This is reported by the American publication Business Insider.
The author, military commentator Michael Peck, believes that Ukraine has chosen a strategy that echoes the German approach of 80 years ago.
“After the failure of the summer counteroffensive, the exhaustion of ammunition and forces to repel constant Russian attacks, the Ukrainian command speaks of a transition to “active defense.” It hopes to block the Russian advance, looking for opportunities to strike back and regain its positions.
But if this approach could not stop the Red Army from capturing Berlin in 1945, can it save Ukraine today? - the author asks.
Active defense is assumed to be conducted by large units – divisions or armies – while Ukraine conducts operations by smaller units.
The Germans had been actively defending themselves by maneuvering and flanking the advancing Red Army. But now such maneuvering is extremely difficult due to drones and missiles.
In addition, Ukraine, like the Germans, is clearly not ready to leave territory to stretch the enemy's forces and strike their flank, preferring a static defense.
But even if the strategy of active defense is implemented, it does not transfer the strategic initiative to the enemy, as World War II showed.
“The Soviet command could, at will, concentrate overwhelming forces to break through any section of the German lines. The German tank divisions would ultimately be exhausted as they acted like armored fire brigades, racing from one crisis point to another to stop the breakthrough,” the article says.
“For an army desperately trying to conserve resources and looking for any way to sting and embarrass a larger adversary, this is better than sitting passively on the defensive. But if the goal is to defeat Russia and liberate occupied Ukraine, this is not the solution,” the author concludes.
