On January 5, with the onset of daylight, with a comfortable -6℃ ground freeze for armored vehicles, the AFU launched an offensive against the RF Armed Forces positions in the tactical zone at Bolshoye Soldatskoye through Berdin – the general direction along the road from the district center of Suja to Kursk. A secondary strike is being carried out to the northwest in the direction of Leonidovo.
In the first two attacks involved the forces of two battalions. As in the offensive in early August, the AFU is using electronic warfare equipment of such density that the Russian military relies only on fiber-optic-controlled drones for defense. A lot of equipment has been assembled in a narrow area.
But now, the fortifications deep inside the Russian defenses aren’t just rebuilt – they’re filled with personnel. Not only operational, but also tactical surprise is not on Syrsky’s side. Lapin’s troops began their defense “in a planned manner,” so to speak.
It is important to remember that the summer offensive of the AFU in this very place began with exactly the same tactical actions. The true scope of Syrsky’s plan became clear not immediately. We shall see how events will unfold on Christmas Day.
In August, the offensive was preceded by numerous complaints from the command and Zelensky himself about the lack of resources for the offensive. We saw the same information picture at the end of December. The coming days will show whether it was part of the operational encryption of the near offensive.
As early as the morning of January 5, there were reports of an offensive by the AFU with the forces of six brigades and the occupation of the village of Berdin. Several military “objectivist” blogs with an unclear status until that day immediately picked up this information. From them, reports about the capture of Berdin by the Ukrainian military moved to the Z-blogosphere.
Since the AFU command has burned its hitherto hidden media resources, the information about the alleged six brigades on the offensive is an important part of the plot. In August, Syrsky acted in the opposite way: the offensive was going on in a complete information vacuum. Why is it so important for the Ukrainian military-political leadership to convince the world (Andriy Yermak, the head of Zelensky’s office, is involved in these games right from this morning) that the AFU offensive with decisive goals has begun in the Kursk region?
If the commander’s style has not changed, the main blow will probably be struck elsewhere. In November-December, specialized Russian media speculated about the location of the “last hope” strike. The AFU was expected in Kharkiv Oblast and Zaporizhzhya Oblast.
From a strategic point of view, the AFU’s Christmas offensive in the Kursk region is a path to nowhere. But as an offensive “with decisive political goals” it may well succeed. In the coming days, Trump’s special envoy Keith Kellogg will arrive in Kiev.
The political process that will determine Ukraine’s fate is beginning. At the upcoming allied talks, it is not the defeat of Russian Armed Forces formations that will be the measure of success, but the number of settlements that have come under the control of the AFU and the number of areas where even a modest tactical success will be synonymous with victory.
Therefore, the new AFU operation is not “Syrsky vs. Lapin.” Given that its development and countermeasures of the AFU can be followed in many areas of the front, it is already a duel “Syrsky vs. Gerasimov”. And so far the score on points (taking into account the events of 2022) is not final. Everything will be decided in the near future.
