People or technology?
The Russians in the Kursk direction are failing to turn the situation in their favor. During the counterattack, they had hoped to break through the Ukrainian forces and cut off part of them. The Ukrainians made good use of the terrain and successfully maintained their lines of defense.
By breaking through another frontier themselves, they made things much more complicated for the Russians in this direction. The blow to the rear forced the Russians to react quickly and, instead of continuing their counterattack, they were forced to redeploy their forces.
The situation in the direction of Kursk suggests that the Ukrainians are serious about holding on to Russian lands and are not going to let go of this prey easily. This is undoubtedly linked not only to the desire to force the Russians to redeploy more forces in this direction, but also to the desire to complicate matters considerably for Putin if the matter comes to peace talks.
This is a very important decision strategically, so let us hope that the Ukrainians will continue to be able to successfully resist the Russians. In fairness, we have to say that, in the Kursk direction, the Ukrainians are not only defending themselves but are also managing to take some new villages. However, these are tactical achievements.
The situation in the other directions is much more complex, although far from critical or threatening catastrophic consequences. The Russians have made some gains at Vuhledar, although the Ukrainians have been defending very successfully here for almost two years. At Pokrovsk, the Russian gains are minimal. There are other places where we see some Russian progress.
What determines the success of the Russians? The word success should be used more in a conditional sense...
We see a clear change in the Russian tactics. It evolves and changes throughout the war. We can safely call the current actions of the Russians some lessons learned. Increasingly, we are seeing the Russians operating with large forces. Whereas before, a great deal of action was taking place in very small groups or in wave after wave, we are now seeing offensives with increasingly concentrated forces. Where the offensive is being carried out with forces as large as a company or even a battalion.
Such an offensive capability is more strongly supported by aerial, artillery, radio-electronic warfare. So, it automatically poses a much greater threat to the Ukrainian defense. Fortunately, Russian coordination is not so good, as there is a lack of many means. However, it is not a good trend. To conclude, it is clear that the Russians are learning, innovating, experimenting, and time and again finding solutions that lead to success on their side as well.
The Ukrainians, on the other hand, are defending very well and successfully exploiting the opportunity to destroy a moving enemy. The war is increasingly moving into the technological arena, where success increasingly depends on purely technical solutions.
We can say that we are witnessing a radical transformation of the battlefield. Technology is fighting against people and against other technologies.
The Ukrainians have shared their thoughts that this process will only accelerate and that the importance of technology on the battlefield will grow. Already now, reconnaissance drones are identifying targets, classifying them, and transmitting data to the "customer" autonomously with the help of technological solutions. On the frontlines, drones fire on drones while in the air. It is only a matter of time (very soon) before we see autonomous swarms of drones acting on their own, discriminating and selecting targets and the means to destroy them when, where and how. The far more interesting question will be who will control those drones? Humans or technology?
So, as we move towards the fourth year of the war, the dynamics on the battlefield are only going to intensify, the importance and use of technology on both sides is growing and will continue to grow.
