Decoding Shoigu’s ‘Active Defense’: Rhetoric Versus Reality in Russia’s Ukraine Strategy

The term “active defense,” as used by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu in 2023 regarding Russian military operations in Ukraine, is indeed a complex and somewhat controversial topic, given the historical and doctrinal implications it carries.

Firstly, Shoigu’s use of “active defense” is significant in the context of Russia’s military actions in Ukraine. He asserted that Russian forces were maintaining “active defense” in response to Ukraine’s counteroffensive, implying a defensive stance in a challenging situation. According to Reuters, Shoigu described the situation on the front as variable, with different levels of difficulty in different areas. He emphasized the importance of neutralizing enemy weaponry and confidently defending necessary areas, particularly those threatened by Ukrainian forces​​.

However, this terminology, “active defense,” does carry historical and doctrinal connotations that make its application to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict somewhat problematic. Traditionally, “active defense” has been associated with the doctrine of the U.S. Army during the 1970s, a doctrine characterized by a combination of defensive maneuvers with selective offensives. This approach is quite different from the current Russian military doctrine and practice, which has been more direct and expansive, especially in the context of Ukraine.

Moreover, the use of “active defense” by Shoigu has been interpreted by some analysts as a way to manage expectations regarding Russia’s military capabilities and objectives in Ukraine. The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) suggests that Shoigu’s characterization of Russian operations as “active defense” might be an attempt to temper expectations about Russia’s military performance and the achievement of its objectives in Ukraine​​.

In essence, Shoigu’s terminology does not align neatly with either historical doctrines or the apparent realities on the ground in Ukraine. While it might be seen as a strategic communication effort to frame the Russian military’s stance in a specific light, it contrasts with the broader aggressive and expansive nature of Russian military operations in Ukraine. These operations have not been limited to mere defense of Russian interests but have involved a significant attempt to exert influence and control over Ukrainian territory, which goes beyond the traditional concept of defensive military actions.