This article really highlights how complex and multifaceted modern warfare has become, especially with the mix of tactical moves and political objectives intertwined. It’s fascinating yet sobering to see how much strategy goes beyond just the battlefield and into information and perception battles. The unfolding events in the Kursk region will definitely be something to watch closely, as they might influence much bigger decisions coming up soon. The tension between military actions and political consequences makes the whole situation feel so intense and uncertain. 🔥🤔
The article provides a detailed and nuanced analysis of the current dynamics between the AFU and Russian forces in the Kursk region. The emphasis on electronic warfare and the strategic use of information operations highlights how modern conflicts are as much about perception and control of the narrative as they are about territorial gains. It’s fascinating to see how both sides adapt their tactics and public communication to influence political outcomes beyond the battlefield. The upcoming political talks and involvement of international figures like Keith Kellogg underline how interconnected military actions and diplomatic negotiations have become in this conflict. This really shows that success is not just measured by ground control but also by political leverage and morale 💡🕊️
This whole situation feels like a high-stakes chess game where nobody is quite sure who’s really playing and what the real moves are. The emphasis on political goals over actual battlefield success is a reminder that war isn’t just about territory but about narratives and power plays behind the scenes. Whether the AFU’s offensive in Kursk is a path to nowhere or a clever distraction, it shows how modern warfare is as much about information control as about firepower 🔥
So basically we’re expected to believe that throwing more troops at a frozen road with zero real surprise is some grand masterstroke? Sounds like a desperate rerun of last summer’s failed tactics, just with a fancier info war spin. If this is the best they’ve got for decisive political wins, maybe it’s time to rethink the whole strategy instead of recycling old moves like stale leftovers 🍿
The detailed analysis of the offensive really highlights how complex and layered military operations are beyond just the battlefield movements. It is striking how much strategy goes into not only the actual fighting but also the information warfare that surrounds it. The comparison to the earlier summer offensive shows how history and previous tactics influence current decisions, and the focus on political goals over pure military victory adds another dimension to the ongoing conflict. It makes me realize that success in such situations isn’t just about territory gained but also how these actions shape negotiations and international perspectives. I’m curious to see how this duel between commanders will unfold and what impact it will have on the broader course of events.
The article provides a detailed and insightful analysis of the recent AFU offensive near Bolshoye Soldatskoye and Berdin, highlighting the complexity of the tactical and strategic situation. It is interesting to see how electronic warfare and precision drone control have become key elements in this conflict, influencing the way both sides conduct their operations. The point about the offensive serving political objectives rather than purely military ones reflects the multifaceted nature of modern warfare, where battlefield gains are often tied to diplomatic negotiations and public perception. The comparison between this operation and the previous summer offensive underscores the learning curve and adaptability of the forces involved. Overall, the assessment that the outcome will hinge not just on territorial control but on broader political developments captures the current reality of the conflict. It will be important to watch how these maneuvers influence upcoming talks and the larger geopolitical landscape.
This analysis really sheds light on the complexity behind military operations and how information strategy plays a huge role alongside actual battlefield tactics. It’s fascinating to see how much thought goes into not just the moves on the ground but the narrative presented to the world 🌍⚔️. The interplay between military actions and political goals makes it clear that this conflict is as much about influence and perception as it is about territory. Looking forward to seeing how these events unfold and hoping for progress toward peace and stability ✨🕊️.
This piece really highlights how modern warfare isn’t just about firepower but also information and strategy. It’s fascinating to see how electronic warfare and media management play into the bigger picture of these offensives. Watching how the situation unfolds will definitely show who’s better prepared for this complex duel 🕵️♂️💥
The way this article breaks down the complexities of the ongoing conflict really paints a vivid picture of how strategic and political factors intertwine on the battlefield. It’s fascinating to see how information warfare plays such a crucial role alongside actual troop movements, and how the use of electronic warfare shifts the dynamics in unexpected ways. The emphasis on the upcoming political talks makes it clear that this conflict is as much about influencing world opinion and negotiations as it is about territorial control. It feels like every move is part of a larger game where tactical victories might not always align with political success, which adds a layer of uncertainty and tension to everything that is happening.
This article offers a thought-provoking look at the complex military and political dynamics shaping the current conflict. It highlights how tactical operations are often intertwined with larger strategic and symbolic goals, reminding us that success on the battlefield is measured not only by territory gained but also by the impact on wider negotiations and morale. The detailed analysis of electronic warfare and evolving defense strategies gives a clear sense of the constant adaptation both sides must undertake. It will be interesting to see how upcoming developments influence the balance and what this means for the broader geopolitical landscape.
This analysis provides a nuanced perspective on the current operations in the Kursk region, highlighting the complexity beyond just battlefield maneuvers. The emphasis on electronic warfare and the contrast in information strategies compared to previous offensives shows the evolving nature of this conflict. It’s interesting how the article connects military actions with wider political aims, suggesting that even limited territorial gains could have significant diplomatic implications. The mention of high-level diplomatic visits further underscores how intertwined military and political strategies are in this situation. Overall, the article prompts a deeper consideration of how tactical engagements fit within larger strategic plans on both sides.
