Look at the Map! Where Are the Ukrainian Military Forces Concentrated and Where Are They Absent?

As I have indicated en passant in prior articles devoted to the unfolding crisis in and around Ukraine, a substantial part of the added value I seek to bring to reporting and analysis is derived from my following the Russian electronic and print media closely, whereas the vast majority of commentators who populate Western television news and op-ed pages only offer up synthetic, rearranged factoids and unsubstantiated claims from the reports and analysis of their peers. Investigative reporting does not exist among mainstream. Reprinting handouts from anonymous sources in high places of the Pentagon and State Department is the closest they come to daily fresh “news.” Such is the nature of the latest front page stories coming from British intelligence about false flag events in Donbas now allegedly being prepared by the Kremlin to justify Russia’s coming invasion.

Last evening’s Vladimir Solovyov talk show on Russian state Channel One provided yet another justification for paying close attention to what they are saying in Moscow. The program was dedicated to the Donbas and included several politicians and political scientists from both Kiev and the Donetsk-Lugansk republics. The most interesting remarks were made by a Russian speaking former Rada member, Spiridon Kilinkarov, who noted that Western mainstream is every day publishing maps showing the positioning of Russian forces at the several common borders of Russia/Belarus and Ukraine. They also carry maps showing the likely routes to be used by the Russian invaders. But Western media are never showing the positions of Ukrainian troops, which one might expect are there to counter Russian threats. The speaker went on to say that now two-thirds of the Ukrainian military or about 150,000 troops are all concentrated on the line of demarcation with Donbas. That is to say, there are almost no Ukrainian forces in the northeast around Kharkiv facing Russian military or to the north of Kiev to face the combined Russian-Belarus military. If this is true, then Mr. Zelensky’s insistence that he does not expect a Russian invasion is justified by Ukrainian boots on the ground. If Russia is holding a pistol to the head of Ukraine, as Boris Johnson stated earlier this week, then Kiev is holding a pistol to the head of the rebel provinces.

Solovyov’s guests further explained that after eight years of facing down one another across about 200 meters of no-man’s land at the line of demarcation, the situation between Ukrainian armed forces and Donbas forces is very tense and volatile, so that it would be very easy for a provocation staged by British or American special forces, who are known to be in the area,  to touch off a major conflagration. This is surely the accident threatening to upset the ongoing negotiations between the United States and NATO on one side and Russia on the other side. 

The guests further assert that in effect the Ukrainian forces at the line of demarcation are not under the control of President Zelensky, whose power is very circumscribed by other political actors, oligarchs and militia chiefs in Kiev, not to mention by U.S. and U.K. forces on the ground in his country.

Many of these general observations cannot be verified from here. But the map of Ukrainian military positions can be verified against images from US spy satellites. I challenge The New York Times, the Financial Times and others to post such maps on their pages now.

As for the host, Vladimir Solovyov, he continues pressing a hard line Russian response of action, not words to US provocations such as yesterday’s announcement by White House Press Secretary Psaki of the fake video Russia is supposedly preparing to justify an invasion. He used the show to urge imposition by Russia of a ‘total economic blockade’ of Ukraine, putting an end to the dozens of daily flights from the West carrying many tons of armaments. Given that Russia views the present security crisis around Ukraine as a replay of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, such a blockade would be entirely in keeping with historical precedent. It would mean, of course, establishing a no-fly zone over Ukraine, which Russia has the military capability to declare and enforce.

Gilbert Doctorow is a Brussels-based political analyst. His latest book is Does Russia Have a Future? Reprinted with permission from his blog.

© Gilbert Doctorow, 2021

3 thoughts on “Look at the Map! Where Are the Ukrainian Military Forces Concentrated and Where Are They Absent?”

  1. Scott Ritter just published another excellent piece on how war with Russia will result in an American defeat. In fact, he calls it a “rout”. Andrei Martyanov recommends this article, noting that other military experts agree. I recommend this article, too.

