Here’s an important piece of news that is hard to estimate the ramifications of: Ukraine has just appointed a new military leader.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy replaced his top army general on Thursday in what amounts to a major shake-up of the country’s war strategy as the conflict with Russia grinds into its third year and Ukraine grapples with shortages of ammunition and personnel.
In a post on X, Zelenskyy said he thanked Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi — a military leader popular with troops and the general public — for his two years of service as commander-in-chief. “The time for such a renewal is now,” Zelenskyy said.
Zelenskyy appointed Col. Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi, the commander of Ukraine’s ground forces, to lead the army. Syrskyi, 58, has since 2013 been involved in the Ukrainian army’s effort to adopt NATO standards.
Snip.
Zaluzhnyi was highly regarded by his troops and by foreign military officials. Some analysts warned that his exit could bring unwelcome disruption, potentially driving a wedge between the Ukrainian army and politicians, and fueling uncertainty among Kyiv’s Western allies.
There has been little change in positions along the 1,500-kilometer (900-mile) front line over the winter, though the Kremlin’s forces have kept up their attacks at certain points. Faced with a shortfall in anticipated supplies of Western weaponry, Ukraine has been digging defenses, while Moscow has put its economy on a war footing to give its military more muscle.
At this remove, it is impossible to say whether the move is justified or not, or whether it will pay dividends. Ukraine certainly punched above its weight for the first year and a half of the war, but the last half year has been a slog for no significant gains on the ground.
Though I’ve liked what I’ve seen of their attacks on Russian logistical and naval targets, an awful lot of Ukrainian action has been a more competent version of those of their Russian enemies: small scale attacks on small tactical objectives. I am also critical about how some western weapons have been used in a piecemeal fashion against tactical targets; for example, using HIMARS against individual tanks or MLRS systems. Someone with a NATO weapons background might more successfully utilize combined arms attacks for punching through enemy positions. But that’s still probably going to require more western weapons (especially air assets, SAM systems and combat bulldozers) than Ukraine currently seems to have…