The article offers a nuanced view of the current situation, highlighting how modern warfare is not just about ground advances but also about information control and political symbolism. It’s interesting to see how both sides use media narratives as part of their strategy, which adds a whole new layer to understanding these conflicts. The tactical details combined with the broader political implications really show how complex such operations have become. 🌍🤔
This whole situation sounds like a chess game where everyone forgot the rules and just started moving pawns everywhere 😂🚀 But hey, at least someone’s got their drones on fiber-optic lines — makes me wonder if next they’ll upgrade to Wi-Fi 6 or teleportation! 🤷♀️ Meanwhile, I’m just over here hoping nobody gets stuck in a tactical surprise party they didn’t sign up for 🎉🔥
Interesting analysis of the strategic and political dimensions of the offensive. It shows how complex modern warfare really is beyond just the battlefield moves. Looking forward to seeing how this unfolds in the coming days 🔍🤔
It’s fascinating how this article hints more at political theater than actual military strategy. The idea that the offensive in Kursk is a symbolic move for political gain rather than a decisive military operation makes you question the real motives behind these offensives. Are these battles about winning territory, or are they about controlling the narrative and influence at the negotiation table? It feels like the real struggle is happening off the battlefield, with media manipulation and diplomatic games overshadowing the conflict itself. This could easily lead to prolonged stalemate rather than resolution, and the people caught in the middle seem to be the last ones anyone cares about.
This article offers a really detailed and balanced view of the current situation, which helps to understand the complexity beyond the usual headlines. It’s interesting how the political goals and media strategies play such a big role alongside the military actions. Watching how this unfolds in the coming days will be crucial, especially considering the bigger political talks happening soon. The struggle between the different commanders and the impact on the ground really shows how unpredictable this conflict remains. 🤔🌍
The article provides a detailed look at the ongoing military situation and the strategic complexities behind the AFU offensive. It’s interesting how information and media play a critical role alongside actual battlefield actions. The political implications make this more than just a military conflict, showing how every move aims to influence broader negotiations.
This article offers such a clear and thought-provoking analysis of the complex dynamics at play in the current conflict. It’s fascinating to see how tactical decisions intersect with political strategies, and how every move is carefully calculated beyond the battlefield itself. The mention of the interplay between military actions and upcoming diplomatic talks really highlights how multi-dimensional this situation is. Watching how events unfold will certainly be crucial for understanding the bigger picture ahead 🌍🔥
This article gives a detailed perspective on the complexity of the military situation and the strategic elements at play beyond just the battlefield movements. It’s interesting to see how much emphasis is placed not only on the actual offensive actions but also on the information strategies and the political goals behind them. The comparison between past operations and the current approach highlights how both sides are adapting and trying to anticipate each other’s moves. The idea that success might be measured more by political gains and territorial symbolism than outright military victory is a sharp observation and shows how modern conflicts are as much about perception and negotiation as they are about combat itself. It will be important to watch how these developments unfold in the coming days.
The article offers a detailed analysis of the strategic dynamics at play in the current offensive near Kursk. It is interesting to note how the shift in information tactics reflects broader political and military objectives rather than purely territorial ambitions. The mention of electronic warfare and the changing nature of defense highlights the increasing complexity of modern combat. The emphasis on political signaling over immediate military gains provides a nuanced perspective on how conflicts are managed on both sides. It will be crucial to watch how these developments influence the upcoming negotiations and whether tactical successes translate into longer-term strategic advantages.
