Attrition vs Escalation

If no breakthrough agreement is reached, the attritional tide of conflict leads inevitably towards the collapse of the Ukrainian state. At that point, the front lines could fall apart overnight. Until then, Ukrainian conscripts perish daily to keep them manned.

By some estimates, Ukraine is currently suffering around 20,000 casualties per month, a number which seems to be matched by its press-ganging capability. Such metrics suggest the process might therefore continue at a grim length.

The reality of warfare is that armies can hold up in a losing battle against overwhelming odds for extended periods of time. However, the lesson of the 20th century is that conclusions to such conflicts are rapid. It’s remarkable that Ukrainians haven’t seen the writing on the wall and panicked yet. Desertions are high yet the edifice remains intact.

Even though this a pioneering conflict in terms of tactics and technology, much of it’s longevity is due to what was built before most of the participants were born. Ukraine has the benefit of enormous fortifications in Donbass and underground military infrastructure across the country constructed during paranoid Soviet times to thwart a hypothetical second Operation Barbarossa conducted by NATO in conjunction with a preemptive nuclear strike.

These fortifications were upgraded by NATO, reoriented eastwards, and ensconced behind massive minefields after the government in Kiev was overthrown back in 2014. These factors make for slow-going since modern Russia is sensitive to taking heavy casualties. Compounding this dynamic is the emergent reality that FPV drones and sophisticated ISR make classic mass advances over open ground the equivalent of suicide operations even for the side with overwhelming firepower.

The Russians are thus forced to apply pressure across a frontline which could stretch from the White House to central Florida and grind the Ukrainians down by a thousand cuts. Thus, we have the paradox of the limited SMO taking significantly longer than the combat on Eastern Front during the Second World War. Again: large offensives are suicide operations, as proven by Ukraine’s three failed “counteroffensives” and the incursion into Kursk.

While attrition is an effective process for the Russians, it doesn’t provide significant territorial gains as evidence of success that the western public could recognize. That’s how we got the initial fraudulent media narrative that Ukraine had thwarted Russia’s unprovoked invasion, which would soon fall apart. This has long since transitioned to the current narrative that a stalemate has created an imperative on both sides for a negotiated settlement.

There’s zero necessity on the part of Russia for a deal on any terms but its maximalist objectives. However, just because Russia can play out the process of pressure and attrition to its grim conclusion, this doesn’t mean that the risk of escalation into a broader conflict isn’t growing.

Ukraine recently pulled off a “Pearl Harbor” against the type of Russian bombers which have served as workhorses of the SMO, launching perhaps thousands of cruise missiles into Ukraine from deep inside Russia. It’s important to note that hangers would’ve thwarted this entire Ukrainian FPV drone operation. Apparently, the Russians park such aircraft in the open for observation by American ISR, in order to comply with the 2010 START treaty.

The precise locations of all these unprotected bombers were thus known to Ukrainian operators since they were deliberately parked to be visible to American surveillance at all times. It’s been this way since the Cold War. Comparable bombers such as B-52s are parked the same way here in the US for verification by Russian satellites.

The role of the US in facilitating this operation is pretty transparent, which has been acknowledged in official commentary by Russia although apparently responsibility was laundered through British intelligence which worked directly with the Ukrainians to facilitate the attacks.

According to Ukraine, it took 18 months to pull off this operation. The western media has been parroting Ukrainian claims that it knocked out “dozens” of Russian bombers. However, this figure comports with the demonstrable absurdity of many Ukrainian claims about conducting a massive turkey shoot of the Russians since the SMO began.

Russian AA repelled attempts on the primary western airbases utilized for the SMO, such as Engels. What Ukraine seems to have struck successfully was far to the east. It’s not even clear if the aircraft hit were operational. Many of the photos circulated have also been shown to be generated with AI. Footage of a strike on a TU-95 all the way out in Siberia looks legit, but the extent of the damage is unclear.

Assuming a generous hypothetical estimate that the Ukrainians have knocked out 10% of Russia’s heavy bomber capacity, this would have no effect on it’s ability to continue conducting the SMO at all since even the biggest missile strikes of the war have required less aircraft. Moreover, strategic bombers often drop large missiles such as the KH-101, while smaller missiles used in abundance, such as various Kalibers, are carried by a variety of naval, land, and air assets.