    A war with Russia would be unlike anything the US and NATO have ever experienced
    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/548322-war-russia-us-nato/

    The principal goal of the government of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is what he terms the “de-occupation” of Crimea. While this goal has, in the past, been couched in terms of diplomacy – “[t]he synergy of our efforts must force Russia to negotiate the return of our peninsula,” Zelensky told the Crimea Platform, a Ukrainian forum focused on regaining control over Crimea – the reality is his strategy for return is a purely military one, in which Russia has been identified as a “military adversary”, and the accomplishment of which can only be achieved through NATO membership.

    As someone who once trained to fight the Soviet Army, I can attest that a war with Russia would be unlike anything the US military has experienced – ever. The US military is neither organized, trained, nor equipped to fight its Russian counterparts. Nor does it possess doctrine capable of supporting large-scale combined arms conflict. If the US was to be drawn into a conventional ground war with Russia, it would find itself facing defeat on a scale unprecedented in American military history. In short, it would be a rout.

  2. Wow. Gilbert finally acknowledges – due to the fact that a huge number of people familiar with the situation already know it, and now it’s being openly stated on Russian television – that “This is surely the accident threatening to upset the ongoing negotiations between the United States and NATO on one side and Russia on the other side”.

    No duh. What have I, Scott Ritter, The Saker, Moon of Alabama, Pepe Escobar and many other commentators been saying for the last three months?

    Except it’s not an accident. This is very likely the Plan. Some people suggest that Zelensky moved his troops to the contact line in spring, 2021, for some other reason, such as internal politics or to shake down the West for more money or to accelerate Ukraine’s acceptance into NATO. Sure, that’s possible. But the US didn’t raise the specter of a “Russian invasion” last spring. Russia moved its forces presumably because they had intelligence that Ukraine was planning an actual move. Sure, it could have been due diligence. But where is the evidence that Ukraine did not intend a new offensive? If my concept is speculation, so is any other interpretation.

    Then in the fall the US started what is obviously an intelligence operation to call Russia’s incremental slow buildup of forces to counter NATO in European Russia as a “Russian invasion.” Then they scheduled massive NATO exercises in Ukraine for 2022. Now the US has gone unhinged on the propaganda, claiming Russia is the one planning a false flag. Sure, that’s possible, too.

    But this all starts to look *exactly* like the run up to the 2003 Iraq war – not to mention numerous similar events in US history like the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

    Alexander Mercouris in the Consortium News live panel with Scott Ritter suggested that the Ukraine military on the contact line is too demoralized to start an offensive. I disagree. Solders do what they’re told. If the political or military leaders tell them to advance, they’ll advance. If some neo-Nazi or jihadist battalion or US mercenary group gets told to make a provocative incursion, they’ll do it. And they have plenty of morale. Once started and Donbass reacts, the situation will escalate on its own. It isn’t even necessary for the Ukraine government to authorize a provocation – the far right battalions and others can do it on their own.

    Mercouris also suggests that Russia will be instantly aware of any Ukrainian preparation for an offensive. That’s true. Which is why I suggest that Russia’s moves in spring, 2021, were based on real intelligence, not just “due diligence.” Also, if a provocation is started by a smaller group of Ukraine forces – and that could be as small as a half dozen men – Russian intelligence might very well miss the preparation or the implications of the preparation. Intelligence is not a precise science as the CIA has repeatedly demonstrated. I note that Russia explicitly warned of US mercenaries preparing a provocation in December. Real intelligence or propaganda no different than the US claim? Who knows?

    The CIA and neocon goal here is not to win an assault on Donbass. It is to start one that draws Russia in. That’s it. It doesn’t even matter if Russia actually does respond. The CIA and neocons can say Russia did, just like they did in 2014-2015.

    The only person who can rein in the CIA and neocons is Biden. So where does anyone see any evidence of that? Instead, his administration continues to run a psyops campaign against Russia with no signs of slowing down (other than reducing the “imminent” rhetoric which is meaningless since it was immediately followed by the “Russian false flag” scare.)

    We’ll see.

Comments are closed.