Russian President Vladimir Putin's strategy in Ukraine invasion has stumped US defence experts

Russian President Vladimir Putin's strategy during Ukraine's invasion has stumped US defence experts.

In war, winning quick control of airspace is crucial. Russia’s failure to do so in Ukraine, despite its vast military strength, has been a surprise and may help explain how Ukraine has so far prevented a rout.

The standoff in the sky is among the Russian battle shortcomings, including logistical breakdowns, that have thrown Moscow off stride in its invasion.

Typically, an invading force would seek at the outset to destroy or at least paralyse the target country’s air and missile defences because dominance of the skies allows ground forces to operate more effectively and with fewer losses.

US military officials had assumed that Russia would use its electronic warfare and cyber capabilities to blind and paralyse Ukraine’s air defences and military communications.

That would have been "the logical and widely anticipated next step, as seen in almost every military conflict since 1938," wrote the RUSI think-tank in London, in an article called "The Mysterious Case of the Missing Russian Air Force."

But the first two weeks have confounded those expectations and instead seen Moscow act far more delicately with its air power, so much so that US officials can't exactly explain what's driving Russia's apparent risk-averse behavior.

Vastly outmatched by Russia's military, in terms of raw numbers and firepower, Ukraine's own air force is still flying and its air defenses are still deemed to be viable,a fact that is baffling military experts.

"They're not necessarily willing to take high risks with their own aircraft and their own pilots," a senior US defence official said

A possible explanation for Russia’s failure to do so is that President Vladimir Putin built his war strategy on an assumption that Ukrainian defenses would easily fold, allowing Russian forces to quickly capture Kyiv, the capital, and crush Ukrainian forces in the east and south without having to achieve air superiority.

“We think that they’re a few days behind where they expected to be” at this stage, Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said.

“It’s clear, yes, the Russians have had their own challenges and they have met resistance we don’t believe they fully expected.”

Ukrainian air force fighter jets are still carrying out low-level, defensive counter-air and ground-attack sorties. Russia is still flying through contested airspace.

Ukrainian troops with surface-to-air rockets are able to threaten Russian aircraft and create risk to Russian pilots trying to support ground forces.

"There's a lot of stuff they're doing that's perplexing," said Rob Lee, a Russian military specialist at the Foreign Policy Research Institute.

He thought the beginning of the war would be "maximum use of force."

"Because every day it goes on there's a cost and the risk goes up. And they're not doing that and it just is really hard to explain for any realistic reason."

“There are two basic ways you can describe the slowness of the Russian advance in Ukraine,” said Loren Thompson, a defence analyst at the Lexington Institute, a Washington think tank.

“One explanation is deliberate restraint. The other explanation is poor execution. We don’t know enough to identify which is the more plausible explanation, but it’s important to recognise the Russians have all sorts of options they have not yet brought to bear,” including heavier use of cyberattacks against the Ukrainian command and control system and air defences.

In its latest assessment, the Institute for the Study of War said Moscow has likely recognised that its initial approach failed and is moving additional combat power toward Ukraine.

“The tide of the war could change rapidly in Russia’s favour if the Russian military has correctly identified its failings and addresses them promptly, given the overwhelming advantage in net combat power that Moscow enjoys,” it said.

The confusion over how Russia has used its air force comes as President Joe Biden's administration rejects calls by Kyiv for a no-fly zone that could draw the United States directly into a conflict with Russia, whose plans for its air force are unclear.

Military experts have seen evidence of a lack of Russian air force coordination with ground troop formations, with multiple Russian columns of troops sent forward beyond the reach of their own air defense cover.

That leaves Russian soldiers vulnerable to attack from Ukrainian forces, including those newly equipped with Turkish drones and USand British anti-tank missiles. David Deptula, a retired USAir Force three-star general who once commanded the no-fly zone over northern Iraq, said he was surprised that Russia didn't work harder to establish air dominance from the start.

"The Russians are discovering that coordinating multi-domain operations is not easy," Deptula said. "And that they are not as good as they presumed they were."

While the Russians have been under-performing, Ukraine's military has been exceeding expectations so far.

Ukraine's experience from the last eight years of fighting with Russian-backed separatist forces in the east was dominated by static World War One-style trench warfare.

By contrast Russia's forces got combat experience in Syria, where they intervened on the side of President Bashar al-Assad, and demonstrated some ability to synchronize ground maneuvers with air and drone attacks.

Ukraine's ability to keep flying air force jets is a visible demonstration of the country's resilience in the face of attack and has been a morale booster, both to its own military and Ukraine's people, experts say.

It has also led to mythologising of the Ukrainian air force, including a tale about a Ukrainian jet fighter that purportedly single-handedly downed six Russian aircrafts, dubbed online as "The Ghost of Kyiv."

(With inputs from agencies)