JAKARTA - Russia's five-week invasion of Ukraine has proven tough and met with fierce resistance, raising questions about the leadership of Moscow's forces, highlighting the role of two top military officials.
The figures of Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Chief of the General Staff General Valery Gerasimov have been in the spotlight, as the strategy used by Russian troops has come into question, with both being said to bear responsibility.
Since his appointment a decade ago, General Valery Gerasimov has won respect for introducing the 'Grasimov doctrine', an approach that combines the domains of military, diplomacy, culture, information, war and technology to achieve strategic goals.
"He was a pretty wise soldier in my opinion and some of his doctrines made a lot of sense," said retired Brigadier Ben Barry of the IISS think tank, quoted by The National News March 30.
"He made several keynote speeches analyzing the changing character of the war battle, including taking lessons from Russia's operations in Syria."
Leading military strategist Prof Michael Clarke suggested General Gerasimov was not a 'flexible thinker' and not a 'well-promoted young tyro' as the Red Army often did.
General Gerasimov's doctrines have either been ignored or proven to be inapplicable against the planned resistance by Ukraine, or "they clearly didn't train it with a high enough level of detail", the RUSI think tank academic said.
As for retired British officer Colonel Richard Kemp, Russia's only one shortcoming in the campaign in Ukraine, the absence of an overall commander in charge of the attack, was a glaring omission.
"That no one was coordinating everything is a significant failure, especially when you look at the use of reserves, aircraft and artillery that have to be switched between different elements of the campaign. If you don't have someone to coordinate that, it makes the battle a lot more difficult." said Colonel Kemp.
The figure of General Shoigu was also part of the management of the Soviet era, where corruption was endemic.
"Power is so corrupt, so inefficient and the cumulative effect is causing senior levels to be told 'this and this' has been done," Prof Clarke said.
"Everyone said everything was fine, when it really wasn't and when the drills suddenly became combat operations, all the flaws that had been tolerated or covered up suddenly became very important," he said.
General Shoigu wasn't a real general either. The title came with his ministerial post, after he was promoted from the Emergencies Ministry when his predecessor Anatoly Serdyukov was sacked in 2012.
Despite hailing from outside the president's 'secret group' of former KGB officers and of Tuvan-Turkish descent, General Shoigu had formed ties with Putin and was no doubt heavily involved in planning the invasion, albeit in a small group that gave the military little time for complex, offensive plans. with all weapons.
"Demonstrating competence as minister of emergency does make it appear that he has a pair of savior arms. However, a real logistical failure can make General Shoigu suffer," said Brig Barry.
Given his ethnic background, racism may have weakened General Shoigu from within the oligarchy and the former KGB cohort, Prof Clarke said.
"There's a level of racism around him. General Shoigu is also a very introverted character and he's not a real Putin person, like other people. He's a bit detached and it's been rumored for some time that he has heart problems," he said.
Nevertheless, General Shoigu, who is fluent in nine languages, including English and Chinese, led the defense during the 2014 invasion of Crimea and a year later in Syria.
Meanwhile, General Gerasimov has also drawn on operational experience both from the Second Chechen War and in 2014, where he was allegedly the general responsible for the Battle of Illovaisk which killed 1,000 soldiers.
But it seems fake, like in the Cold War. "I watched the Soviet Army in the 1980s in East Germany, where they were a pretty dilapidated group when everyone thought they were Superman," said Colonel Kemp, former commander of the British Army in Afghanistan.
"They were widely feared, but actually, when you look at them up close, the vehicle is rusty, not well maintained, and the soldiers are undisciplined. I suspect it continues," he said.
However, all may not be lost for the generals. After the D-Day landings in 1944, perhaps the most complex military operation planned, it took the Allies seven weeks to get out of Normandy.
"Two things can happen. If Russia gains air superiority, it will make life very difficult for Ukraine's supply movement. And what if President (Volodymyr) Zelenskyy is killed? His leadership is a public projection of national determination and will, in addition to a very social media operation. smart like music stars Rihanna or Adele," said Brig Barry.
President Putin, however, did not stay in the Kremlin for four decades without good instincts.
"My hunch is they are responsible for this," Professor Clarke said. Previous victories in Ukraine, Syria and possibly Libya may also have convinced the high command of their superiority.
Or they may have been given an impossible task by President Putin, Professor Clarke continued.
"They were given the impossible to do and now they are blamed for not doing the impossible."
That the Spetsnaz paratroopers and special forces brigades, considered the equivalent of British and American troops, were defeated in the early days demonstrates terrible planning and intelligence, he said.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
