In A Year, Ukraine Has Gone From Crisis To Freeing 400 Km, Aiding US vs Iran

The narrative sure has changed. A year ago, sonorous experts were warning of Ukraine's imminent collapse due to manpower shortages and Russia's seemingly implacable strength. Fast forward to this month and Ukraine has not only taken on the offensive initiative in the Donbas and southern parts of its land, but is helping the US defend itself against Iranian drones with Russian targeting (despite White House denials).  

The implication is that in the preceding year, despite the US government trying to assist Russia and despite Russia's brutal attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure in the depths of winter, Ukraine has emerged stronger. And as if that were not significant enough, Russia's attempts at offensive operations across the front this winter have uniformly failed. Given the disparity in sizes, this may not be a complete momentum shift, but it is a signal that the previous, negative narrative was superficial and, arguably, inaccurate. JL

Mick Ryan reports in Futura Doctrina and Phillips O'Brien reports in his substack:

A year ago, many were saying Ukraine was failing. Ukraine was facing a manpower crisis, would be unable to hold back the Russian steamroller and with the US now under Donald Trump, faced a bleak future. The reality ended up being rather different. From that to helping the USA defend itself is quite a trajectory. Ukraine is helping the US and Gulf States and is the only nation in the world who could have provided aid so quickly. (And) the most important battlefield development of the past year was Ukraine’s liberation of occupied Dnipropetrovsk Oblast in a deliberate, planned series of attacks. The operation resulted in Russian forces postponing their planned offensives, redeploying troops from other sectors, and reinforcing their defenses. Russia’s spring-summer offensive disrupted before it commenced is a significant achievement.

As we are still in the early phases of 2026, it is worth thinking about where things stood a year ago to understand the strategic value of Ukraine for Europe now and going forward. In a nutshell, a year ago many people were saying Ukraine was failing, that Europe had to take on Ukraine as a burden, etc. Ukraine was portrayed as facing a manpower crisis that would soon see unable to hold back the Russian steamroller and with the USA now under the leadership of Donald Trump, it was proclaimed that Ukraine faced a very bleak future. 

The reality ended up being rather different. This year the focus is not so much on Ukrainian weakness but on Ukrainian attempts to fight back and whether they have a chance at success. That is remarkable with the US changing sides and the Russians hammering Ukrainian infrastructure all winter. This change in narrative is because certain key Ukrainian strengths and capabilities are now far more apparent to the media and analytical community than they were a year ago. Much of this strength is in war production and technology, strengths that have become glaringly apparent over the last two and a half weeks. They are so vital that Europe’s defense future now requires Ukraine. Ukraine is now achieving what Europe has struggled with for decades—creating new and innovative start-ups.  

The most important battlefield development of the past week, and perhaps for the past year, was Ukraine’s near-complete liberation of occupied territory in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast. On 10 March, Major General Oleksandr Komarenko, head of the Main Operational Directorate of Ukraine’s General Staff, confirmed to RBC-Ukraine that more than 400 square kilometres of territory had been recaptured since the start of the Oleksandrivka axis operation in late January 2026. Three small settlements remain to be cleared.

The operation was a deliberate, planned series of attacks. Ukrainian forces conducted mutually supporting advances towards Hulyaipole and Oleksandrivka, advancing 10–12 kilometres on each axis. Key contributors to Ukrainian successes included dispersed Russian positions, winter weather suppressing Russian drone operations, and the disruptions to Russian battlefield communications by the throttling of Telegram and Starlink. The operation had mutually supporting objectives. At the tactical level, the aim was to push Russian forces out of Dnipropetrovsk. Operationally, it was designed to pre-empt Russia’s anticipated spring offensive.

According to UNITED24 Media and ISW, the operation appears to have resulted in Russian forces postponing their planned offensives, to redeploy troops from other sectors, and reinforce several areas in their defensive scheme. If Russia’s spring-summer offensive planning has indeed been disrupted before it commenced is a significant achievement.

