January 14, 2023
Baghdad / Obelisk: A few days ago, Moscow chose a new chief of staff for the armed forces to lead operations in Ukraine, in evidence of Russia’s impatience and turmoil in the face of a war it cannot win, according to experts.
Sergey Surovikin, who was appointed at the end of October as commander of the armed forces, did not complete the three months in office. Instead, he appointed Valery Gerasimov, who has been sitting at the top of the Russian military hierarchy for ten years.
In Moscow, as well as in the West, observers spoke Thursday of President Vladimir Putin’s impatience in the face of Ukrainian resistance, the fragility of the Russian leadership facing unrealizable demands, and the promise of an upcoming major battle.
– Unprecedented –
In Russia and in other countries it is very rare to appoint a chief of staff for one operation. The person who coordinates and assesses the threat cannot be the same person who leads the battles on the ground.
“The last time this happened was in 1941, during the Nazi invasion,” said an analyst from Moscow, who asked not to be named.
Gerasimov, the second-in-command in the military hierarchy after the defense minister, carries the nuclear briefcase. “Would he take her with him” to Ukraine, the analyst said sarcastically.
The analyst believes that this appointment “violates all existing rules” of the military leadership and constitutes a decision that reveals that “things are not going as planned.”
Because nearly 11 months after the start of the invasion, Russia can only see itself floundering.
The cities of Bakhmut and Solidar (east) are currently witnessing fierce battles. “It is not appropriate to change the chief of operations in the middle of a battle,” said Tatiana Kastoyeva-Jan, Russia researcher at the French Institute of International Relations.
This, she added, “disrupts the entire hierarchy, from top to bottom. It can’t be a good sign.”
– Next attack –
Experts agree that this decision is an indication of the acceleration of the Russian process. Talk about a new attack has been going on for months, while the hypothesis of a new mobilization is not excluded, after a first mobilization in September that mobilized nearly 300,000 men.
For his part, Alexander Khramchikhin, an independent Russian military expert, confirmed, “It is clear that this amendment means that there are plans to expand the scope of the battles,” noting that the goal, in his opinion, is to ensure effective control over the regions claimed by Russia (Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson, and Zaporizhia).
Mark Galeotti of the Royal United Services Institute, a think tank, said the decision was “confirmation that major attacks are coming and that Putin recognizes that poor coordination is a problem.”
– Putin mystery –
What could General Surovikin do in less than three months? What mistakes did he make? How can the replacement of leaders of a structurally ineffective army be justified? Experts talk about Putin’s impatience and ambiguity.
In the absence of recent military victories, Putin notes the growing disregard for the performance of his army, which calls for “the eternal Russian questions: +Who is wrong+ and ‘What to do+’,” as Tatiana Stanovaya, a specialist in Russian elite affairs, wrote in a tweet.
But Gerasimov’s appointment does not answer those questions. “Everyone looks in shock: (Yevgeny) Prigozhin’s (head of Wagner military group) guys, the military correspondents, the army. It seems that a large number of very knowledgeable people do not understand the essence of this decision.”
Some suggest that the choice fell on a man of unquestioned loyalty to be sent to Ukraine. But Marc Galeotti believes that “if you don’t stop appointing leaders, replacing them, burning them, making unrealistic demands, and degrading them arbitrarily, that loyalty will not be born.”
– Russian suspicion –
By changing the military leadership again, Putin will not quell the suspicion that grips part of Moscow elites and Russian public opinion.
Today, Alexander Khramchikhin said, “resentment is growing over why we did not win this war,” referring to “bad estimates at the beginning” of the conflict…which Gerasimov endorsed…
Many analysts see this new change as an indication of internal conspiracies. “The media battle around Solidar shows that everyone is trying to take credit for the victory,” said Tatiana Kastoyeva-Jan.
“There’s everything in this story: internal struggles, power struggles, jealousy,” summed up Dara Massicott, an expert at the RAND Corporation in Washington.
Obelisk – follow-up – agencies
The text that includes the name of the author, entity, or agency, does not necessarily express the point of view of the obelisk, and the source is responsible for the content. The responsibility of the obelisk is to impartially transmit news, and to defend freedom of opinion at its highest levels.