This week’s big news is that US support for the negotiation process could be faltering. When questioned after his return from meeting European and Ukrainian leaders last Friday, US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio discussed negotiations and stated “It is not our war. We didn’t start it,” and that President Trump is “probably at a point where he’s going to say, well, we’re done”.
Rubio’s comments were soon echoed by Trump at an Oval Office press conference, where he discussed the difficulty of negotiations, and stated “Now if for some reason one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say: ‘You’re foolish. You’re fools. You’re horrible people’ – and we’re going to just take a pass.” The President is obviously tiring of dealing with the Ukraine War and could be ready to backtrack on his campaign commitment to end the war.
Putin is out manoeuvring Trump strategically
An observation of Trump is that he is a highly emotional person, who makes decisions based on feelings rather than evidence. Currently, Putin is winning the negotiation by stringing Trump along with commitments to negotiations, that do not materialise. Putin is also careful to never concede any of Russia’s key objectives, for example; retaining the illegally annexed part of Ukraine, disarming Ukraine, the removal of economic sanctions, and ensuring a foreign security force does not enter Ukraine.
After US Special Envoy, Steve Witkoff’s meeting with Putin on 11 April Kremlin media said the meeting was long, more than four hours, and productive “focused on various aspects of the Ukrainian settlement.” Russian statements also suggested that an objective of the meeting was to discuss Putin and President Trump meeting in person. Russia presenting the image of being willing to negotiate, but without taking meaningful action.
However, regardless of these positive words on 14 April, Sergei Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister told news service Kommersant that the Ukrainian regime was illegitimate and restated Putin’s requirements for a ceasefire. On April 18, Russian Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Vasily Nebenzya reiterated Russia’s rejection of a general ceasefire. Examples of key Russian officials reinforcing Putin’s irreconcilable ‘bottom lines’ for a ceasefire.
- Sponsor Promotion -
Putin is making Trump look weak and ineffectual, and this situation cannot go on forever. Even Putin’s best flattery is not able to hide the fact that he is making an international laughing stock of the new Whitehouse. The world’s greatest military power hobbled, unable to work with its traditional European allies because of an narrow-minded dislike of Europe, and instead relying on Putin’s goodwill to achieve Trump’s objective of finishing the war.
This leaves Trump with two options; he can either throw US economic and military weight behind Ukraine to make the war unwinnable for Putin, forcing him to negotiate. Or, he can walk away like a school bully when a smaller child stands up to them. Trump and Rubio’s statements hint that they are considering the second option..
But what about US military aid?
Rubio and Trump’s statements are important, President Biden’s last round of military aid to Ukraine is rapidly running out, and the current Whitehouse has not provided any further aid. My assessment is that even without US aid Ukraine can maintain its defence, continuing to attrit Russian forces. But that without US aid Ukraine does not have the military power to inflict a crushing defeat on Russia that could shorten the war. The impact of no US aid is a longer and more destructive war.
Ukraine’s recent offer to purchase $30-50 billion dollars of military aid through a minerals deal continues to be discussed and the BBC reported on 19 April that “A signed memorandum of intent, published by the Ukrainian government on 18 April, says the countries intend to set up an investment fund for the reconstruction of Ukraine as part of an economic partnership. Kyiv and Washington aim to finalise the text by 26 April.”
The deal may provide Ukraine with a second avenue for getting military support from the US. Unfortunately, greed rather than a commitment to the international rule of law may be the factor that convinces the Trump regime to support Ukraine.
Why Easter is important
Trump and Rubio were both clear, that the negotiation is time constrained and that the US wants to get ‘a result’ soon. When media asked about his timeline Trump did not provide detail, saying simply “But quickly. We want to get it done.” Likewise, Rubio said the US was willing to abandon its efforts “within days” when questioned about timelines. Statements like this indicate that Trump’s administration is keen to make a deal, or move on.
In a The Spectator article titled ‘Why Putin is keeping Trump waiting for a Ukraine deal,’ Russia expert Mark Galeotti potentially provides some insight. Galeotti points out the significance of Easter both in Russia where it is a religious holiday, and for Trump because the holiday roughly marks the 100th day of his presidency. This holiday represents a potential decision point for both parties.
Putin’s Easter ceasefire
Trump and Rubio’s statements indicate that the US is tiring of Putin’s game. Russia’s announcement of an Easter ceasefire indicates that Putin believes he can get more from Trump, and wants to continue the discussion. Putin’s offer is unlikely to be anything more than a deception designed to keep Trump’s Whitehouse at the negotiating table.
The longer Trump ineffectually negotiates, the more Putin’s international reputation is enhanced because countries that do not align with US will probably enjoy seeing the nation being ‘played’ by Putin. Ukraine’s President Zelensky demonstrated exactly how to deal with the ceasefire offer, by saying that if he is serious Putin should agree to the 30-day ceasefire proposal that is already ‘on the table.’