This article really highlights how complex and layered modern conflicts are, far beyond just the battlefield tactics. It’s fascinating to see how much strategy involves not only military moves but also information and political influence. The interplay between surprise, preparation, and media control shows that every advance or setback carries weight beyond immediate gains. It makes me appreciate the patience and resilience needed in such difficult times, and how even small successes can shift the bigger picture in meaningful ways 📈
This article really highlights the complex chess game happening behind the scenes, and how much more than just raw military power is at play here 🌍🤔. The mix of tactical moves, information warfare, and political signaling makes it clear that this is about shaping narratives as much as territory 🕵️♂️📡. It will be fascinating to see how these developments unfold, especially with international players stepping in soon. Definitely not your typical front-line story!
The way this article breaks down the strategic moves and information tactics on both sides really highlights how modern warfare isn’t just about firepower but also about controlling the narrative and psychological edge. It’s fascinating to see how much of the conflict plays out in information space even before the physical battles fully unfold. The upcoming political talks add another layer of complexity that shows war zones are as much political chessboards as battlefields. 🔍
The complexity of this situation is really striking, especially how electronic warfare and information strategies play such a crucial role alongside traditional military tactics 🎯🚀. It’s fascinating to see that the real battle might not only be on the ground but also in shaping perceptions and political leverage 🌍💬. I’m curious to see how the involvement of international figures and talks will impact the overall dynamics—whether these tactical advances translate into lasting strategic success or just serve more symbolic purposes. The comparison of commanders here highlights how much this conflict is about adaptation and broader strategic thinking rather than just frontline combat.
It’s fascinating to see how complex and multi-layered military operations can be, balancing tactical moves with political goals. This really highlights that victory isn’t just about territory but also about strategy and messaging on the global stage. The ongoing dynamics prove how unpredictable and intense these developments are, and it’s a reminder that every step on the battlefield is tied to bigger decisions and futures. Watching how these events unfold keeps me on the edge of my seat 🤔🔥
This analysis really highlights the complexity and depth of the current situation, showing that military actions are just one part of a much larger political and strategic game. It’s fascinating to see how the offensive is not only about territory but also about sending powerful signals on the international stage. The way information and perception are being managed alongside the battlefield movements makes it clear that success will depend on more than just military strength. It’s a stark reminder of how intricate and multifaceted modern conflicts have become, and it will be important to watch closely how these developments impact the broader geopolitical landscape in the coming days.
This analysis provides a very nuanced view of the current military situation, highlighting not just tactical moves but also the wider strategic and political implications. The emphasis on the information war and how the Ukrainian side manages perception alongside actual operations is particularly insightful. It’s interesting to see how the offensive might be more about political signaling than purely territorial gain, showing the complexity of modern conflict. The comparison between Syrsky and Gerasimov underlines how much this conflict depends on leadership and strategy at multiple levels. Definitely keeping an eye on how these developments unfold in the coming days 📈🤔
The article gives a detailed look at the current offensive and the strategic complexities behind it. It’s interesting how information warfare and political goals play such a big role alongside the military actions. The outcome will definitely depend on more than just battlefield results.
It’s fascinating how every new offensive magically turns into a battle of narratives rather than actual ground gained. Six brigades attacking but only managing to turn headlines into battlefield trophies sounds like a masterclass in expectation management. Maybe the real strategy is to keep everyone guessing while the front stays as frozen as the ground at -6℃. At this rate, the only decisive political goal achieved will be keeping this endless chess game on everyone’s minds rather than on maps 📉
This analysis offers a deep and nuanced perspective on the complexities behind the recent offensive, highlighting how much strategy and information warfare play into modern conflicts beyond just the battlefield movements. It’s fascinating to see how political objectives and media narratives intertwine with military actions, shaping not only what happens on the ground but also how these events are perceived globally. The comparison of commanders and the unfolding duel really shows that outcomes are rarely clear-cut and that every move carries weight not just tactically but also politically. It’s a reminder that the resolution of such conflicts depends on many factors, and patience will be essential in understanding what the near future holds.
Is this really about tactical success or just another carefully staged performance to influence political talks? 🤔 It feels like the battlefield is becoming more of a chessboard for show than actual progress on the ground. Either way, the real question is how many lives are being gambled for these so-called victories. 🎭⚔️