Russia’s slower than intended invasion of Ukraine has revealed many strategic and tactical miscalculations. This will hurt Putin politically and Russia economically.
On February 28, 2022, Anonymous made a wide range of incisive comments:
"My own thoughts are as follows.
Military
1. Preparing the supplies and logistics for an invasion of a 200,000 man army is a big job. Compared to the US in Gulf War let us assume it is 3 to 6 months. That means Putin started planning the Ukraine invasion at the fall of Afghanistan or earlier.
2. Did Putin think Ukraine would surrender quickly, like Kabul? If yes he has miscalculated. Much of Putin’s messaging seemed designed to scare Ukraine into submission. But it hasn’t worked, with no sign of Ukrainian units giving up.
3. Putin’s threats in advance of invasion also gave a lot of warning to the Ukrainians. That gave them time to prepare.
4. Even with 200,000 men, Putin’s forces are spread thin by attacking from the North, East and South. Ukraine is bigger than France and has 40 million population. In WWII the German Army Group South invaded Ukraine with over one million men. There must be lots of gaps for Ukrainian units to slip through.
5. If part of the Russian plan was to cut off the Ukrainian government in Kyiv and replace it with a puppet, that has failed.
6. I wonder if Putin might have made more progress by concentrating his forces in the east and expanding from the breakaway territories? A more pitched battle on a narrower front could have taken; advantage of greater Russian fire support.
7. Getting drawn into city fighting seems very much against Russian interests. Their mobility advantage becomes worthless and it becomes easier for the Ukrainians to knock out Russian tanks.
8. So overall it does not seem to be going well for the Russians so far. Certainly there appears no quick victory in sight.
9. Of course it is hard to see the Ukrainians expelling the Russians, who can simply send more men and equipment. So, a stalemate is looming in my view.
Economic and political
1. At first Nato and the west was reluctant to support Ukraine, especially Germany. Then as the Ukrainian defence started to look determined, respect for their cause has grown, and western countries have felt obliged to support them.
2. The operation may already have had adverse consequences for Russia, driving Finland and Sweden closer to joining Nato. Not joining Nato didn’t do Ukraine much good, so the conclusion for the Scandinavians is fairly obvious.
3. If it does become a stalemate, economically Ukraine will be damaged. Politically Russia, especially Putin, will be damaged. Despite threats, if Russia can’t take Ukraine, their image of military toughness will look like a facade.
4. If Putin’s gambit does not succeed, will other Russian republics try to break away while their army is stretched thin? There are multiple areas that house separatists.
5. Internally, if Putin fails, makes Russia look weak, and stops wealthy oligarchs getting their cash from the west, his internal support might slip. Will the oligarchs’ scheme to replace Putin as a way to break the stalemate.
6. Economically the sanctions will not do much in the short term. But cutting off the cash supply from the west to Russian banks will hurt. It will take years for Russia to build the infrastructure to send its gas east. In the mean time they will bleed a lot of cash.
Those is all only speculation, and Ukraine might collapse tomorrow. But the longer it resists, the higher the human, financial and political costs for Russia, and destruction for Ukraine."