For the first time since the invasion, the Kremlin has also admitted defeat: At first – as at the beginning of the war with the withdrawal from the Kyiv region – there was only talk of a regrouping of the troops. After enormous criticism of this portrayal, the Russian leadership seems to be trying to minimize the damage: they are trying to downplay the defeat.
At the same time, and observers deduce this from the public discussions on state television, a “blame game” has also begun: He is trying to shift the blame for the wrong decisions onto consultants who would have completely misjudged the situation. For the first time, voices can be heard in the Russian media that the war cannot be won in this way.
Head rolls required
Ultra-nationalist hardliners and the pro-invasion military bloggers, who have meanwhile reached a wide audience, are now going further: they are demanding a heads-roll in the military leadership. The allegations range from insufficient preparation of the army to incompetent leadership and even treason.
Among other things, the resignations of Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Chief of Staff Valery Gerasimov are being demanded. Putin recently kept his distance from Shoigu. At the same time, deposing him would be an admission of failure, political scientist and Russia expert Gerhard Mangott pointed out in the ZIB2 interview on Tuesday.
Russia expert on criticism of “military operation”
Russia expert Gerhard Mangott, Professor of International Relations at the University of Innsbruck, talks regarding the increasing criticism in Russia of the “military operation” in Ukraine.
million readers
For the Kremlin, the military bloggers are something like the ghosts that you have summoned yourself. At first, they spread success stories somewhere between facts and propaganda, but in the past few weeks and months, more and more critical voices have been mixed in, which have already become very loud regarding some of the Russian army’s strategic mistakes. And at the same time, their influence has increased enormously: Some of the bloggers now have more than two million readers, as the New York Times reports.
Bloggers as a “thorn in the side” of the Kremlin
“The war has given them a new sense of solidarity with the authorities and confidence that they now have the right to address their demands to the Kremlin,” writes Andrei Pertsev, a journalist with the Russian exile media Meduza, in an analysis for the US -Think tank Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
According to Meduza, the Russian journalist Ekaterina Vinokorova reported last week, citing three independent sources from the Kremlin, that the military bloggers are increasingly angering the Russian leadership and are “a thorn in their side”. The fact that the Russian military overlooked the Ukrainian offensive and was literally overrun gives the bloggers’ criticism even more weight. Essentially, they are demanding two things: general mobilization and the bombing of important infrastructure objects in Ukraine.
General mobilization might change the mood
Such a general mobilization, even partial mobilization, would be a highly risky step for Putin politically. The narrative of the “special operations” would no longer be tenable, one would be in a war that also affects the population directly when men are drafted for military service. That, in turn, might upset the mood in the country. So far, if the polls are to be believed, there has been a majority that supported the war – even if interest in what is happening in Ukraine is manageable and has evidently also waned recently.
Also militarily questionable
General mobilization would probably not make sense militarily either in the short term: “A large-scale conscription would most likely overwhelm the ability of the Russian Ministry of Defense to recruit, train and equip new soldiers,” writes the US think tank Institute for the Study of War.
The training alone would be time-consuming, and the “procurement of the necessary equipment, ammunition and supplies for a large conscript army” would be “very difficult” in view of the reported Russian material shortages. And whether the thinned and, according to reports, partially demoralized army would really be strengthened with freshly recruited soldiers without much combat experience and probably with even less fighting morale remains doubtful.
Politicians are also calling for more effort
Nevertheless, the term mobilization is now also buzzing around in Russian politics. On Tuesday, the leader of the Communist Party, Gennady Zyuganov, called for a “general mobilization” at the first autumn session of parliament, but was then corrected that he had only called for “economic mobilization”.
The leader of the Fair Russia – For Truth party, Sergey Mironov, called for social “mobilization”. Mikhail Sheremet of Putin’s United Russia party had previously called for a general mobilization. But the call should be interpreted once morest a different background: Sheremet is not only a member of the State Duma, but also Crimea’s Deputy Prime Minister.
And such a demand fuels the suspicion that the Russian leadership in Crimea is actually concerned that Ukraine might attack the peninsula even more forcefully than with the isolated air strikes hitherto. There are also rumors that Russian officials are recommending their families to leave Crimea.
Shelling of infrastructure as a concession
With the other demand, however, the Kremlin seems to want to appease the military bloggers: Shortly following the successful Ukrainian offensive, the critical infrastructure in the city of Kharkiv was shelled, and the power went out completely for a while. This is exactly what the bloggers are asking for, and recently it has also been a topic in the Kremlin-controlled media. Observers see a clear shift in the Russian military leadership, which had previously – at least officially – denied targeting civilian infrastructure.