Annexation fails to hide gulf between what Putin wants and what his forces can hold

It was the moment of two completely unrelated events. The other was staged in Moscow and consisted of theater, imperialist expansion, pen on paper. The other the slow, methodical advance of Ukraine’s forces through poorly supplied and commanded Russian positions.

Friday laid bare the stark gulf between Russia’s ambitions and its reality. As Russian President Vladimir Putin hosted a remarkable, fake ceremony – in the grandeur of the Kremlin’s St. George’s Hall and with and orchestrated crowds of support at a rally outside – his forces were losing in a strategic town in the very area he claims to annex.

Thursday night’s signatures on two decrees annexing Kherson and Zaporizhzhia areas began the Potemkin farce. Part of Zaporizhia is still in Ukrainian hands. Slowly, bits of Kherson are being taken away. Moscow claimed that these occupied areas became Russia at the time the decree was posted online. According to Ukrainian officials, 23 civilians were killed in an S300 missile strike that hit a convoy of cars near Zaporizhzhia. They were attempting to enter the occupied territory to deliver humanitarian aid and evacuate those who were allowed to leave. An act of savagery that began the area’s first day under what Russia considers its protective umbrella.

Ukraine’s advances are gathering pace. Their focus is the railway hub of Lyman, which has gained outsized importance because of Russia’s dogged defense and the strategic role it may have in their control of the entire Luhansk region. Putin signed papers Friday declaring that this region is now Russia, and he will do it against a backdrop of very bad news.

A Ukrainian soldier posted a video Friday in front of the administration building of Yampil, a tiny settlement to Lyman’s east, from which Russia has apparently retreated, suggesting that Lyman is for the most part isolated to its rear from the rest of the Russian military. According to some reports, regular Russian army forces, the national guard, and some volunteer units remain in the city in significant numbers. Cut off, their decision to fight or surrender makes little difference to Ukraine’s continued advance.

The Ukrainian moves may again highlight one of the strategic flaws of Russia’s positioning – that it seems to fight hard for one location in the belief its defense will hold, and then struggle to regroup when the “impossible” happens. The recent defeat of Russian forces in Kharkiv region was largely due to the Ukrainian encirclement around Izium, the supply hub. We will soon see if Lyman's fate is similar to Luhansk.

Indeed, the central policy takeaway from Putin’s Friday rant against the West – a direct call for a ceasefire and a return to the negotiating table – reflected how the annexation ceremony was taking place against the backdrop of extremely bad news militarily. Not that the calls for talks are likely to be heeded: Ukraine and its Western allies have dismissed Russian calls for diplomacy, pointing to Moscow’s history of using the opportunity of negotiations to regroup on the battlefield.

Back on the ground, Ukraine’s methodical and deliberate progress is a cold dose of reality for a Kremlin that still seems to think it can create reality by the force of its own will. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Friday that the parts of Luhansk and Donetsk that Russia does not control will have to be “liberated” – a statement that totally fails to recognize that the direction of travel on the battlefield is going the other way.

What is the solution? Moscow still seems set on the idea that “partial mobilization” will eventually improve their fortunes. Yet instead, it appears to expose again the gap between reality and fiction – between modern warfare and their belief in volume and persistence. Russia continues to attack targets head-on, with as many force as possible. It may hope that tens of thousand of poorly trained and equipped conscripts can overwhelm positions it has so often struggled to take. They are now facing a modernizing Ukrainian army with precise Western weapons, useful tactical advice, and that is simply out-maneuversing them. You don't need to attack a town directly, when you can cut it off by going around its back.

The cracks in Putin’s Potemkin world are beginning to let the light in. His public admonishment of his own officials for the appalling executions of partial mobilization is rare. This was a policy he declared, so families whose husbands and fathers were torn away to the war will want to see the situation reversed quickly, before the body bags start to come home. They are unlikely to be mollified by an acceptance from a “benevolent tsar” that things should have been handled better. Since the mobilization announcement, some 200,000 Russians fled the country. This is likely to be a lot more than those who were forced into army uniforms.

In his Friday speech, Putin talked up the use of “all” means at his disposal to defend these newly annexed parts of Ukraine, but he did not specifically threaten to use nuclear force. However, he did mention that the US's use of such weapons against Japan was a precedent. It is a threat but it is not direct and each of these words is carefully chosen.

Again, we are at the point where we need to ask ourselves what a nuclear power does when its traditional forces are unable to achieve its military objectives. It is important to remember that nuclear power is only possible when it has a solid foundation for its forces.

Most nuclear powers, with the exception of North Korea and Pakistan, would be able achieve their military goals without having to resort to the Bomb. Russia is proving that its army is not up for the task. And that failure likely reflects on the readiness of its nuclear forces: how can you be sure in the Kremlin that your nuclear arsenal is up to scratch if your tanks can’t get diesel 40 miles from your own border?

It will be difficult to know what the future holds. But we are slowly seeing the gulf between what Russia wants, what it can do and what is actually happening – a gulf it normally filled with fear and threatening rhetoric – being exposed on the world stage. The world in the next decade will be determined by how Moscow reacts.