The United States does not have a clear picture of Ukraine’s war strategy

WASHINGTON – Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky provided almost daily updates on the Russian invasion on social media.

Viral video posts demonstrated the effectiveness of Western weapons in the hands of Ukrainian forces; and the Pentagon held regular briefings on the progress of the war.

But despite the flow of all this news to the public, US intelligence agencies have done so less information than they would like about Ukraine’s operations and have a much better picture of the Russian military, its planned operations, its successes and failures, according to current and former officials. .

Governments often hide information from the public for operational security reasons.

But these information gaps within the US government could make administration difficult Biden decide how to target military aid by sending billions of dollars worth of weapons to Ukraine.

US officials said the Ukrainian government gave them few classified reports or details of their operational plans, and Ukrainian officials acknowledged that they did not tell the Americans everything.

Of course, the US intelligence community collects information on almost every country, including Ukraine.

But US spy agencies generally focus their collection efforts on opposing governmentslike Russia, not current friends, like Ukraine.

And while Russia has been a priority for American spies for 75 years, when it comes to the Ukrainians, the United States has gone to great lengths to strengthen its intelligence serviceNot to spy on your government.

The result, former officials said, was a little Blind spots.

“How much do we really know about how Ukraine is doing?” said Beth Sanner, a former senior intelligence official.

“Can you find a person who will tell you with confidence how many troops Ukraine has lost, how many pieces of equipment Ukraine has lost?”

Even without a full picture of Ukraine’s military strategy and situation, the Biden administration pushed for new capabilities, such as the missile artillery systems that President Joe Biden announced last week.

Ukraine awaits the arrival of Western weapon systems more powerfulas both warring sides suffer heavy casualties in the eastern region of donbas.

Pentagon officials say they have a robust arms shipment process, which begins with a request from Ukrainians and includes a US assessment of what kind of equipment they need and how quickly it can be mastered.

Some European agencies say it will be difficult, if not impossible, for Ukraine to reclaim the land Russia has taken since it invaded in February, but US intelligence agencies are less pessimisticauthorities said.

However, there are cracks in Ukraine’s defenses and questions about the state of the armed forces and Ukraine’s strategy in Donbas have created an incomplete picture for the United States.

Avril D. Haines, director of national intelligence, testified in a Senate hearing last month that “it was very difficult to say” how much more aid Ukraine could absorb.

He added: “In fact, we probably have more knowledge from the Russian side than from the Ukrainian side.”

A key question is what measures Zelensky intends to ask in the Donbas.

There, Ukraine faces a strategic choice: withdraw its forces or risk being encircled by Russia.

In recent days, Ukraine has provided more information.

On Sunday, Zelensky visited the front and called the fighting in Sievierdonetsk, a city key to controlling Donbas, “extremely difficult”.

He also recognized it up to 100 Ukrainian soldiers die every day and he described how Russia took over a fifth of the country.

The government’s more frank public statements could be a precursor to a conversation with its population about strategic choices to be made in Donbas, analysts said.

“There will likely be a debate on whether to remove any defenses that could get trapped if they remain,” said Stephen Biddle, a professor of international affairs at Columbia University.

“If there is a deliberate withdrawal, Zelensky will have to explain that somehow this does not seem to put Ukrainian weapons into question. You will have to tell some kind of story to the Ukrainian people if you decide to withdraw those troops, and explain the losss that they might suffer if they stayed is a logical way to do it.

There is another reason for the incomplete intelligence on Ukraine.

Cloud cover has limited the usefulness of aerial satellites.

The United States provides regular near real-time intelligence updates to Ukraine on the position of Russian forces, information that Ukrainians use to plan operations and strengthen their defenses.

But even in high-level conversations with General Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or Lloyd Austin, secretary of defense, Ukrainian officials only share their strategic goals. not your operational plans detailed.

Ukraine’s secrecy has forced US military and intelligence officials to try to learn what they can from other countries operating in Ukraine, training sessions with Ukrainians and Zelensky’s public comments, US officials said.

Ukraine, officials said, wants to present an image of strength, both to the public and to its close partners.

The government does not want to share information that could suggest a weakening of the determination or give the impression that they may not win.

In essence, Ukrainian officials do not want to present information that could encourage the US and other Western partners to reduce the flow of weapons.

At the behest of the United States, Ukraine has spent years strengthening the protection of its military and intelligence services against Russian spies.

Informing other countries about their plans and operational situation could reveal weaknesses that Moscow could explode if the Russian military finds out.

Of course, Ukrainians are not always so attentive to US operational plans.

Zelensky once publicly announced that Austin and Antony Blinken, the secretary of state, would be visiting Kiev, a fact that US officials had tried to keep secret.

There are good reasons why Ukraine does not speak frankly about its forces or military strategy, Biddle said.

“I’m not sure it’s in the interest of the American or Ukrainian public that the Ukrainians are honest about their losses if the result is that it strengthens the Russian war effort,” Biddle said.

“But that means we don’t really know both sides of the story.”

The United States has better estimates of Russian casualties and equipment losses, a senior US official said.

The Defense Intelligence Agency, for example, estimates the number of Ukrainian soldiers killed in action Similarity to that of Russia, but the agency has a much lower level of confidence in its estimate of Ukrainian losses.

The picture US officials have presented of a grueling war, in which neither side makes decisive gains, appears to be accurate, Biddle said.

However, public information on Ukrainian casualties, equipment losses and morale is incomplete.

But there could be a potential cost if the intelligence community is unable to present a more complete picture to the public or Congress on Ukraine’s military prospects, Sanner said.

If Russia advances further, the lack of understanding of the state of the Ukrainian military could expose the intelligence community allegations which did not provide policy makers with a complete picture of Ukraine’s war prospects.

“It’s about Russia’s goals and Russia’s prospects for achieving its goals,” Sanner said.

“We don’t talk about whether Ukraine could defeat them. And to me, I feel like we’re bracing ourselves for another intelligence failure by not talking about it publicly. “

Eric Schmitt in Washington and Michael Schwirtz in Ukraine contributed to the reporting.

c.2022 The New York Times Company