But what about Russia’s Summer offensive
It is now widely reported that Russian has transitioned into a summer offensive, and along the frontline last week there was an increase in the number of attacks. Further, Russia has massed approximately 67,000 soldiers across the border from Sumy. Ukrainian sources believe that Russia plans to try and take this city, but an attack on it is unlikely to be successful.
Historically, Sumy has proven difficult to capture and Ukraine’s increasing proficiency in defence combined with having time to fortify the city means taking it is probably beyond Russia’s capabilities. Further, 67,000 soldiers may seem like a large force but in this conflict, it is far from enough to capture a city of approximately 250,000 people.
 |
Russia is attacking vigorously along the whole frontline but its attacks have been unsuccessful to-date. However, some Russian activity is noteworthy, providing useful insight into developing tactics and Russia’s larger plans.
A large Russian armoured assault near Orikhiv, uses new tactics
On 16 April, Russian forces in Zaporizhia launched a large armoured attack near Orikhiv. The attack was spread along a frontage of approximately 40km and involved about 300 soldiers supported by 40 armoured vehicles and 10 4×4 buggies. The attack was defeated and most of the armoured vehicles were destroyed.
This operation is notable for its size, for the long frontage, and because it may indicate Russia’s operational-level plans. This attack probably tests new tactics, Russia spreading its vehicles out on a very wide frontage rather than concentrating them. Probably, to disperse Ukraine’s drones over a wide area making them less effective.
At operational-level this attack may be an indication that Ukrainian intelligence’s reporting that Russia was preparing a multi-pronged campaign may be correct. This large attack combined with continued pressure on Pokrovsk, and the build up of forces near Sumy suggests that Russia is interested in attacking on three fronts. Good news for Ukraine, because attacking on multiple fronts dissipates Russian resources making it harder to achieve local superiority.
Russian armoured assaults near Chasiv Yar, Vilne Pole and Novopavlivka, more new tactics
Stupochky and Klishchiivka both south of Chasiv Yar were attacked by a company-sized (100 soldiers and about a dozen vehicles) force on 13 April. On 14 April, similar sized Russian forces were defeated near Novopavlivka and Vilne Pole. The three attacks are interesting because they involved using swarms of soldiers on motorbikes and in ATVs ahead of the armoured vehicles.
A tactic probably designed to quickly overwhelm defending anti-tank missiles and drones, paving a pathway for armoured vehicles. This is another example of Russia experimenting with tactics to break through Ukraine’s defensive system.
More Russian armour near Pokrovsk
Later in the week, on 17 April Pokrovsk was attacked in a similar manner but by a battalion-sized group (approximately three companies working together. A statement from President Zelensky claimed Ukrainian forces had destroyed 115 vehicles and killed or wounded 240 Russian soldiers. The size of this attack, and that it was quickly defeated by Ukraine make it noteworthy.
What this Russian activity indicates
This activity indicates that Russia is trying to evolve tactics for using armour in the attack. Recently, armour has been relegated to secondary roles like providing fire support rather than leading attacks. The effectiveness of drones and guided anti-tank weapons making life too dangerous for these vehicles.
However, tanks and armoured vehicles remain formidable fighting machines and developing tactics to bring them onto the battlefield is likely to produce significant results. Russia appears to be experimenting and testing ideas, like dispersion and using fast-moving motorcyclists to precede armour. Summer is drying out the ground after the rasputitsa, or mud season and now that vehicles can move Russia is using the opportunity to test ideas.
Ukraine’s defeat of these attacks last week demonstrates that Russia has not found the formula yet, but the fact that they are trying new ideas demonstrates that Russian forces still have the will and the resources to evolve.
Summary
Russia’s activity rate is increasing, and we are seeing more use of armour, indicating Putin is keen to use his increasingly scare tanks and armoured fighting vehicles to achieve quick victories. Russia’s commanders are testing new tactics, and it appears that their operational planning involves a three-pronged assault on Ukraine.
Attacking on three axes of advance is operationally flawed because Russia will be unable to generate sufficient combat power on any single axis to achieve a decision. Probably, Putin feels pressured to demonstrate to Trump that Russian victory is inevitable by winning a quick victory, so is spreading his forces wide looking for a weakness. The aim being to get the US to distance itself from the conflict, and for the Whitehouse to walk way in exasperation.
Putin’s Easter ceasefire is a tactic in the wider negotiation, ‘spinning’ that Russia is engaged in the peace process. In coming days, we will see whether Trump keeps accepting Russian ‘spin,’ because the US certainly has enough economic and military leverage to force Putin to negotiate but what currently stands in the way is the willingness to use this power.
Ben Morgan is a bored Gen Xer, a former Officer in NZDF and TDBs Military Blogger – his work is on substack
