Huge pro-EU rally grips Ukraine

[Oberon]

I'd be interested, compare it with the one I made a while back. Might even be in this thread somewhere...

[ikalugin]

Declaimer - this is not a real plan, discussion is hypo theoretical only. Ukraine is used as an example because it is thread relevant and because it is the ongoing conflict we may speculate about. As this is a preliminary and very crude work, improvements and details would come later.

In this post I do not comment on the political part of the operation, only the theoretical military aspects.

http://www.scribblemaps.com/maps/vie...lan/pXINphrYfh
well I drew this behind a cup of my breakfast tea. While this map is horribly crude, I could try to draw a better one later. Map key - blue areas are the areas held by Ukrainian Counter Terrorist Operation. Red circles - air assault and hasty defence areas, red squares - airborne assaults/airlift areas, red triangle - the sea borne assault. The general idea is:
- to provide a deep encirclement of Ukrainian CTO troops while threatening Kiev (if not outright securing it), securing the Russia friendly territory (south east of Ukraine).

Details:
Preparation of troops:
- deployement of the forces and means.
- Day-1 air offensive, tactical air and missile strikes against the C3I, air defence and missile troops elements, airfields, remote mine laying on selected axis.

1) Part one - encirclement and reduction of CTO troops. This is achieved by the rapid advancement of an operational combined arms grouping - 1st CAA, precluded by the airborne landings - 1st Airborne Regiment Tactical Group, the flank security against possible actions by the CTO troops is achieved by dropping air assault groupings, backing them up with the anti tank teams, deploying obstacles (such as anti tank mine fields), keeping a powerful armoured and mobile anti tank reserve.

Depth of this operation is approx 250km, which is within a single day of advance in the assumed conditions (lack of organised and credible defence, good roads, neutral or friendly air). Flank frontage is approx on the same scale, with half a dozen roads leading through it.

2) Part two - threatening Kiev. This part of the operation precludes any meaningful efforts to support the CTO grouping by the Ukrainian Loyalist forces. As such this is a secondary, deceptive effort and is conducted by the 2nd operational grouping - 2nd CAA.

This attack is precluded by the airborne assault against the Borispol airport. If successful - the overall grouping has the objective of holding Kiev, the airport and the Dnepr river crossings.

3) Part three - securing the Russia friendly areas. This is conducted by the 3rd operational grouping - 3rd CAA, operating out of Crimea. The objective is to reach the Dnepr line, secure crossings, link up with the sea borne assault force in Odessa/Nikolaev and the 1st CAA in the north. Due to the dispersion of effort on 3 operational axis, this grouping is separated into 4 task forces and a mobile reserve. The TF1 is tasked with linking up with Odessa and Nikolaev sea borne assault forces, TF2 is tasked with securing the crossings across Dnepr river in Herson (and acts as forward guard for TF1), TF3 is tasked with advancing towards Melitopol, TF4 is tasked with linking up with the 1st CAA and securing Zaporozhie Dnepr crossings.

1st CAA consists of:
-1 TnkDiv.
-2 MRBds.
-Airborne regiment task force.
-2 VDV Airborne regiments acting as light mech inf.
-Air Assault Brigade.
-2 Helicopter Brigades.
-SpecBd.
-various engineer, sapper, anti tank and support units.

2nd CAA consistes of:
- TnkBd.
- MRBd.
- Airborne regiment Task force.
- SpecBd.
-various engineer, sapper, anti tank and support units.

3rd CAA consists of:
- TF1
--Naval Infantry Brigade (split into 2 Battalion Tactical Groups).
--MRBd (again split into 2 BTCs).
--2 VDV Airborne regiments acting as light mech infantry.
--various engineer, sapper, anti tank and support units.
- TF2
--MRBd
-various engineer, sapper, anti tank and support units.
- TF3
--2 MRBd
--SpecBd
--various engineer, sapper, anti tank and support units.
- TF4
--TnkBd
--MRBd
--various engineer, sapper, anti tank and support units.

I could break this up further.

p.s. looks like my map is dead
p.p.s. I could expand/refine this if need be, as this is very -just poped into my mind- so most likely very flawed.

[Skybird]

Checking a map reveals that the Crimean peninsula roughly equals Switzerland in size, and the two regions around Luhansk and Donezk that are under separatist control (and are not under pressure by Ukrainian army currently, which had suffered several setbacks in recent weeks anyway), may equla roughly the size of the modern Czech Republik after the split from Slovakia.

I think in an environment where the population is friendly or at least neutral, a Russian force of 1-2 divisions could hold up the Ukrainian army. Even conquer it from them.

However, the bigger concern for Kiev is not a Russian invasion, but a Russian-supported militia or guerilla type of opponent which uses modern military weaponry and heavy platforms. Several weeks ago it were such forces that apparently have delivered the Ukrainians extremely serious losses, more or less wiping out or enforcing the surrender/self-dismantling of several Ukrainian brigade-sized units.

