Yurii Butusov: Government shows weakness, enemy takes advantage of it
Yurii Butusov, Editor-in-Chief of Censor.NET, on Radio NV about the Russian offensive that cannot be stopped, the possible dismissal of Syrskyi, the situation near Lyptsi and Toretsk, and Ukrainian guided aerial bombs.
Yurii, you regularly mention in your analytics, and we understand that you hear about certain problems directly from our military, and they may be local problems. But is it correct, as I understand it, again, referring to your streams, that the global problem we have now is that our defenders are not able to stop the Russian offensive. I want to talk about this.
Yes, let's talk about it.
Well, if we are talking about the fact that the Russians did take advantage of the fact that we had a shortage of shells. We remember that American support was frozen, and it lasted for almost six months, and, of course, our enemies took advantage of this. What do we have now? How can we characterize the situation as of today?
Now, indeed, we are receiving an increased amount of ammunition of certain calibers. First of all, the 155 mm caliber, which is now the main caliber for our artillery. So, of course, the amount of ammunition in the army has increased significantly, and this is really good news and increases the efficiency and combat capability of the Ukrainian army. But, of course, the army is not provided with all calibers, not all calibers, because it is not only 155. We also need other calibers, including 152mm, 122mm, 105mm, 125mm and 120mm mortars. The army has a large number of weapons. Of course, for such a large-scale war and such a large number of deployed troops and ammunition, the shortage is far from being fully overcome, and we cannot use all our weapons to a certain extent.
Okay, but you usually talk about the problem that, unfortunately, the Russians continue to advance, but you talk more about decision-making at the highest level. What do you observe there?
We do not yet have any decisions at the highest level, because this requires a clear understanding of what is happening in the war, and this requires an objective assessment of the results of the fighting. All this can only be the result of a competent analysis. Unfortunately, there is no such demand for this analysis at the highest level. I don't know what this is due to, perhaps the fact that the political leadership of the Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, is more concerned with information issues and foreign policy, but there is a great underestimation of the situation at the front. In fact, it should be noted that where we have a high-quality organization of combat operations, despite the enemy's great advantage in munitions and manpower, we manage to stop the Russians and inflict heavy losses on them. The main challenge for us now is changes at the front, structural changes in the defence forces in order to stop the Russian offensive. This will radically change the political situation, it will radically change the course of negotiations in general, it will cause great political blows, such damage to the Russian Federation. That's why the key for us now is to reorganize our defense forces to reliably stop the enemy from advancing along the entire frontline. The defense forces currently have such capabilities both in terms of professional staff, commanders and weapons. We can do it. This requires organizational management decisions.
Yurii, when you say that there is a great underestimation of the situation at the front, what do you mean? Are you talking about the potential of our enemy? Or are you talking about how well-supplied certain units holding important positions at the front are? What do you mean?
I mean, you really need to understand that the advantage we can achieve in the war right now is an advantage in the quality of command and control and the use of troops. We will not have more shells than the Russians. We will not have more airplanes and bombs than the Russians. We will not have more missiles than the Russians. We will not even have more drones than the Russians. That is, we need to understand that we are fighting one of the largest armies in the world, which is now supported and armed by North Korea, Iran, and which receives strong support from China. Therefore, we must clearly realize that our victory cannot be in numbers. Neither in the number of people, nor in the number of weapons. Our victory can only be in quality. And we must make changes that improve our quality. The quality of management, organization, training, manning, combat use of troops, improvement of military equipment, modernization of drones, use of qualitatively new types of weapons, especially drones. That is, all of this requires systemic solutions that should be aimed at people, at improving the command structure, at strengthening the survivability of our infantry. These are our main challenges. We have to do all this faster than the enemy, to be ahead of the enemy both in implementing changes and in scaling them up so that these changes take place on the entire front. This is the main challenge of our time, that is, intellectual warfare, intellectual solutions. And if we do not come to this, we are seriously weakening ourselves. We lose people, territories, and weaken our political prospects of winning the war. Because it's one thing when we negotiate and the enemy continues to attack, and it's another thing if we have stopped the Russians and they are unable to get through anywhere. These are absolutely stronger and more powerful political positions.
