The British military is training some 2,000 elite Ukrainian soldiers at a remote location in Dartmoor for an operation envisaging strikes from air, land, and sea to paralyze Russian forces on the Crimean Peninsula. Still, the bold plan is unlikely to fly, per Michael Maloof, former senior security policy analyst at the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
"Russian forces are too entrenched in Crimea," Maloof told Sputnik. "It just isn't going to happen. And if you're talking about these 2,000 Western trained troops, they could be decimated very, very quickly in any sustained fight. With 2,000 troops you're not going to make advances, you're not going to take back an entire peninsula; that just isn't going to happen. The supply train to ensure that [Ukrainian] troops have adequate supplies and care is so lacking now that under actual war fighting conditions, it could become even less, especially when supply trains are cut off. And given the number of troops, it's not going to make all that much difference in any effective counteroffensive. I wouldn't call it a counteroffensive. Again, they're going to be lucky to hold on defensively to their own positions rather than advance much further."
In addition, it's much too late to bring a new fresh face to the conflict, according to Paul E. Vallely, retired US Army major general and chairman of the Stand Up America US Foundation.
"Not going to work," Vallely told Sputnik. "I think it is more Western propaganda."
Is NATO Training Efficient?
Meanwhile, reports are emerging saying that the much-lauded NATO training is not as effective as many believe. Surrendered Ukrainian soldiers, who were trained in NATO countries, questioned the effectiveness of training and complained that it was insufficient and did not guarantee an advantage on the battlefield.
Western countries have not participated in high-intensity conflicts since the Vietnam War, and have mostly trained in accordance with the patterns of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria wars.
To complicate matters further, Ukrainian troops are being trained by different NATO member states, CIA veteran Larry Johnson told Sputnik last month, adding that this approach undermines the principle of uniformity of the army. Per Johnson, a soldier usually gets the basics during 13 weeks of training and should then undergo at least two to three months of specialized training to learn how to operate NATO-grade weapons.
Meanwhile, most of the Ukrainian troops that have been trained by the UK have gone through five weeks of boot camp.
"Boot camp is just the first phase of training soldiers," Vallely explained. "The US requires the boot camp soldiers to go to advanced training for another four weeks to specialize and become more competent in soldier skills. The morale of the soldiers has to be tested as well. Then small unit leadership at the platoon, company, and battalion levels has to be tested."
Five weeks is obviously not enough time to teach soldiers Western military doctrine, especially for complicated combined arms operations, Maloof echoed.
"The Ukrainians know how to fight defensively, but not offensively, and I think that this is where they can't get enough training in how to actually launch a troop counteroffensive to actually take that territory," he said. "And they don't have enough troops - number one. And number two, the equipment supplies are not consistent. They're not capable of being regularly relied upon as supplies. And the attrition rate of the equipment that they do have is so high that the US cannot supply it fast enough."
Is the Ukrainian Army Capable of Fighting in High-Intensity Conflict?
The other element that is lacking completely for the Ukrainians to be able to launch an effective counteroffensive is air power, Maloof continued.
"The United States would not even think of launching an offense without air power to neutralize communications, command control, all of those elements before you introduce troops. And what we're seeing here is almost a repeat of World War I, trench warfare virtually. It's amazing how they get bogged down in place. I mean, that's not a prescription for an effective counteroffensive," the security policy analyst emphasized.
Despite statements from the Western military leadership about the forthcoming deliveries of F-16s and M1 Abrams and increasing numbers of Ukrainian units being trained according to NATO standards, there are a lot of problems with the Western military aid efficiency. Simultaneously, the US and its allies refuse to consider a peace settlement, insisting that the Kiev regime should gain an advantage on the battlefield. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have been sustaining heavy losses on the ground.
Under these conditions, neither a Ukrainian "blitzkrieg" attack on Crimea nor a large-scale counteroffensive looks possible, according to Sputnik's interlocutors.