Yes. Long term it's hard to imagine Ukraine holding off Russia. The best hope is that a costly invasion causes Putin enough domestic issues that he is forced into some kind of compromise.
Bellingcat reports that the orders are to take Kyiv by Monday regardless the losses if Ukraine can hold out for longer they might just be in the clear.
It’s also clear now that the Ukraine is getting direct intelligence from NATO especially from the global hawk drones and the sigint/elint aircraft it’s been flying their ability to avoid Russian offenses, hit key targets and to mount effective counter attack seem to indicate they do have map cheats enabled.
The training they got from NATO forces seem to be paying off in spades too.
Russia seem to be closer and closer to the point where their only winning condition is a Grozny scenario and if that happens then there is no chance that NATO would stand by.
Conventional warfare with limited civilian casualties would be tolerated leveling cities wouldn’t this isn’t Syria.
The EU and NATO knows that even if Russia takes Ukraine they won’t be able to hold it it might take another decade but it eventually would be free again even without major insurgency.
Puppet regimes don’t hold and Ukrainians have been far more interconnected with the EU especially through Poland than say Belarus.
If that happens we are facing the very real possibility of escalation to some kind of nuclear war per Russia’s doctrine.
If we do not save Ukraine due to our own fear, then that’s the effective precedence Putin will have just set. Russian conquering Ukraine is an _escalation_ from NATO perspective.
And from I see, the Ukrainians will probably force them to do that, if they want to take it.
They can’t risk it especially considering they can’t control the skies over central and eastern Ukraine.
Russia hasn’t been able to stop Israel from controlling the skies over Syria either and despite the fact that there is probably a major political component there (Russia doesn’t want Iran to establish themselves in Syria either since it would diminish Syrian dependence on Russia) there is also a very much practical component to it too.
Israel can knock Russia out of Syria even if it can’t do it without any losses it can do it without major losses and other than a symbolic attack most likely a Russian sub sinking Israeli naval assets or attacking Israeli gas platforms in the med Russia cannot wage a conventional war on Israel due to the distance and the vulnerability of their logistics chain.
The situation in Ukraine isn’t that different Russia knows that it only can operate there as long as NATO allows it too and know it probably knows that better than ever.
If we to assume that Russia does not want a nuclear armageddon then we can assume that they would respect which ever red lines NATO has telegraphed to them in private.
Javelins would probably not be that effective if the tanks enter the city but other anti tank weapons like the NLAW are. Also barricades could have them bogged down. But still if the numbers of 500 tanks in Kyiv are true and the Russians are under orders not to retreat under any circumstances holding the city might be difficult.
If Russia takes Kyiv even if they don’t kill Zelenskyy they’ll have a bargaining chip to play in the negotiations that would surly have to happen sometime next week if they don’t they don’t have anything.
Right now Russia is running out of win conditions or even a way to get out of this situation at all and that is the most dangerous part.
If they have nothing to bargain with they can’t come to the negotiating table to get the sanctions removed and they will not issue an unconstitutional surrender under any circumstances other than if there to be a regime change in Russia.
Even if they make no progress from this point onwards, their main bargaining chip would be withdrawing from western and central Ukraine.
also kyiv is built from very long and very wide streets (i was born there). if you have enough javelins/nlaw, it will be not too different from shooting range in urban environment
Javelin or any ATGM with DFA doesn’t like power lines.
Line of sight can also be a problem.
IR seekers are more difficult to use due to interference from other IR sources.
Wire guided missiles don’t like urban environments either fences, power lines etc.
Wireless guided missiles actually do get interference from WiFi.
Then you have the tactical issues.
Fear of collateral damage, fewer firing positions which make your actions more predicable etc, and due to the nature of the urban environment you have much fewer enemy vehicles exposed at any time.
It’s not that ATGMs become totally useless it’s just that they aren’t nearly as useful as on an open battlefield.
and it seems fairly open. If I was a tank driver I wouldn't count on a couple of power lines saving me from missiles.
Could that be the way this all ends? Maybe the FSB will serve Putin a cup of its world-famous Polonium tea.