While defensive enthusiasts around the world remain in a state of shock at the stunning Ukrainian victories along the entire Kharkiv-Izyum frontline, military researchers are already discussing the impact this recent offensive will have on military history textbooks.
And for a good reason, for decades conventional military thinking has surmised that for an offensive operation to achieve rapid success the conducting military would need to have vast superiority in artillery and air support. While western armaments such as High-speed Anti Radiation Missiles (HARMs) and M777/M142 artillery systems significantly reduced both Russian air and fire support capabilities, it would be incorrect to say the advancing Ukrainian units had an overwhelming fire advantage as it is traditionally thought of.
Instead, it can be argued that Ukraine is both paving the way for a new generation of combined arms warfare (incorporating emerging technologies such as drones and so called “smart” weapons) and returning to the basics of offensive military actions.
In the waning hours of the First World War, the Entente alliance orchestrated an organized offensive action meant to split and shatter the defender forces of the German Empire. It had been a long summer for the forces of the German army, costly gains during the spring offensives of 1918 known as the Kaiserschlacht had forced severe attrition among the already depleted imperial army.
Recognizing the significant over-extension and low morale of the German army, the Entente began what would come to be known as the Hundred Days Offensive. The goals were clear: probe the German forces in their most exposed sectors, and utilize breakthroughs to disorganize the strongest points along the line and force a hurried retreat.
Beginning in early August, allied forces probed sections of the front they thought to be weakest. On the 8th of August this effort proved successful, with the British 4th army achieved a breakthrough of 15 kilometers. This breakthrough disoriented the defending Germans, leading to a hurried evacuation from the salient as they left behind artillery pieces and scores of POWs.
For the next three months, Entente forces would repeat this strategy. Blow after blow was dealt to the retreating German forces, who failed to re-organize effectively to counter the ever advancing armies of the Entente. The result was the total collapse and withdrawal of the German Empire from almost all occupied territory in France and Belgium.
Does this sound familiar?
It is, perhaps, too early to speculate if the recent Ukrainian counter offensives will represent the collapse of the Russian occupation. What is clear, however, is that the recent Ukrainian offensive is remarkably similar to that of the Hundred Days Offensive.
From the concentration of infantry, to the probing attacks meant to drive a wedge and eventually overwhelm superior positions, to the frantic retreat of Russian forces, the similarities are clear.
So, what does the analysis of the Hundred Days Offensive as an analogy of the Kharkiv offensive tell us about the future? Well it’s possible Ukraine will use these recent victories as an opportunity to continue to strike Russian forces to prevent re-organization. It is, however, just as possible that Ukraine will opt to consolidate its hold over these territories and choose to defend over the coming winter.
If Ukraine chooses to strike while the iron is hot, well we might just see history repeat itself.
Thank you for reading, if you’d like to reach out please email me at Dontstealprep@gmail.com
