By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has approved a plan to establish separate assault forces, according to reports. Zelenskyy stated that the decision follows the observed success of existing assault battalions and regiments during 2025. Preparations for the announcement are underway, with the expectation that the forces will be operational within a week to ten days. The assault forces will also incorporate a drone component.
Read the original article here
Zelenskyy announces decision to establish assault forces. This announcement sparks immediate curiosity. The key question is: how do these assault forces differentiate from the standard military units already in service?
Assault forces are crafted for a specific purpose: pushing back into territory that has been seized by the enemy, or even launching attacks directly into Russia itself. This suggests a shift in Ukraine’s strategic posture. Previously, the focus was largely defensive. Now, with these new forces, Ukraine may be ready to transition toward a counter-offensive stance.
The shift from defense to offense might be driven by a few factors. Firstly, it could be due to the depletion of Russia’s resources, leading to opportunities to exploit weaknesses along the front lines. When enemy supply lines are stretched thin, certain areas may become vulnerable. This could allow for strategic penetrations by these specially trained units.
It is important to note the assumption that the new assault forces will be equipped with better training and resources compared to the standard line forces. They are designed to be tactically superior, even when faced with heavy casualties. They will likely receive specialized equipment, optimizing them for offensive operations. This signifies a deeper commitment to reclaiming lost territories or carrying the fight directly to the enemy.
The creation of these assault forces is not necessarily a sign of weakness, as some might suggest. It is likely a formalization of practices already in place, a method to concentrate resources and training to specialized units. Such a move can streamline logistics and boost morale among these elite units.
There are several possible ways to interpret the announcement. One possibility is that these forces will be specifically trained and equipped to breach enemy lines – essentially, storm troopers. This may suggest a shift in Ukraine’s strategy from primarily defensive operations to a more offensive approach. Past Ukrainian offensives have been costly, resulting in minimal strategic gains. With dedicated units, the balance might shift, potentially allowing for more significant gains with acceptable losses.
A second interpretation is that Ukraine may be planning to directly target Russian territory. This could suggest a belief that the Russian military is overextended and struggles to defend its borders. The possibility is that Ukraine is ready to escalate, with less concern about the Russian response or the reactions of their Western allies.
Finally, the announcement might be a propaganda or psychological operation aimed at rattling Russia. Perhaps it is similar to commandos or special forces, operating independently behind enemy lines to conduct sabotage, eliminate key military figures, or disrupt enemy operations. These actions could weaken Russia’s ability to wage war.
It is likely a reflection of a doctrinal shift and better integration of existing practices within the army’s command structure. Making this more formal and better integrated into their military apparatus could be bad news for Russia, as Ukraine has had much success. So, creating a dedicated group to attack specifically could mean that the gloves are off. Ukraine is shifting towards counter-warfare, becoming less concerned with avoiding civilian casualties.
The creation of assault forces could mean a further weakening of the regular line units. If the assault forces suffer significant casualties and their combat effectiveness is compromised, this could have adverse implications for Ukraine’s ability to conduct operations successfully. However, the formation of these units is not an admission of defeat; instead, it may represent a strategic evolution in response to the realities of the conflict.