Ukraine’s counteroffensive began a couple of months ago, but its military has been preparing for it for years by adopting NATO-style warfare tactics. However, the Biden administration took over a year to allow NATO countries to send F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine. By the time Ukrainian pilots are trained on these advanced aircraft, it may be too late to support ground forces currently engaged in the fighting. This raises the question of whether the counteroffensive can succeed without significant air power, which is a cornerstone of Western warfare tactics.
According to current and former officials in Ukraine, the United States, and Europe, as well as Western defense analysts, the answer is yes. Interviews conducted last week suggest that despite the absence of F-16 jets, the counteroffensive is progressing, albeit without any major breakthroughs. Philip M. Breedlove, a retired US Air Force general and former NATO commander, believes that Ukraine can succeed even without these advanced tools. He explains that learning and deploying combined arms tactics, which are essential to modern ground warfare, will benefit Ukraine’s forces in various phases of the conflict.
However, Breedlove notes that if Ukraine is expected to fight like NATO forces, it needs the necessary tools, which have not been provided. The top Ukrainian commander, Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, shares the frustration surrounding the lack of air power. Some experts argue that this disadvantage has left Ukraine vulnerable to Russian attack helicopters, which have easily targeted Ukrainian tanks and armored vehicles. These helicopters are equipped with anti-tank missiles that Ukraine’s air defenses cannot intercept effectively.
Colonel Markus Reisner, overseeing force development at Austria’s main military training academy, emphasizes that Ukraine needs more warplanes to defend its ground troops against such attacks. He believes that air superiority is crucial for successful land operations and criticizes those who argue that Ukraine does not need F-16s at the moment, deeming it a political rather than a military perspective.
Since the war began in February 2022, neither Ukraine nor Russia has achieved air superiority. Despite Russia’s overwhelming advantage in fighter aircraft numbers, both sides have predominantly relied on artillery, drones, and long-range missiles. This is due to Ukraine’s Patriot missiles and Russia’s S-400 air defense systems, which have deterred each other from launching airstrikes with piloted warplanes near the front lines.
While Ukrainian pilots flying MiG and Sukhoi fighter jets have been cautious in their approach and limited in their operations, the recent addition of long-range missiles provided by Britain and France has offered some support against military targets. However, a Biden administration official acknowledges that even with F-16s, it remains uncertain whether Ukraine’s forces can adequately support ground troops. This issue has become a sore point for Ukrainians.
After suffering heavy losses during the early stages of the counteroffensive, some Ukrainian commanders have reverted to tactics they are more familiar with, such as artillery and missile fire. Military experts anticipated this outcome, attributing the challenges beyond air power. Retired Col. Steve Boylan, a former spokesman for the US Army’s Combined Arms Center, explains that effectively executing combined arms tactics requires years of training and should not be attempted in the midst of a fight.
Boylan highlights the importance of having troops on the ground to secure and hold territory. Even with air power, victory is not achieved until ground forces take control. He believes that Ukraine will adapt American instruction, training, and tactics to suit their specific needs.
Although air power offers significant advantages in battle, Gen. Valery Zaluzhny points out that Ukraine’s military is already one of the best-equipped and most experienced in Europe. President Volodymyr Zelensky has expressed confidence that plans to obtain Western warplanes are progressing, including the introduction of F-16s. However, training pilots and ensuring language proficiency will be time-consuming.
According to military aerospace expert Douglas Barrie, sending a small number of F-16s into battle would not make a substantial difference. Adequate training and a sufficient number of properly equipped squadrons are necessary to have an impact on the counteroffensive. Barrie acknowledges that Ukraine’s forces would not have been capable of launching a Western-style combined-arms offensive without air power.
In conclusion, while air power plays a crucial role in warfare, experts and officials believe that Ukraine’s counteroffensive can still succeed without F-16s. Ukraine’s forces have adopted NATO-like tactics and have demonstrated their capabilities in the conflict. However, the absence of air power does present challenges, particularly against Russian attack helicopters. The acquisition of F-16s would optimize Ukraine’s defense capabilities, but it will require significant training and resources. In the end, the counteroffensive’s success will depend on a combination of factors, including the resilience and adaptability of Ukraine’s forces.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
