11/5/2025, CSIS Online Events. Watch the full panel here.
Speakers: Max Bergmann, Maria Snegovaya, Kateryna Bondar and Dara Massicot.
*All quotations are paraphrased. I write down quotes to the best of my ability, but it may not be word-for-word accurate. Paraphrased quotes are in “”, while ‘’ are my own snarky air quotes.
The panelists discussed the current state of the Russo-Ukraine War, noting trends and developments, comparing strategies, and guessing at the ultimate goals for Ukraine, Russia, and the US. Underlying the talk was the idea that this war is a lab for new technologies and strategies.
Adaptation cycles are compressing. Here are some developments we’ve seen throughout the war:
“Our traditional formations no longer provide the keys to success.”
Russians realize that they have great difficulty in massing significant equipment in any one place, since it will be spotted and blown up. Consequently, we see more “100km offensives”: deep-strike / very long-range drone and missile attacks. Because of Ukraine’s ability to carry out deeper strikes, Russia has relocated their bomber bases to be further away, in the Far East and close to China. Their long flight times to reach the front lines means that they need to carry fewer bombs, they experience increased wear and tear.
Additionally…
- Drones: that although much of the discussion surrounding this war has focused on UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, also known as drones), artillery is still key,as it can stop troops and equipment from massing.
- Fiberoptic cables for UAVs.
- AI autonomous drones: as of this broadcast, there is no fully autonomous UAV on the battlefield. This remains an enormous “yet.” The panelists predict that whichever deploys breakthrough technology in this area may gain a huge advantage.
- Andrey Belousov, Russia’s new Minister of Defense, has been making changes to the military, and is trying to foster greater innovation.
One difference between Russia and Ukraine’s military-industrial system is that Russia started the war with a heavily centralized weapons industry and are now trying to decentralize and boost innovation. Ukraine on the other hand had an extremely decentralized arms industry, and are now trying to centralize. In Ukraine, there were hundreds of small companies with lots of innovation, but the problem was that much of these technologies aren’t standardized or compatible with each other, and it’s tough to scale up production for certain weapons (particularly drones), since they are all very different. Right now however, Ukraine’s production capacity actually exceeds the government’s purchasing capacity.
Much of the conversation focused on the limitations faced by Russia and the current Ukrainian strategy of “bringing Russia to the table through pain”. Russia’s battle style is inefficient and casualty-intensive, and they are struggling to achieve their war aims (such as the four regions they claim are Russian territory). They also constantly need to balance the dwindling population that they are sending into battle. This includes launching strikes against oil refineries and other energy infrastructure. There have been oil and gas distribution issues in rural Russia. This is also where a disproportionate amount of Russian soldiers (and casualties) are from.
Russia remains obsessed with Donetsk and Donbas. The situation at the front lines is currently dire for Ukraine, as their positions are not being replenished with more troops. Russian soldiers spread out in tiny groups, then link up to overwhelm and capture Ukrainian positions. Continuing like this, the Russians are able to takes bites out of the Ukrainian line. Yet ‘progress’ has been slow. When the fight on the ground is going poorly for the Russians, they will often send in long range missiles/drones like the Shahed to bomb cities, giving the impression to their domestic audience that they are ‘getting something done’.
Overall, the assessment is that Russia is “grinding and hoping that the Americans get bored.” Indeed, the US is vital to Ukraine’s survival. One panelist mentioned that Russia misplayed its hand with the current administration. Trump’s goal was to end the war quickly, and he acted in ways that benefitted the Russians immensely. However, when peace talks were attempted, Putin delayed the process and demanded a solution to “the root causes” of the conflict. This did not go well, and he squandered his goodwill from the Trump Administration. Trump’s position towards Russia has soured considerably since then, however he is not as staunch an ally to Ukraine as his predecessor. The money that Ukraine is currently receiving is from the Biden Administration, and it is unclear how far Trump’s support extends beyond words. The panelists felt mixed about both American Tomahawk missiles being sent to Ukraine, and the new Ukrainian-designed Flamingo cruise missiles. Tomahawks will not make much of a difference unless Ukraine can access significant numbers of them. That is not currently the case. Similarly, Ukraine is only able to produce three to six Flamingo missiles per month, which will need to be ramped up to make a difference.
We shall have to see how things progress. In the meantime, don’t forget to floss.