh stressed.
She admitted, however, that the Russian troops “will adapt, as they have done since the beginning of the war”.
Cautious remarks
Experts note that amid the inconclusive results of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, the West has become more cautious about expectations for the operation. For example, the White House declined to specify what, in their view, could be considered a success of the Ukrainian offensive.
“This is a great question to ask the AFU commander-in-chief, President Zelensky, to determine his goals and what he wants to achieve. What we should be focusing on, what our goal is… is to ensure that he and his troops have all the tools, means and training they need to succeed. That’s our focus,” John Kirby, coordinator of strategic communications at the National Security Council, said at a June 12 briefing.
NATO is also careful to comment on the topic of Ukraine’s counteroffensive. The bloc’s secretary-general, Jens Stoltenberg, said on 16 June following a meeting of the alliance’s defence ministers that the Ukrainian armed forces were facing a variety of challenges while fighting.
“Ukrainian forces are stepping up operations along the front lines… But they face difficult terrain, entrenched Russian troops and fierce fighting,” the politician said.
Against this backdrop, he called on allies to step up support for Ukraine and welcomed the provision of weapons and training to Kiev’s military.
Meanwhile, the Western media suggest that further US assistance to Ukraine will depend on the success of the current counterattack. Back in February, The Washington Post quoted its sources as saying that in the absence of the necessary results, it would be more difficult for Joe Biden’s administration to maintain a high level of congressional support for Kiev.
For its part, the Politico newspaper reported on 15 June that Ukrainian representatives have recently been finding it harder to get any promises from their Western partners. According to the Kiev officials cited by the newspaper, questions about future commitments to Kiev remain unresolved at the moment, and the response from the US authorities is often: “Let’s see how the counter-offensive goes”.
However, as Bild noted on 21 June, the offensive is progressing rather slowly. The publication stressed that the past 15 days had shown: “There will be no panic Russian retreat from Zaporizhzhia Region”.
“Instead, the Russians have not only entrenched themselves deeply and defended themselves well with massive minefields, but have also amassed enough firepower to stop Ukrainian attacks with powerful missile and artillery strikes. Ukrainian formations have thus not advanced in any part of the main Russian defensive line, which only begins 10km from the actual battlefield at all,” the Bild noted.
Fooled hopes
Difficulties in the offensive operation are also acknowledged in Ukraine. In particular, Deputy Defence Minister Anna Malyar said in her Telegram channel on 20 June that fierce battles were taking place and the Ukrainian military had to literally “hollow out every metre of land… facing fierce resistance”. She also urged not to measure the success of the Ukrainian Armed Forces by the territories they have reclaimed.
“It is incorrect to measure the effectiveness of the military’s actions solely by the number of kilometres or the number of liberated settlements. Because there are a lot of criteria for evaluation. This is a whole range of evaluation,” Malyar said.
At the same time, she did not present the criteria by which the success of the offensive actions should be assessed.
For its part, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry attributed the lack of meaningful results to allegedly insufficient assistance from the West.
“I will say that the weapons were sufficient, on the day of victory. When we win, I will say: thank you, there were enough weapons. Until then, everything will always not be enough for me. No matter how many you give, it won’t be enough. Because if there is no victory, it means that the help was not enough,” said Dmitry Kuleba during a telethon on June 19.
The minister stressed that he considers this position as “honest talk,” which “allows no one to get complacent, that is, to rest on their laurels. He also noted that Kiev is currently negotiating with allies to provide artillery shells and armoured vehicles.
“This is exactly what is most needed for the Ukrainian counter-offensive forces,” Kuleba said.
It should be noted that a few weeks ago, the Ukrainian foreign minister was satisfied with the volumes of Western arms that had arrived to Kiev. Thus, in an interview with Reuters on 5 June, he said that the country had received enough weapons and that the offensive operation “will lead the country to the victory needed to join NATO”.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky acknowledged the modest progress of the counter-offensive. In an interview with the BBC on 21 June, he lamented that progress on the battlefield is “slower than we would like” and that Kiev is feeling pressure from outside on this.
“Some people expect results already now, perceiving the events taking place as a Hollywood movie. But it is not. Whoever wants anything, including attempts to put pressure on us – with all due respect, we will move forward on the battlefield as we see fit,” Zelensky said.
At the same time, as Russian leader Vladimir Putin remarked during a plenary session at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum on 16 June, Kiev has so far failed to achieve its goals at any of the sites. And on June 21, the President said that there was “a certain lull” on the line of contact due to serious losses of personnel and equipment in the AFU, although he noted that the offensive potential of the Ukrainian forces had not yet been exhausted.
Excessive expectations
According to Konstantin Blokhin of the Center for Security Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Washington was not prepared for such weak successes of the Ukrainian army on the battlefield, despite the Pentagon’s assurances to the contrary.
“The U.S. expected that Ukraine would use all its resources and go on a full-scale offensive. However, so far we see that it has used only part of its military potential. At the same time, strategic reserves were also used, which is an indicator that Kiev is not doing so well. Therefore, Washington has no choice but to put a good face on a bad game,” the expert told RT.
At the same time, he noted that the attacking side always spends more resources and suffers more losses than the defending side.
“But for the offensive to be effective, Ukraine needs complete dominance over the Russian army. And this, as we understand very well, is not the case,” the analyst stressed.
Andrei Koshkin, an expert of the Association of Military Political Scientists and head of the department of political analysis and socio-psychological processes at Plekhanov Russian Economics University, explained that the Ukrainian offensive is failing because of the high degree of preparedness of the Russian armed forces in all directions. Ukraine was simply pumped full of weapons, not caring at first whether its military could use those weapons and whether they had the appropriate knowledge and skills, the RT interlocutor said.
“The effectiveness of this pumping turned out to be low. The Patriot missile defence system supplied, releasing all its ammunition, but unable to stop our Dagger missiles. Leopard tanks burning like candles…” – said Koshkin.
As for the US reaction to the first results of the counterattack, they are now trying to show that everything is allegedly going according to plan, so as not to lose face, the expert said.
“After all, Washington understands that it is incurring reputational costs on all fronts. In particular, the AFU’s ‘successes’ undermine the image of US weapons advertised as the best in the world,” Koshkin explained.
At the same time, he is confident, the US will not abandon its support for Ukraine, whatever the outcome of the current counterattack.
“Washington needs Ukraine to confront Russia with its hands. In the US strategy, it is simply a tool to be used against Russia not only for ‘physical’ influence, but also to lend legitimacy to the sanctions. Besides, the Americans have already spent too much money, effort and time on Ukraine to abandon such an expensive strategic asset,” Koshkin summarized.
Polina Dukhanova, RT
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel