We’ll have to wait and see if new training for Ukrainian soldiers to fight using Western war doctrine bears any fruit.
Up until now, both sides have shown that they mostly fight the same war doctrine, which is artillery barrages and WWI style trench warfare. Any great movement like the celebrated Kharkhiv counter offensive and the fall of Kherson has been mainly the result of horrendous and amateurish mistakes by the Russians. After all, how are supposedly 15 tanks supposed to break through the lines near Kharkhiv, make a mad dash to capture the opposing commander of the entire region and sweep across the Luhansk? One can call that luck or skill but it’s actually some dumb mistake by the Russians. And Kherson was simply given to the Ukrainians when its strategic significance was not understood as the gateway to the southern coast and Crimea. It’s one of those situations where the Russians had to literally die to the last man because Kherson City was that strategically important.
Aside from those two incidents, the war has been a complete stalemate where Ukraine has used its mobility and asymmetrical weapons to battle Russia’s massively superior numbers. In a way, if Ukraine feels that it really will eventually get superior equipment, there’s no rational reason to get risky and push the pace of the war. Ukraine should preserve its forces since Ukraine has a smaller overall population than Russia so shouldn’t try to compete on the basis who will quite first if numbers are traded equally.
So again, it seems to be a question if Ukraine can plan and execute operations in the style of a Patton, Rommel or Montgomery in WWII who famously directed operations based on not just hard nosed defense but also lightning strikes to outflank the opponent across the deserts of North Africa, up the boot of Italy and finishing up the war liberating France. Not like the slugfest during the coldest winter on the march to Stalingrad.