Moscow must not invade the the SouthEast of the Ukraine if Poroshenko launches an attack - it is sufficient to support the rebels and secure their supply with ammunition, weapons, intel, and modern weapons.

The current heavy Russian activity along the border seems to be related to an establishing of comprehensive and dense defensive fortification. At least that is what NATO now complains about. Putin wants to prepare against any Ukrainian manouvering across the border, or an Ukrainian distant future where parts of the country will have joined NATO. See more of this Russian action when NATO starts to send weapons to Kiev.

What we see in general imo is a cementation of the de facto splitting-up of the Ukraine. It is unimaginable that Luhansk, Donezk and the Crimean peninsula will return to the Ukraine after all what has happened. The facts have been created. Like them, or not - they will not change. Regarding the Crimean, I am okay with it. Regarding the other two regions, it depends on whether the rebvels really have the majority of the population behind them, or not. Their referndum claimed a 70% or 80% majority behind them - but there were no numbers mentioned that revealed how many of the people actually went to the voting, or did I miss these numbers? If the rebels indeed would have a solid majority of the regional population behind them, then Kiev has no moral or other claim to make there, and should give it up. >If<, that is.

Finally it has to be mentioned that the Russian forces seem to have learned a lot in the past ten years or so. Western militaries get quoted repeatedly with expressing their surprise at how "damn fast" they are moving, and how well coordinated they even move huge formations on theatre level. The modenrisation of forces and the big investemnt in better communication networks seems to pay off for Russia, also changes in the military doctrine. I cannot see the Ukrainains being a match for them even if Russian forces would fight in numerical inferiority. And due to its lack of financial assets it is unlikely that the Ukraine will adapt to this fast.

[XabbaRus]

Slightly off topic here, but I read that NATO were getting their knickers in a twist about the Serb-Russian anti terrorist exercise that lasted one day.

However when Russia got upset about a far larger NATO exercise in Poland they were basically told where to stick it. The whole thing is a hypocritical mess.

On a connected note what is the opinion of Brown-Moses of bellingcat citizen journalism fame? The now go to weapon expert darling of the media. Regardless that he has no engineering training or education in munitions etc. Just lots of youtube videos.

[ikalugin]

Skybird, most population of Ukraine is passive and thus rising up substantial local forces would be hard.

Hence my idea of delivering maximum political shock (Russian tanks and VDV in Kiev, most of South-East secured by Russian forces) on day 1, offering surrender to individual CTO forces groupings on day 2.

Then swinging the blocking groupings to the outer encirclement perimeter and moving the mobile forces to isolate the non surrendering CTO forces and reducing them.

[Oberon]

It's a good strategy. I envisioned a similar move, but based more around capturing the airfields in the east with airmobile groups and establishing a stop line from Kharkov down to the Dneiper. I didn't envision threatening Kiev, but that's a strategically sound move in order to draw forces away from the east of Ukraine.
I also didn't factor in Odessa, possibly because at that time it was still relatively calm there. I don't know if Odessa could be held via sea-link purely, so you'd have to establish an overland route which would be open to interdiction. Personally, if it was up to me I'd leave Odessa alone and focus on taking eastern Ukraine. Neutralise the naval forces around Odessa though, perhaps naval mines and the like, but no actual naval invasion.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Oberon

It's a good strategy. I envisioned a similar move, but based more around capturing the airfields in the east with airmobile groups and establishing a stop line from Kharkov down to the Dneiper. I didn't envision threatening Kiev, but that's a strategically sound move in order to draw forces away from the east of Ukraine.
I also didn't factor in Odessa, possibly because at that time it was still relatively calm there. I don't know if Odessa could be held via sea-link purely, so you'd have to establish an overland route which would be open to interdiction. Personally, if it was up to me I'd leave Odessa alone and focus on taking eastern Ukraine. Neutralise the naval forces around Odessa though, perhaps naval mines and the like, but no actual naval invasion.

Large airdrops are sadly not possible, Russia currently has sufficient air lift capacity to air drop a regiment of VDV. Hence I go for 2 air drops (Battalion Tactical Groups) to capture the airfields (with Specnas infiltrator's support) and then airlift the remaining combat power of their parent regiments.

Airlifts/drops/assaults alone would not be capable of reliably defeating the CTO forces, as you would atleast need an armoured/mobile anti tank reserve to back such essentially static defences up. And if you plan to reduce the demoralised CTO forces later - you would need substantial mechanised presence on the ground. This is why I use air assault forces, supported by mobile blocking detachments and mobile reserves to conduct isolation, first within the inner ring of encirclement (to prevent the break out of CTO forces), then in the outer ring (to prevent their reinforcement), while strong mechanised grouping reduces CTO forces.

