During the past few days, the Russian-Ukrainian war witnessed a remarkable development when Russia revealed that armed elements had entered its territory through the Ukrainian borders, which means that Ukraine may have begun to transfer the war into Russia.
And whether you do or plan to do so, the question posed by German writer and analyst Andreas Kluth in an analysis published by Bloomberg News is: Will this development be a good thing?
Russia said that “Ukrainian terrorists” and “fascists” attacked Russian territory. Of course, according to the German analyst, such statements and everything issued by the Russian government can be ignored. It has been said that the armed groups that claimed responsibility for the attacks inside Russian territory consist of Russians who defected from President Vladimir Putin’s army and are fighting against him for Ukraine now.
One of these groups calls itself the “Russian Freedom Corps”, and the other is called the “Russian Volunteer Corps”, and includes elements of ultra-nationalists.
According to Cloth, there is limited information available about these anti-Putin paramilitary forces, especially with regard to whether they take orders from Ukraine or operate independently.
Ukrainian exile
But these groups appear to be at least tenuously linked to the pro-Ukrainian International Legion, a force of foreign fighters akin to the International Brigades that took part in the Spanish Civil War against the ultranationalist forces of General Francisco Franco, Spain’s late dictator.
Ukraine quickly denied any involvement in cross-border military attacks in Russia. It may be true, according to what the German analyst says, but the most important question remains: Does launching major attacks on Russian territory have a strategic effect?
Some of the best military minds in history have won defensive wars in exactly this way. The idea was that the threat of the invading country attacking its bases on its territory would compel it to withdraw in whole or in part from the original front line to protect its rear bases.
This scenario occurred during the period from 210 to 202 BC when the Roman commander Scipion (Scipio) the African (died in 183 BC) did so. The Carthaginian commander Hannibal terrorized Rome with his invading forces for 8 years. Scipion responded by leading a Roman army into the Iberian Peninsula to capture Hannibal’s bases there. Years later, he crossed the Mediterranean into North Africa to threaten Cartagena itself.
Just at this moment, Hannibal had to leave Italy and return with his forces to his country to defend it, and Scipion defeated him and Rome won the war.
In the same way, Ukraine could open new fronts within Russia. In this case, Putin will be forced to withdraw parts of his forces in Ukraine and return them to Russia. This will weaken the Russian forces in Ukraine and help the Ukrainians regain their lands. Putin will also appear weak at home and will be at risk of being turned on.
But Ukraine is not ancient Rome, Russia is not Cartagena, and Putin is certainly not Hannibal, one of the greatest military men in history despite his eventual defeat, so the strategic situation is completely different.
Putin has a nuclear arsenal and has threatened to use it more than once if he finds himself cornered. And if the world – including China, Russia’s closest ally – have so far convinced Putin that any nuclear escalation will not be acceptable, the Russian doctrine allows the use of nuclear weapons if the Russian state itself is in danger.
Since Putin considers himself Russia itself, he may decide to use these weapons if he is certain of his personal defeat.
Commitment to defensive war
The second difference is that Ukraine – according to the German analyst – currently has the best army in the world in terms of combat readiness, which depends on continuous Western support. It defends the sky with American air defense missiles, launches its counterattack on Russian forces using German battle tanks, and may control the air with American F-16 fighters.
But all this is acceptable on the grounds that Ukraine is only defending its own territory. The biggest fear in the West is the possible involvement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the war against Russia, which in this case could turn into a third world war.
Also, some Western countries may stop supporting Ukraine if it adopts offensive tactics.
Finally, what is known as the world south, that is, African and Asian developing countries that appear to be neutral, may actually and officially side with Russia.
Cloth believes that the best implementation of the African Chipion strategy could be Ukraine’s attempt to regain Crimea, which Putin seized in 2014, not by invading it directly, but by cutting off supply routes to it by restoring the Zaporizhia region and then the Sea of Azov, and cutting off the land bridge that the Russians built to connect the Lugansk region. and Crimea. If the Ukrainian attack succeeds in achieving its objectives, the Russian forces in Kherson and Crimea will be exposed in the long run.
In this case, Putin may see that he has achieved enough and reluctantly enter into peace negotiations, while launching his internal propaganda machine to tout the success of his “special military operation” in Ukraine.
On the other hand, if Putin is subjected to military operations inside Russia, it will be difficult for him to claim victory and enter into negotiations, and then he will find himself compelled to redouble his talk of defending Russia against its enemies by using all his military tools.
Finally, says Cloth, Ukraine should not attack Russian territory, nor encourage militants like Russia’s anti-Putin paramilitary forces to do so. It is better for Ukraine to clearly announce to the world that it is fighting a purely defensive war.
Kiev’s strategy must remain to continue to win the world, and then to recover as much of its occupied lands as possible, according to the German analyst.