A big deal has been made in American media about how badly Russia’s nuclear capability has been degraded. Well, in World War 3 the continental US would be struck by ICBMs coming from mobile launchers in the wilderness of the Russian Federation, which can fly over the South Pole to avoid any potential defenses, and from submarines in oceanic launch locations which would be extremely difficult to find.

The role of Russian bombers would be to launch cruise missiles armed with tactical nukes (KH-101 would become KH-102) at America’s stooges in Europe, presumably in an escalatory scenario before mutually-assured destruction commences between America and Russia. Such operations could also be carried out by much smaller aircraft such as Su-34s or the Iskander truck-launched missile system.

Tactical details aside, Ukraine’s attack on the Russian bombers was a brazen and deliberate violation of Russia’s published strategic doctrine that delineates when the use of its nuclear arsenal becomes justified. In other words, it was a humiliation of Russia and a calling of its bluff regardless of how much damage was actually inflicted.

The propaganda victory for NATO was enormous, as this is the most dramatic proof yet of the contention that Putin doesn’t actually have any redlines and is in fact too weak to retaliate against NATO no matter what provocation he receives through NATO’s role in military attacks on Russia. This in turn serves as a sort of moral proof of NATO’s cause.

From Putin’s cold calculation, an escalation through retaliation is dangerous and unpredictable whereas the process of victory through attrition is inevitable. This has been the tenor of his restraint since the tanks started rolling.

The trouble for Putin is that the Russian public is now subjected to daily drone attacks against airports, passenger trains, apartment buildings, and all sorts of infrastructure. The military value of most attacks is zero, making the correct classification terrorism. The Russian public is becoming increasingly inflamed, creating a clamor for action heightened beyond staying the course of the SMO.

Worse yet is the potential for an attack to steer the conflict into an escalation that Russia won’t be able to avoid. The most dramatic incident was during a uniformed visit by Putin to Kursk last month when his helicopter formation was subjected to a large Ukrainian drone swarm. His death could’ve spelled World War 3.

These drones are dirt cheap for Ukraine to field while the list of potential targets that Russia must defend is basically unlimited. Good evidence of this disparity is the fact that the hits on Russian aircraft were scored far in the east where the bases probably weren’t covered by Pantsir point defense AA batteries, which intercepted the drones sent against Engels.

To the Ukrainian leadership, they’re already in World War 3 so misery loves company. An escalation is the only thing that could stave off Russian victory anyways. The Ukrainians pose a grave to danger everyone else in the world since the rest of us don’t share their dire predicament.

Another case in point was a plot to assassinate Putin during the Navy Day parade in Saint Petersburg last year. Then Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin received a phone call from his Russian counterpart listing the initial targets of Russian retaliation if the plot went ahead. Fortunately, that was the end of the matter.

The current bottom line is that we’re faced with a scenario in which the attritional process in Ukraine keeps dragging out as Ukrainian terrorism operations within Russia mount. How does Putin keep his constituency mollified indefinitely? How would a peace agreement ever be concluded while Russians are subjected to terrorism? There are a set of dangerous synergies at play while an end can’t be discerned at a fixed point down the timeline.

The only way for the conflict to come to a rapid halt would be the cessation of NATO support that not only keeps Ukraine fighting, but the state itself functioning. No sign of reason is coming from Europe, though. The German government is in the process of allocating billions for new bunkers in the name of a coming war with Russia. British PM Kier Starmer keeps talking about preparing his country for open war with Russia as well. The Baltic countries are preparing to interdict Russian shipping.

The situation is completely insane and doesn’t bode well for the prospect of forcing Ukraine into the harsh reality of ceding to Russia’s demands in order to avoid collapse. Trump has been bloviating about peace with no results. In practice, he hasn’t made any significant changes from the Biden Administration’s policies. Putin was willing to talk for optics, but he’s not going to agree to anything to the disadvantage of Russia.

We could be in for a long wait while holding on the the hope that the Ukrainians won’t score some sort of terroristic blow which achieves the escalation they’ve been seeking. The best case scenario might be waking up one morning to the headlines that Zelensky fled as Ukraine implodes.