Michael Kofman: ‘After Kherson, gains for Ukraine will come at slower pace’

by Olga Rudenko

Editor’s note: The Kyiv Independent asked Michael Kofman, military analyst and Research Program Director in the Russia Studies Program at CNA, to comment on what retaking Kherson means for the future of the war. Watch Michael Kofman speak at the panel discussion that took place in Kyiv on Oct. 25: “War and Storytelling in Ukraine.”

The Kyiv Independent: Now that the Ukrainian forces have retaken Kherson, what prospects does it open for the counteroffensive? How can Ukraine use this momentum?  

Michael Kofman: I think Ukraine has the initiative, and from the standpoint of morale it does have momentum. Ukraine may now shift the bulk of the forces there to a different front, but they likely need rest and refit. The fighting in Kherson was grinding and costly. 

As winter approaches, November and December in particular are difficult months to conduct offensives. Russian forces will seek to entrench for the winter, using the Dnieper (Dnipro River) as a natural defensive barrier in the south. In the east their position remains vulnerable, trying to retain a defensive line between Troitske, Svatove, Kreminna. It may be smart for Ukraine to keep pushing now, before mobilization can increase Russian manpower availability in 3-4 months, but weather conditions and force availability may make that unsound. The short answer is, it depends.

Ukraine can take advantage of new positions, moving up HIMARS systems, to range ~70km into Kherson. This will allow them to steadily eat away at Russian forces there, perhaps setting up a southern advance in Zaporizhia (Oblast) later on. However, I suspect the river will serve to shift operations east. 

The Kyiv Independent: Do you think that we can expect any more territorial gains for the Ukrainian forces soon? Or does taking Kherson mean that everything else will come much more difficult?  

Michael Kofman: Generally, yes, but doubtfully on the scale seen in Kharkiv and Kherson. I expect there will be gains, just that these may come at a slower pace. I think there are opportunities in Luhansk (Oblast), but in general I suspect that future offensives are likely to be against a more consolidated Russian force with less territory to defend. Kherson was not an easy battle, and after Kherson offensives are likely to be just as difficult, if not more so. But it depends. Russia may face shortage of ammunition, and experience morale problems with mobilized personnel over the course of the winter. 

The Russian goal seems to be to entrench and defend for the next several months, try to reconstitute the force, and then attempt a new offensive in the Donbas in 2023. Ukraine can disrupt this process by keeping up pressure over the winter. I’m skeptical that Russia can restore offensive potential, but they may be able to extend the war. Depends on the net effect of mobilization and the extent to which Ukraine receives sustained material assistance from the West.

The Kyiv Independent: What effect can retreat from Kherson have on the Russian military?  

Michael Kofman: Defeat is never good for morale, but the situation in Kherson was different from Izyum and Lyman. It was an organized retreat, not a rout as we saw in Izyum, with high casualties, and stores of equipment abandoned. Russia appears to have withdrawn the bulk of their remaining forces and equipment. Although more evidence will be available in the coming week to better judge what happened. This is just an initial impression. Unfortunately that means Ukraine will have to face them again, perhaps in a campaign east of the Dnieper. 

The Russian military didn’t leave unscathed, but nonetheless, it left in an organized fashion over the course of weeks. Hence Kherson is a significant victory, but Ukraine’s approach suggests a tradeoff was made between trying to prevent the Russian withdrawal, and avoiding a costly battle for the city of Kherson. This strategy preserved Ukrainian forces for future offensives, and did not entail destroying the city. Overall, I think that strategy was quite sound, and reflected better on Ukrainian military leadership when compared to Russian commanders who often choose to throw away the lives of their own men.

The Kyiv Independent: Do you think that Russians conducted the retreat from Kherson in a way that is optimal for the regime’s political future? Russian ideologist Alexander Dugin hinted that Putin might have to pay for the failures of the war with his life – and promptly deleted the post.  

Michael Kofman: I think that (Russian General Sergey) Surovikin learned from prior defeats to socialize the need for retreat earlier, setting expectations, and that he handled this defeat better than predecessors. It is still embarrassing, since Russia has abandoned the only regional capital they annexed. Putin’s decision to annex territory that Russian forces do not control, and cannot defend, will be studied for years to come as an example of what not to do. It is one of the many bewildering aspects of Russian strategy, or lack thereof, in this war. As for Dugin, who truly cares what he thinks? I think his significance is grossly overstated in the West relative to his actual relevance in Russia, but that’s just one person’s opinion. 

Olga Rudenko

Editor-in-chief

Olga Rudenko is the chief editor of the Kyiv Independent, an award-winning media start-up launched in November 2021 by the former editorial team of the Kyiv Post. Olga is the former deputy chief editor of the Kyiv Post. She has written for global publications, and was a fellow at the Chicago Booth School of Business in 2021.

https://kyivindependent.com/national/michael-kofman-after-kherson-gains-for-ukraine-will-come-at-slower-pace

6 comments

  1. “Putin’s decision to annex territory that Russian forces do not control, and cannot defend, will be studied for years to come as an example of what not to do.”

    The defeat of the russian gang in Kherson and Kharkiv will be studied by military experts for years to come. How the use of deception and superior military tactics will overcome WW1 tactics every time.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. I’m sorry, but I put the predictions about how long or short or easy or hard the war will be in the same place I put predictions about the deranged little monkey’s fate – if he dies, gets killed, gets deposed, gets imprisoned – into the rubbish bin.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Putler is indeed planning a huge offensive in spring; which may include Kyiv. Which is why his forces must be decimated throughout the winter.
    To achieve this, the defenders absolutely must have much more heavy artillery; including HIMARS with ATTACM’s.
    Putler can and will go for years, so he’s got to be stopped right now.
    Western supplied air defences must go into overdrive.
    Putler is doubtless encouraged by Trumpkov’s decision to run in 2024. Trumpkov and his camp followers have already signaled no more help for Ukraine.

    Liked by 2 people

      • Possibly you missed this :

        “Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday described Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine as “genius” and “savvy,” praising his onetime counterpart for a move that has spurred sanctions and universal condemnation from the U.S. government and its trans-Atlantic allies.
        “I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”

        Now that is a truly horrendous example of gloating at death and misery. Worse than a kremtroll. Sad and really painful to read.

        No US president in history has repeatedly praised a fascist dictator. With that stunning lack of empathy, it’s possible that he’s a clinical psychopath, like the tiny poisoner.

        This is a man who sincerely believes that Crimea is Russia, that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered in 2016.

        A man whose son boasts of the $billions of criminal RuZZian money invested in the family business.

        What could possibly go wrong?

        His biggest supporters; like Taylor-Greene and Carlson, hate Ukraine more than Simonyan does. And she’s paid to hate!

        His rival DiSantis, is likely to be little better. Pence is much better but cannot command the level of support needed. Gabbard may be invited to be Trumpkov’s running mate, just to make things worse.

        The men that will help Ukraine: Wicker, Graham, McConnell, Rubio etc, don’t seem to have a chance of running, let alone winning.

        If putler’s Holocaust continues, (of course I pray to God that it will end like yesterday), a vote for Trumpkov for Ukrainians will be similar in effect to a Jew voting for Hitler in 1932.

        Biden’s General Mark Milley, is now pushing for a Kissinger-type “land for peace” deal. I will post it. It’s appalling.

        Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.