The Kiev part is not to draw CTO forces from Donbas region, but to demoralise CTO forces, destroy or capture Ukrainian leadership, draw any new units formed by the Ukrainian Loyalists to Kiev region and not South-East of Ukraine.

Capturing Odessa would make the logistical aid to the Ukraine by external parties that much harder, as then Ukraine would loose it's last port. It would also link up with Transnistria and secure Crimea for good.

[mapuc]

My hopes goes up and down

Now I have bad feelings about the situation right now.

Markus

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

Large airdrops are sadly not possible, Russia currently has sufficient air lift capacity to air drop a regiment of VDV. Hence I go for 2 air drops (Battalion Tactical Groups) to capture the airfields (with Specnas infiltrator's support) and then airlift the remaining combat power of their parent regiments.

Airlifts/drops/assaults alone would not be capable of reliably defeating the CTO forces, as you would atleast need an armoured/mobile anti tank reserve to back such essentially static defences up. And if you plan to reduce the demoralised CTO forces later - you would need substantial mechanised presence on the ground. This is why I use air assault forces, supported by mobile blocking detachments and mobile reserves to conduct isolation, first within the inner ring of encirclement (to prevent the break out of CTO forces), then in the outer ring (to prevent their reinforcement), while strong mechanised grouping reduces CTO forces.

The Kiev part is not to draw CTO forces from Donbas region, but to demoralise CTO forces, destroy or capture Ukrainian leadership, draw any new units formed by the Ukrainian Loyalists to Kiev region and not South-East of Ukraine.

Capturing Odessa would make the logistical aid to the Ukraine by external parties that much harder, as then Ukraine would loose it's last port. It would also link up with Transnistria and secure Crimea for good.

I was thinking more mobile helicopter drops at specific airfields in the eastern Ukraine, Mi-24 style. Then the main armoured forces push through and meet up with the airfields which can be used for forward operating bases and supply locations.

Demoralising might go one of either way, you've already seen in this thread how rabidly anti-Russia some people in Eastern Europe are, if Russia outright invades the Ukraine then this is going to stir up great anti-Russian sentiment and might wind up increasing morale rather than decreasing it. Sort of how Russia responded during the Great Patriotic War.

I feel Odessa might be a bridge too far, looking at the overall strategic map, I have no doubt that Russia could take Odessa, but I think that it would stick out a bit too much and put a lot of pressure on Moldova which in turn would ripple through NATO and increase tensions more than it would if the Russian forces stopped at the Dneiper.

[Catfish]

Only that Russia has as much interest in "taking the Ukraine", as it will "invade" Lithuania, Estland or Poland

Am i the only one who wants to vomit, when i see our media "report" about the Ukraine ?

[Oberon]

I think it depends really, I mean I honestly didn't think Russia would take Crimea, so I'm not going to turn around and say for definite that they're not going to take Eastern Ukraine either.

Not painting them as the Soviet bear, unlike others, but also not saying that it's impossible that they won't act to safeguard their interests in the region.

[August]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

Skybird, most population of Ukraine is passive and thus rising up substantial local forces would be hard.

Hence my idea of delivering maximum political shock (Russian tanks and VDV in Kiev, most of South-East secured by Russian forces) on day 1, offering surrender to individual CTO forces groupings on day 2.

Then swinging the blocking groupings to the outer encirclement perimeter and moving the mobile forces to isolate the non surrendering CTO forces and reducing them.

That's when Ukraine pulls out those Soviet nukes they held back when the USSR fell and levels Moscow.

[Catfish]

In the meantime, our [insert insult here] chancellor Merkel has declared the cold war, in Brisbane. Not in the german people's name, but because she could, and was probably forced to.

Only in german, sorry, but i did not find ONE freakin article in the anglo-saxon media, criticising this.

http://www.geolitico.de/2014/11/17/m...-kalten-krieg/

I like America, as an idea, but these imperial politics and behaviour suck big time. And can't our german government finally stop to lick their whatsover ?

[Skybird]

Interfax should have quoted Putin with a slight variation of something Al Capone once said. During the inspection of a tank factory or weapon factory, Putin should have said: "Politeness is nice, but politeness plus weapons get you further."

Who said that guy has no sense of humour?

During the beginning of the so-called little green men appearing on the Crimean peninsula, he once should have described them as "polite men".

Admitted, if you do not know that quote by Capone, you don't get the point in these jokes.

[August]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I think it depends really, I mean I honestly didn't think Russia would take Crimea, so I'm not going to turn around and say for definite that they're not going to take Eastern Ukraine either.

Well I think they will take eastern Ukraine and I believe the west will let them get away with it.

Their always formidable propaganda machine has managed to muddy up the waters sufficiently that a fair number of people in the west now believe them over their own governments, their own news media not to mention the last 160 years of almost non stop Russian expansionism.