Across the rest of the frontline, the pattern remained mixed but not unfavourable to Ukraine. Russia Matters’ March 11 Report Card found that during the week of 3–10 March, Russian forces actually lost 30 square miles of Ukrainian territory, contrasting sharply with the gain of 25 square miles in the preceding week. Russian advances continued near Pokrovsk and in the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area, while Ukrainian forces advanced near Kupyansk and in western Zaporizhzhia Oblast

In many ways Trump continues to live in the narrative of 2024-2025, which had Ukraine on the back foot and doomed to lose. From that point of view, Ukraine could only be seen as a supplicant, begging for hand-outs and on the brink of catastrophe with many of its weaknesses self inflicted. A year ago such language was everywhere. Here, for instance, is how Michael Kofman summarized Ukraine’s position in a CDS Podcast.

“But I think we’re entering 2025 with Ukraine in a very difficult position. There are some very glaring structural issues in terms of Ukraine’s manpower, mobilization, and force management decisions that were made last year, that could have been a lot better. And if we look at the overall funding situation and prospects for sustained Western support, Ukraine certainly faces an uncertain future this year.”

From that to helping the USA defend itself is quite a trajectory. 

If Ukraine now helps the US and Gulf States, Ukraine’s future matters much more for Europe. Ukraine is the only nation in the world who could have provided aid in this way so quickly, and aid that actually seems to work. 

The thing that is most impressive for Ukraine (and vital for Europe) however is not that this aid was given, it was that this is just one part of an entirely new military/technological capacity that has been created wholesale over the previous few years. Ukraine has seen a whole new generation of start ups blossom in military/high tech areas, start-ups which should also have significant civilian cross-over implications in the future.

Most prominently, these include strike drones of all types from the longer range Flamingos, to a host of different mid-range systems that are showing themselves to be very efficient.

Note, do watch out for the growing effectiveness of Ukrainian mid-range systems. I first tried to bring this distinction to your attention a few months ago, and I can now say that the evidence is beginning to come in. Ukraine is hitting more and more targets between 100-500kms from the front and doing great damage. The Ukrainians also, or so I am told, can build these mid range systems in large numbers. This is what I wrote about the issue in February.

My guess, and remember this is all my opinion, is that what they will attempt with the mid-range systems is to exacerbate significantly the problems they are causing for the Russians strategically on the battlefield (more losses than they can replace) and in the long-range war (economic losses). It is the mid-range which connects these two areas, and asserting control over movement and deployments in this mid-range area will hit Russian military forces coming and going as it were.

What the Ukrainians are doing now with these mid-range systems is trying to methodically degrade Russian logistics and air defense that are being kept further and further from the front line. There were reports of a number of such attacks this week.

Moving on from UAVs and air defense, the Ukrainians have and are developing a host of different systems including unpiloted ground vehicles, they are building up their internal capacity to make NATO-standard artillery pieces and shells, and they are pushing the boundaries in some areas of autonomous systems control. Moreover, as in the anti-UAV area, they are developing systems to coordinate all their capabilities to make them more effective; systems of systems as it were.

The total value of Ukraine’s military/technological capacity and how it has grown is worthy of note as well. Before the war, Ukraine mostly made updated versions of legacy Soviet systems. Now they are making some of the most cost-effective and technologically advanced systems to be found anywhere. It has been estimated that Ukraine’s defense industries have the ability now to produce up to $50 billion in weapons annually. This is more than Ukraine can fund on its own, which is why it is crying out for defense collaborators and why European support is so vital. Europeans have the money to help grow this defense/technology hub and not outsource to American or other producers.

And it should. Europe is rich, technologically conversant, but has a major entrepreneurial problem. Compared to the US, European start ups are less successful and stall much earlier in their growth process. Ukraine, however, is now a start-up hub. Much of Ukraine’s success has been from new producers, such as Magura, which makes sea drones, and is now valued at around $1 billion.

The Magura V5 USV which reaked havoc on the Black Sea Fleet. You might see a sea drone, others see a tech start up.

The speed with which Ukraine came to American aid last week would have been impossible for any other European producer.