Zaluzhnyy and Positional Warfare

A New Update on the War from the Ukrainian Commander in Chief

Source: @UKikaski Twitter/X

It’s been a week of real media and public relations chaos at the top of the Ukrainian government and military. You get this from time to time in democracies that go to war, but even when you recognize it for what it is it isn’t very pretty.

Stefan Korshak

In recent interview with The Economist, accompanied by a short By Invitation article and a nine-page paper on the status of the Russo-Ukraine War, General Zaluzhnyy provides perhaps the best-informed analysis of the war. It is an update that provides a strategic diagnosis, and the current trajectory of the war.  

The most widely reported part has been the use of the ‘s’ word: stalemate. In The Economist interview of General Zaluzhnyy, the Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief, was quoted as saying that:

Just like in the first world war we have reached the level of technology that puts us into a stalemate…There will most likely be no deep and beautiful breakthrough.

Within a short period of time, a response to the Zaluzhnyy article was provided by the President of Ukraine during a 4 November news conference. President Zelenskyy noted that:

Time has passed, people are tired, regardless of their status, and this is understandable…But this is not a stalemate, I emphasize this once again.

The New York Times sought to focus on this as an ‘emerging fissure’ between the President and the military. This is an unfortunate characterisation, and not very accurate. The public difference in language, while unfortunate, is just part of the normal back and forth that characterises civil-military relations in peace and war.

As I noted on 6 November: “Unlike China, Russia, Iran, the ongoing discourse between civil and military leaders frequently sees significant differences in view occur. This is encouraged because politicians and military leaders have different backgrounds and experiences which they bring to the table. These differences in view, while causing friction, allow for the full consideration of all options to solve the very complex problems of a nation at war (and even nations at peace).”

And while the implications of Zaluzhnyy’s article for civil-military relations in the Ukrainian context are explored towards the end of this piece, my primary aim here is to examine the Zaluzhnyy interview and nine-page paper. I will consider why it was released now, and what it may tell us about the current status of the conflict and its trajectory.

First, why did General Zaluzhnyy write this article on Positional Warfare, and why now?