When you say that the key is the reorganization of the defense forces, in your opinion, and the certain information campaign that has begun against the Ukrainian generals and against General Syrskyi, the Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Is this helpful? How do you understand why there are, and I have to quote Mariana Bezuhla, a servant of the people, saying that such narratives are arising that you see, the new commander-in-chief, Syrskyi, replaced Zaluzhnyi, and that he hasn't worked out either, something needs to be changed.
I have repeatedly said that what the Servants of the People and Mariana Bezuhla are doing, it's just a very shameful, petty and mean political game against the military. In other words, the ruling party, the deputy chairman of the Defense Committee, the Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, headed by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief Volodymyr Zelenskyy, instead of taking responsibility for changes in the defense forces, which they are responsible for themselves according to the Constitution of Ukraine, are trying to create an artificial split, intrigue in the army and blame individual officials, individual generals. They create the impression in society that everything is fine in the management of the country's defense organization, and there are only some generals who are doing something wrong. Let's replace this general with this one and everything will be fine. I think that everyone understands that the modern war of large armies, armies of millions, is a war that is actually waged on a state scale. It is a war between two state systems. And the effectiveness of any general, including General Syrskyi and his predecessor, General Zaluzhnyi, we talked about this when Zaluzhnyi was still the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, does not depend on the person who holds the position. Generals act within the framework set by the country's top leadership. First of all, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief and his Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. Generals operate with the resources given to them by the state, the number of mobilized men given to them by the state, the weapons given to them by the state. The army fights in the defensive positions that the state has equipped with concrete fortifications. This is all systematic joint work. Instead of working together to solve the issues and problems of the country's defense, the servants of the people, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Mariana Bezuhla, Andrii Yermak and all the other people, they behave like populists in power who say, you know, we will not fight a war, we will blame the generals. This is just a shirking of responsibility by the servants of the people, and they are showing their weakness, and our enemies are rejoicing of this weakness," Russian propaganda quotes Ukrainian state leaders who themselves blame the army. Zelenskyy blamed Zaluzhnyi, Mariana Bezuhla blamed Zaluzhnyi, now she is blaming Syrskyi, and then they will blame some other leader again. It will be an endless story.
You know, I think it's worth talking about specific things, and I mean what is happening in specific areas. You were at the very zero line, you were near Lyptsi, remember that this is a settlement in the Kharkiv region, and the Russians are very much hoping to occupy it in order to simply fire on Kharkiv with cannon artillery. They want to further terrorize Kharkiv, which is already suffering from guided bombs and shelling on a daily basis. You published such an extensive report from Lyptsi, from its zero line. Can you tell us what you saw there? Maybe something was not included in it, let's say, that could not be filmed, or there was no way to film it?
Basically, I showed what could be filmed. So I think there is no point in discussing anything else there. I would like to say that Lyptsi is an example of a new tactic and warfare that the Russians are trying to use. They are doing everything to capture this village, and to capture Vovchansk, to capture the village of Starytsia, which is also east of Lyptsi. And it is very important for the Russians to gain a foothold in the border area and create a constant threat to Kharkiv. And they are conducting an offensive, a new tactic, using limited ground forces, but massive air and artillery strikes with high-precision weapons. For example, what cannot be shown on video, we can say that the enemy has struck the positions of the 13th National Guard Brigade "Charter", which directly defends Lyptsi, in just a month, using at least 407 guided bombs. Including yesterday, Russian sources showed how for the first time the enemy used a three-ton FAB-3000 bomb on the positions of the "Charter" brigade directly in the village of Lyptsi. This is the first use of such a bomb. They hit the territory of the Lyptsi hospital, by the way. Luckily, there were no Ukrainian servicemen there. But the enemy simply destroyed a civilian facility in this way. And this shows what powerful means of striking are being used by the Russians. In other words, they are trying to break through to Kharkiv, and they are trying to reduce their losses due to such a total advantage in the means of destruction in large numbers. We must pay tribute to the fact that, despite these attacks, our infantry is holding out. I filmed a report with the soldiers who held a small position, which the Russians attacked with 12 500-kilogram bombs. It was very difficult, I can't post it yet, it's a video for certain tactical reasons. But it shows the scale of the fighting and how the Russians are rushing to Kharkiv, in what difficult conditions our soldiers have to stop them and repel them from Kharkiv.
