Seems lots of folks, both "experts" and some posters here, are handwringing about a relatively static frontline and basically interpreting that one data point to mean that Ukraine lacks the capability to go on a major offensive and retake significant territory anytime soon. I don't know shit, but that sounds a lot like everyone predicting Ukraine would fall within days when the war began.
Some describe the current situation as a stalemate. But is it really a stalemate when Ukraine is continuing to degrade Russian forces at a significantly higher rate than their own losses? HIMARS are wreaking havoc on Russian logistics and command centers. Russia is still trying to mount lots of local offensives, which for the most part are being repelled and in lots of cases with heavy losses. On top of that, the flow of arms to Ukraine is increasing, and fresh troops are being trained to NATO standards.
If you are the Ukrainian military, would you prefer to mount a major offensive before or after tens of thousands of trained reinforcements and $3 billion more in arms arrive, and HIMARS finishes destroying its targets? Before or after rubbing out Russian offensives that degrade Russian forces at a 4:1 clip over Ukraine's? To me, Ukraine is simply setting conditions and using the same strategy that took back the north -- destroy logistics and such until Russian cannot effectively defend, much less go on the offensive.
If you read the tea leaves, I also think Ukraine has a plan. This is something I've been thinking about since Ukraine announced the southern offensive. At the time, I was asking why on earth Ukraine would announce that? Now I believe it was purposeful disinformation aimed at drawing a lot of Russian forces to Kherson oblast. The immediate effect of that was to take pressure off the Donbas front line, where artillery had just closed the Sieverdonesk pocket. Causing a lot of Russian BTG's to be transferred to Kherson meant that they were in a much more precarious logistical position, not only across a major river but also as far from Russian resupply as anywhere on the frontline.
But if the announcement of the southern counteroffensive was a purposeful headfake, I don't believe it was done only to take pressure off the Donbas frontlines. Ukraine knows that it needs to make some advances soon to maintain support for the war. I think it was because the main counteroffensive will begin elsewhere. Today the Mayor of Melitopol tweeted that residents should evacuate before winter, purportedly due to lack of gas for heat. I'm going to make another bold prediction and say its because thats where the counteroffensive will start. After Ukraine has set all the conditions it can, and tipped the balance of military power as far as it can in its favor -- I believe within the next month or two -- Ukraine makes a major push into Zaporizhia oblast. If successful, it would divide Russian forces in half, with a big part of the southern half pinned across the Dnipro in Kherson with absolutely no hope of resupply. Those forces would fold. At the same time, Ukraine could advance on the east well behind the front, where Russia has had a lot of time to dig in, set mines, etc.
Will it work? No idea. Ukraine probably only has one shot to make this happen soon, if it fails then we are in for a long war. But Ukraine is being helped by NATO military expertise and intelligence, not to mention the factors above, and definitely has morale on its side. I think when it happens Russian forces fold like a cheap track suit.
P.S. I'm also waiting for undercover operatives to put a detonator in an ammo car on a train thats about to head over the Kerch bridge.