The Achilles Heel of Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: A Logistical Nightmare
The world watched in shock as Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. The announcement of a “special military operation” by Russian autocrat Vladimir Putin was quickly followed by the shelling of Ukraine, marking the beginning of a conflict that has since gripped the globe. However, as the days turned into weeks, it became increasingly clear that Russia’s military might was being undermined by a critical weakness: logistics.
The invasion was not a sudden act of aggression but rather a continuation of a conflict that had been simmering since 2014 when Russia and the rebels it backed overtook Crimea and swathes of Eastern Ukraine. Since then, Russia has maintained an enlarged and active military presence along Ukraine’s borders, amassing an extraordinary 75 percent of their principal combat units within striking distance of Ukraine. By November 2021, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry announced that 90,000 Russian troops had encircled the country’s borders and occupied territories. The Russian forces that were in the region for supposed exercises simply weren’t leaving. Not only were they not going away, but their numbers were growing.
The massive domestic mobilization of troops, weapons, and supplies was made possible by Russia’s vast rail network. The country’s military is able to rely heavily on the rail network, moving troops, tanks, and trucks to and from various locations. However, this domestic advantage also represents an Achilles heel when conflicts take place beyond their borders. When war stretches past their furthest rail yards, Russian military logistics capabilities are, at best, mediocre.
The opening hours of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine saw the invading force working to dismantle Ukraine’s military infrastructure. Airstrikes on Ukrainian air bases were aimed at helping Russia quickly gain air superiority without strong resistance. However, as the conflict prolonged, the Russians found themselves scrambling to regroup and resupply. Most Western forces operate on a pull-based system where fighting forces request resupplies as needed based on what actually occurs. Meanwhile, the Russian military operates predominantly on a push-based system where forces are resupplied on a more predictable basis as determined by leadership.
The Russian military’s logistics difficulties were hardly surprising. In fact, they represented a historical through line when analyzing the disastrous Soviet-Afghan War of the 1980s. Poor logistics performance is an oft-cited reason for the USSR’s failure to achieve its objectives. According to tacticians, their logistics support forces were inflexible and under-equipped, which left the fighting forces too under-equipped to perform their jobs.
As the conflict in Ukraine continued, the Russian military’s logistical shortcomings became increasingly apparent. Russian tanks were running out of fuel and left abandoned, and invading troops were seen looting stores for food, potentially due to a lack of their own. Stories emerged of Russian forces asking Ukrainian civilians for supplies and directions, seemingly unaware of the average person’s opinion on them in the country they were attempting to conquer. The Russian military was looking disorganized and disconnected, a few disparate forces tasked with going in guns blazing to induce a quick and easy surrender.
However, the Ukrainians were not about to surrender. They recognized the importance of logistics in warfare and targeted Russia’s logistics. Posts circulated on social media platforms adapted to organize the country’s guerrilla-style defense, stressing the value of destroying fuel trucks. If you stop the fuel trucks, you stop the tanks. Ukrainian forces also destroyed two key bridges into Kiev, allowing them to focus on defending a smaller number of choke points. Towns and cities dismantled their street signs or painted over them to read “Welcome to Hell,” making it harder for Russian troops to navigate around the country.
The early struggles of the Russian military only made them more desperate. As the conflict prolonged, the invaders resorted to looting, shelling civilian areas, and using increasingly destructive weaponry and deadly techniques to compensate for their lack of strategic tact. The true cost of Russia’s failure is borne by the innocent casualties of war: Ukrainian defenders, Russian conscripts, and most tragically, the Ukrainian civilians who were displaced, injured, or killed simply for staying in the place they called home.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has exposed a weak point in the nation’s military might. Logistics capabilities are arguably one major strategic advantage of many Western militaries, especially the US’s, whose global network of military bases and massive sea and airlift capabilities allow it to properly supply conflict anywhere on earth. For Russia to have failed so visibly mere miles from its border exposes its Achilles heel to any future adversary. Tragically, however, these early struggles appear to make the Russian military only more desperate.
In conclusion, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has highlighted the critical importance of logistics in warfare. It has exposed the limitations of a military strategy that relies heavily on a single mode of transportation and a push-based supply system. It has also underscored the resilience and resourcefulness of the Ukrainian people in the face of a formidable adversary.