To imagine what 407 guided aerial bombs in a month on a small village in the Kharkiv region means, and the fact that you said that FAB-3000 was also used, that is, to imagine what it costs our military to hold their positions there, not to withdraw from them, is, of course, heroism. Now we realize that there are enough hot spots on the frontline. Now, one way or another, Toretsk is in focus again. You analyzed the situation there. You said that there seem to be problems with the reorganization of the units holding positions around it. Can you tell us more about this?
I don't think there's anything more to say. Obviously, the problem is not just with reorganization, with rotation of units, but with the approaches to planning combat operations. A brigade from one important area, which was defending that area, was decided to be redeployed to another area. This led to the fact that the area where the defense was successful suddenly became a crisis area, and a crisis arose there as well. The question arises whether such means of using troops are appropriate in a modern positional war, when the enemy, in principle, thanks to its intelligence, has a fairly clear idea of the maneuvers of our troops, yet replacing, withdrawing, and bringing in brigades. This is a process that is very difficult to hide, almost impossible. In today's conditions, when there are a large number of drones at the front, when such very total, dense electronic reconnaissance is being conducted. This is again what we talked about at the beginning. To create an advantage at the front, we need to constantly improve management decisions and analyze the consequences. Because the use of troops is now the number one problem, not the number of shells, not the number of planes, not the number of bombs.
I understand your point. Again, you said that it is a strategic goal, maybe I'm exaggerating the importance, you know better, for the Russians to reach the Oskil River. So that this very important military line, as of now, how close are they to this goal, let's say, how do you assess it?
Russia has been trying to fight for access to Oskil since the beginning of 2023. The battles are taking place on the border of Luhansk and Kharkiv regions. They have been going on for a year and a half. They are very fierce. Therefore, of course, these battles continue, and the enemy manages to advance there, advancing literally 100-200 meters, in some areas they managed to advance 2-3 kilometers. In other words, the advance is small, but it is there. The main problem is that our defense there suffers from the fact that the troops do not rely on powerful, fortified defensive positions, complex, echeloned, but again only on field fortifications made by the hands of the soldiers themselves. And the quality of these fortifications is far from being equally high everywhere. Of course, these field fortifications, even in three wood logs counter flooring, are not what is needed to counteract modern high-precision weapons, powerful air and artillery attacks.
I think you've seen the news that testing of Ukrainian GABs, i.e. Ukrainian guided aerial bombs, is about to begin. Can we assume that this will help us destroy Russian positions? How important, let's say, can such a tool be?
This is important. We need to reinforce our weapons, more aircraft. This is very important. It's a shame that we are lagging behind the enemy, because, in principle, we know how the Russians have constructed their GABs and their control modules. They are built entirely on the basis of publicly available components. All of this can be purchased. And among the components, they have components from Europe and America, among others. Therefore, all of this can be completely designed. We see that there is a large technological lag, a lack of such quick solutions that would allow us to at least repeat the successful solutions that the enemy makes quickly. The GABs have been in use for a year. The enemy has been sending troops to mass non-use and mass production since the beginning of the year. So let's hope that we can achieve them. We have airplanes, and the more weapons we have, the more losses we will be able to inflict on the Russians. It will not be a panacea and a miracle weapon, bombs alone will not solve the problem, they cannot turn the war around but it will significantly increase the pace of losses of the Russian occupiers. And this is what we need to stabilize the frontline.
Mr. Butusov, thank you very much for this conversation. Yurii Butusov, Editor-in-Chief of Censor.NET, was with us live.
