The expert predicted a powerful counteroffensive of the Russian army: cooler before the storm

– Rustem Maksovich, what is happening at the front now?

– To answer this question, it is necessary to analyze the actions of the enemy, which were taken by him within the framework of the so-called Ukrainian “counterattack”. As far as is known, they prepared two army corps for this. Not having received the expected result in the Kherson direction, they shifted the blow to the Kharkov direction. Yes, they had some success there – how they moved part of our troops closer to the Lugansk border with a bulldozer and continued the onslaught.

When the counter-offensive fizzled out in the Kharkov direction, they again transferred troops to the Kherson direction. If we compare directions, then Kharkiv has purely image goals. The appearance of the enemy there, of course, weakens the supply of our troops, but does not lead to critical consequences. But the Kherson direction is of great strategic importance.

– Why? Because of the bridgehead?

– Yes, because on the right bank of the Dnieper we have a significant foothold, which we can sooner or later use to organize an offensive and create a threat to Nikolaev, Krivoy Rog, and later Odessa. If we do not have this bridgehead, we will have to start all over again – to force the Dnieper again.

– And what is the difficulty of crossing the river?

– Let’s remember, for example, the experience of the Great Patriotic War. The crossing of the Dnieper in 1943 was a grandiose strategic operation. Just think: within one day, 2,200 people were nominated for the title of Hero of the Soviet Union – every soldier in the battalion who was the first to set foot on the right bank received an award.

Now imagine: the right bank is high, and the left one is gentle. And the Armed Forces of Ukraine will be able to fire on the entire opposite side, even with small arms, not to mention artillery or something more substantial.

But, keep in mind, we cannot now throw our soldiers to cross this serious water barrier. We protect the lives of soldiers. At the same time, it is very desirable for us to have a foothold on the other side. After all, in a good way, it is for this bridgehead that the Kherson battle is going on – not for the sake of Kherson itself, but for the sake of holding this bridgehead.

– The battle for Kherson, which, however, has not happened yet, is often compared with the Battle of Stalingrad.

– The experience of the Battle of Stalingrad is very valuable. Stalingrad on the right bank of the Volga, we were able to keep without bridges. We ended up striking right and left against the Hungarian and weaker Italian troops. We surrounded the whole army and it was a huge success. The current situation is a bit reminiscent of Stalingrad, although in terms of scale, of course, everything is now at a lower level.

– Could the transfer of the forces of the Russian army to Belarus have confused the plans of the Armed Forces of Ukraine?

– Information about the creation of a joint group of troops, as well as a potential threat to Kyiv, and maybe even Lviv, of course, makes Ukrainians react. Therefore, they are transferring part of their troops to the Belarusian border in order to prevent a possible strike from the north. And this is beneficial to us.

It is possible that this is an operational camouflage on our part – we simply misled the enemy. Maybe there are no our troops in Belarus, but we demonstrated this in order to pull back the forces, since we cannot hold the defense in the Kherson direction. I dont know. Historians or the military will tell everything later. But now this information is classified as “top secret”, and we can only state what happened.

– Over the past week, the Armed Forces of Ukraine tried several times to attack in the Kherson direction, but were repulsed and suffered heavy losses. Why do they keep doing it?

– If earlier we observed brigade offensives from the side of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, now we are talking about battalion and even company tactical groups offensives. And in these offensive actions of Ukraine, there is a decrease in intensity, pace and impact on our troops.

This does not mean that they have lost their offensive potential. Rather, it happened because we are saving our forces for defensive operations. Recall the Moscow strategic defensive operation. In the autumn of 1941, our ammunition consumption was as follows – one shell per weapon per day. At the front, there was a catastrophic lack of shells, near Moscow, cadets of military schools died in the defense of the city. In the meantime, all the projectiles that were being fired were stockpiled for a powerful counterattack.

In the end it worked out and we won. It is possible that these days, when part of our troops in the minority are defending in the Kherson region, a powerful counterattack is being prepared that will lead to a counteroffensive.

– There is a rather disturbing lull at the front. What can it say?

Silence can never be trusted. There is always a lull before powerful changes at the front. There may be a lull in planning. A new commander of forces in the special operation zone has been appointed, General of the Army Sergei Surovikin, who is faced with the task of turning the tide of combat operations.

To reverse this move, you need to start from the very beginning – assess the situation, the capabilities of the enemy, your troops, etc. While this process is going on at the headquarters, all staff officers are busy planning. It is possible that exactly the same planning began in the Ukrainian army. Therefore, with all responsibility we can say that the calm before the big storm.

– Meanwhile, NATO countries continue to supply Ukraine with all new weapons…

– By the beginning of the summer, we had ground the weapons of the Ukrainian army, by the end of the summer – the stocks of Soviet weapons of the countries of the former Warsaw Pact, including the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania. Now Ukraine is being supplied with ammunition, which the NATO countries have laid down for the period of the war with Russia. And in order to replenish this ammunition, they themselves need to mobilize industry.

So the forces of Ukraine are not unlimited. She has already lost her entire military industry, has ceased to be a sovereign state in the field of military affairs, and has begun to use foreign weapons. In addition, Kyiv admitted that the Anglo-Saxons, under the leadership of the Pentagon, began to plan all operations that, by and large, did not change the state of affairs in Ukraine.

– But we have lost part of the previously liberated territory, and this is a fact …

– Yes, it is very unpleasant, we suffer losses leaving the territory. But speaking purely in a military way, it turns out that the Ukrainians still did not have any serious systemic successes. The same strike on the Crimean bridge was aimed at image “overcomes”, and not systemic ones. I would understand the deep intention of the attack on the Crimean bridge if it had been delivered after the start of the offensive operation in the Zaporozhye direction, on Mariupol, for example, in order to cut our land supply line for troops. In this case, a strike on the Crimean bridge would be an attempt to block our troops in the Crimea, in the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions. Yes, I would say that this is a serious success for the Ukrainian army. But today I can’t say that.