How Ukraine Politically Outmaneuvered, Operationally Outperformed, and Tactically Humiliated Russia

 

Has Ukraine's star risen while Russia's has faded, akin to a celestial shift in power? We have been observing how, in the Black Sea's operational theater, Ukraine assumes the role of a conductor orchestrating a harmonious symphony, while Russia grapples to find its notes.

War is a complex and intricate endeavor, far removed from the simplistic portrayals often seen in Hollywood movies. In reality, there are rarely clearly defined "front lines" that can be easily breached through heroic acts. The quest to determine winners and losers in the midst of modern warfare is further complicated by the slow-motion analysis and often inaccurate interpretation of events, akin to the use of Video Assistant Referees(VAR) in sports. The fog of war is an undeniable reality, and with the advancement of technology, it becomes even more bewildering and challenging to navigate.

Amidst the intricate web of complexity and uncertainty, the ongoing events in Crimea unquestionably emerge as profoundly significant. Over the past year, a sequence of extraordinary incidents has unfolded before our eyes. Ukrainian special forces demonstrated their prowess by effectively disabling critical radar systems in August. Subsequently, Ukraine leveraged UK-supplied Storm Shadow strikes to successfully eliminate a Kilo-class submarine and a Ropucha-class landing ship. In a meticulously timed move, a follow-up strike obliterated a headquarters housing retreating senior staff in September. Moreover, the audacious special forces jet-ski raid in October exhibited levels of courage and daring akin to the legendary Cockleshell Heroes. These unfolding developments shed light on the sheer gravity of the situation in Crimea, where the distinction between bold heroism and strategic maneuvering becomes increasingly blurred.

Sevastopol is hanging on as a military stronghold, but it has been hit hard, and my American military contacts are well aware of it. Right now, there are five warships stationed there, but it is facing some serious challenges. It is not the first time we have seen military bases stubbornly defended long after they have lost their practical value, often driven by pride or emotions. One thing is for sure, life at that naval base can't be much fun these days.

Britain's Armed Forces Minister, James Heappey, recently described Russia's Black Sea Fleet as 'functionally defeated.' In naval warfare, you can render an enemy ship combat-ineffective without sinking it. This could mean taking out a major weapon system, crippling the operations room, or seriously damaging its ability to move – essentially making it useless. If that is what Heappey meant by 'functionally defeated,' then Sevastopol certainly fits the bill. But remember, Sevastopol is just one piece of the puzzle. As much as jet skis and flags make headlines, they won't be enough to retake Crimea. What about the rest of the Black Sea Fleet? They may be displaced, but they are still in the game. Their ability to disrupt and deter shipping, especially Ukraine's grain exports, has been weakened, but it has not completely shut down.

Russia's ability to send warships to harass and intercept vessels in the northwestern Black Sea is almost nonexistent right now. However, the credit for this goes more to Ukraine's superior weaponry and surveillance capabilities than anything happening in Sevastopol. But it is not a total shutdown, and the Kremlin has shown it is willing to take significant losses if they think it is necessary.

Over in Novorossiysk, there are seven Kalibr cruise missile launchers, including three Kilos that can lay mines. The tricky part about these assets is that their specific base location in the Black Sea isn't as important. Kalibr missiles have the range to strike from just about anywhere, and a submarine laying mines isn't easily deterred by Ukrainian missiles. They also have some maritime air assets, although these are few in number and getting up there in years.

Mines play a pivotal role in this overarching strategy. They offer a cost-effective means of exerting control over vital sea lanes, inducing heightened risks and subsequently inflating insurance premiums for vessels traversing those waters. What makes them particularly unsettling is their elusive nature, often lurking undetected and unaccounted for, drifting ominously into harm's way. Given this context, the recent decision by the British Royal Navy to sell two minehunters to Romania appears well-founded. While discussions regarding the entry of NATO mine countermeasures groups into the Black Sea may currently seem premature, it is increasingly probable that the exigencies of mine clearance at sea will necessitate such cooperation in the near future.

Putin's justification for the annexation of Crimea rested on the premise that it was of paramount strategic importance. However, if the safety of Russia's fleet in the region is compromised, then the question arises: at what juncture does the entire peninsula transform into just another illegally seized portion of Ukrainian territory, warranting its return? Moreover, ongoing discussions about constructing a naval base along the Black Sea coast of Abkhazia, a breakaway region of Georgia, can only add to the Kremlin's political discomfort.

In terms of operational dynamics, the Ukrainian forces currently maintain the upper hand in the Black Sea. Russia finds itself compelled to respond in a disjointed manner, marked by fractured command and control structures, haphazard missions, and suboptimal planning. The loss of Sevastopol only exacerbates this predicament. Tactically, the Ukrainians exhibit remarkable levels of ingenuity and adaptability, executing coordinated multi-domain attacks that blend conventional and innovative weapon systems. Navies and procurement departments worldwide would do well to scrutinize these lessons at a fundamental level.

Sunk Morale

Has the balance shifted to the extent that Ukraine can now accomplish its strategic objectives while Russia cannot? It is worth noting that the UK's Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) recently declared that the threat to British shipping remains at the highest level, underscoring the continuing dangers in the region. While Sevastopol has undoubtedly suffered significant damage, the question remains: does Ukraine possess sufficient assets to strike at Crimea at will, rendering it too perilous for the 800,000 Russians residing there? The answer, for now, remains elusive.

In the absence of a sensational 'Hollywood-style breakthrough' on the land front, there is a palpable danger that the focus of attention has been redirected elsewhere, potentially obscuring the profound shifts unfolding beneath the surface. However, recent events in Crimea, particularly in Sevastopol, cannot be underestimated in terms of their far-reaching consequences. Russia finds itself ensnared in a web of political humiliation, operational intricacies, and tactical setbacks. The morale within the Black Sea Fleet, once formidable, has likely hit an all-time low. Yet, the litmus test remains whether these developments will culminate in the restoration of a semblance of freedom of navigation in the Black Sea, and it is here that I must exercise caution in labeling them as an unequivocal strategic turning point—at least, for the time being.

The absence of a spectacular breakthrough on the ground should not overshadow the significance of these maritime developments. While Russia grapples with the repercussions of its actions in Crimea, including the decaying state of its Black Sea Fleet, the international community's ability to ensure the unfettered movement of ships in these contested waters remains the ultimate yardstick of change. Until this vital aspect is decisively altered, it may be premature to definitively brand these events as a watershed moment in the larger geopolitical narrative, reminding us that the multifaceted dynamics of conflict often unfold beyond the confines of Hollywood-style heroics.