The announcement came as a surprise. On Friday March 25, the Russian army assured that it would now concentrate its offensive on eastern Ukraine. The Russian command, through Deputy Chief of the General Staff Sergei Rudskoy, said that “the principal objective” was here “liberation of Donbass”. Words that clash, whereas so far, Russia has claimed to want “demilitarize and denazify Ukraine” in its entirety. The next day, thee american president Joe Biden said to Warsaw that he “wasn’t sure“ that this ad meant a change in Russian strategy in Ukraine.
Julien Théron, researcher at Sciences Po Paris, specialist in conflicts and international security and co-author with Isabelle Mandraud of the book Putin, the strategy of disorder (Ed. Tallandier, 2021) returns for franceinfo to the issues behind this statement.
France info: The Russian Command announced that the main objective now was “the liberation of Donbass”. Sis this a reliable statement?
Julien Theron: It is important to remember that theThe arguments put forward by Russia to justify the offensive in Ukraine are part of a system of propaganda aimed at the Russian population. Since the beginning of the conflict, the objectives of the Kremlin, supposed to be fulfilled, have not been known, it is not known what it is about. The Russian Prime Minister [Mikhaïl Michoustine] had first announced an extension of the fighting but, even if Russia struck in western Ukraine, this objective failed. Russia then announced that it wanted to take the most important cities. This plan also failed because the main cities were not taken. Even the city of Mariupol, attacked, is not won by Russia. Moscow had then drawn a push of its troops from the south towards the north of Ukraine, in order to cut the country in two, along the Dnieper river. In reality, if there are changes of objectives in the strategy given to the army, it reveals political decisions. This is what needs to be seen: there is a link between a certain military inability to penetrate deeper into Ukrainian territories and the military redefinition of Moscow.
So we now have the objective of taking over the entire Donbass. But when Putin recognized the independence of the two breakaway entities in eastern Ukraine [les “Républiques populaires” autoproclamées de Donetsk et Louhansk], it did not recognize the entire administrative territory. In fact, Putin is explaining that what he wants is to take all of these two territories. What is not done yet. The territory of Luhansk is almost totally controlled by Russia, but that is not the case for that of Donetsk.
What will be the repercussions of this announcement for the Donbass?
We could see a reinforcement on the eastern front, but that would require new troops. However, it is complicated to set up such a reinforcement. A redeployment of forces stationed elsewhere would take time. It is complicated, in a territory in conflict, to move armies over hundreds of kilometers. It is difficult to know how Russia could really strengthen this front compared to what it has already been doing for a month. Without forgetting that the Russian authorities are still maintaining their objective “of denazify“ the whole of Ukraine.
Could this declaration play on the negotiations between kyiv and Moscow, currently at a standstill?
The announcement, in itself, will have no direct effect on the negotiations. Russia has continued to multiply the announcement effects since the start of the offensive. It is the military balance of power on the ground that defines political objectives and therefore diplomatic negotiations. The more difficult the situation becomes for Russia, the more it will push Moscow to negotiate. As for the eastern territories, the idea for Ukraine is not to cede these territories to Russia. The idea is for Ukraine to win the war, that was very clear. President Volodymyr Zelensky has said there are discussions, but that does not mean he is ready to grant independence to these territories.