A strategic failure is what happened in the Yom Kippur War when the Israeli counterattack penetrated the Egyptian and Syrian front and started attacking the rear. I don't see how gaining 20% of an opponent's territory and entrenching yourself is losing even if Russia thought it would achieve more faster. So far Ukraine hasn't demonstrated an ability to counterattack at scale.
back
3 comments
There are of course degrees of failure. Egypt suffered a strategic collapse.
Russia failed to achieve its primary strategic goals. It has even failed its secondary strategic goals like taking the Donbas.
Instead of a swift conquest of Ukraine, they’re stuck in essentially a stalemate in most of the regions they control. They’re also facing an imminent counter offensive in the south with Kherson (their primary prize claimed so far) increasing cut from the lines of communication.
Meanwhile, years of economic growth have been erased from the Russian economy, it’s diplomatically isolated, militarily discredited, and facing a reinvigorated and enlarged NATO.
I’d call that a strategic failure.
“Russia failed to achieve its primary strategic goals.”
According to who? The war is ongoing and getting worse for Ukraine the long the west doesn’t invest more heavily
> I don't see how gaining 20% of an opponent's territory and entrenching yourself is losing
I guess it depends on two questions: (1) have they accomplished their actual goals? (2) how quickly can they replace the manpower and equipment that they have lost so far?
> So far Ukraine hasn't demonstrated an ability to counterattack at scale
They have been constantly counter attacking.
And with so many Ukrainian soldiers in UK being trained the real offensive is coming soon when they return.