logo
eRussia's ‘triple chokehold' tactic driving Ukraine back

eRussia's ‘triple chokehold' tactic driving Ukraine back

Yahoo23-05-2025
Russia is deploying a military strategy known as the 'triple chokehold' to grind down Ukrainian troops, according to experts.
Kyiv's forces are facing severe pressure on multiple fronts while Russia works to edge them towards exhaustion by integrating three combat elements into a cohesive strategy greater than the sum of its parts.
Vladimir Putin's forces are launching ground assaults to pin troops down, followed by drone strikes to restrict movement, and then launching glide bombs to target offensive positions.
There were early signs that Russia was deploying the tactic on the battlefield last year, The Telegraph was told – but Moscow's armies have significantly increased its use over the last two months along the front line.
'The whole Russian army is using the triangle strategy,' said Serhii Kuzan, the chairman of the Ukrainian Security and Cooperation Centre. 'We call it the strategy and war of exhaustion.'
Since the beginning of this year, Russia has been plagued by a depletion of resources and numerous failed offensives.
The country's military is said to be losing over 1,000 soldiers per day, while Ukrainian armed forces have hit 1,159 Russian tanks, and more than 2,500 armoured vehicles since the start of 2025.
Heavy losses mean Russia is increasingly trying to press its key advantages over Ukraine – a steady supply of soldiers and an ability to quickly produce drones and glide bombs.
These efforts are proving effective, with Russia's forces capturing close to 1,500 square miles of territory last year – its most significant gains since Putin launched his invasion in 2022.
'It's a very attritional mode of warfare,' explained Nick Reynolds, research fellow for land warfare at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). 'These three elements create conflicting imperatives for Ukrainian defenders.'
The methodical approach begins with ground assaults fighting to pin down Ukrainian troops, forcing them into defensive positions and stalling their ability to manoeuvre.
The continued assaults put heavy pressure on Ukrainian defences.
'By using huge numbers of people and sending them in assaults on Ukrainian positions, they are trying to exhaust our soldiers and our resources,' said Mr Kuzan. 'The intensity of the fighting in places like Pokrovsk is very high, with assaults every two hours. This is of course exhausting for our soldiers.'
Next, drones are deployed to restrict Ukrainian mobility, conduct surveillance, target vulnerable points and disrupt troop movements.
These drones include first person view (FPV) drones, which allow Russian forces to track Ukrainian positions in real time and quickly respond to any troop movements.
'Because of these drones, Ukraine is forced to man the front line with static defensive positions supported by extensive deception measures, for example, large-scale digging, to obscure where troops are actually concentrated,' said Mr Reynolds
The third prong sees Russia deploy glide bombs to target key offensive positions from long distances, weakening Ukraine's ability to sustain operations. These long-range, precision-guided munitions target key Ukrainian positions, particularly artillery and defensive installations.
'This is where the real dilemma comes, or the really difficult one, to which there isn't really an answer,' said Mr Reynolds.
'Digging in and all those protective measures are excellent for reducing attrition by artillery or FPVs, yet glide bombs will destroy those fortifications and bury people.'
The combination forces Ukrainian soldiers to choose between holding their positions – risking heavy casualties and resource exhaustion – or staying mobile, which increases their exposure to drone strikes and isolated attacks.
Credit: Russian Ministry of Defence
'What pins Ukrainian forces in place is the combined threat of Russian ground operations, artillery, and drones, especially FPV and tactical unmanned aerial vehicles,' added Mr Reynolds.
Glide bombs have become the most critical element for this strategy, buoyed by Russia's ability to churn them out quickly.
'Rates of Russian production and employment of glide bombs and FPV drones has greatly increased as the war has gone on,' John Hardie, the deputy director of the Russia Program at the Foundation for Defence of Democracies, told The Telegraph.
Russia plans to produce 75,000 glide bombs in 2025, averaging about 205 per day, according to RUSI, greatly increasing its ability to deploy the tactic.
Ukraine has adapted to the triple chokehold by shifting to a dynamic defence strategy – constant repositioning and unpredictability, rather than holding fixed positions.
It is using a combination of mines, various strike zones and traditional fire against Russian forces before they manage to search its undermanned infantry positions, according to Mr Hardie.
Ukraine has also expanded strike-drone units that serve as a key force multiplier, and dramatically increased production of FPV drones and other unmanned systems.
'The Ukrainians have become very adept and innovative about countering all types of Russian attack,' said Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former British Army colonel and chemical weapons expert.
The strategy has pushed Ukraine even further into a war of endurance. But as of yet, any gains are incremental for Russia, and the tactic has failed to result in any large-scale operational breakthroughs.
'Russia is fixing the Ukrainian forces but cannot manoeuvre to deliver a decisive blow,' said Mr de Bretton-Gordon.
The issues for Russia of under-trained soldiers and a lack of armoured vehicles remain unsolved. Witnesses have reported the use of motorbikes and even e-scooters by Russian troops to push towards Ukrainian defensive lines.
The glide bombs also have a significantly high failure rate.
'They have found it very difficult to concentrate force because this type of manoeuvre takes a lot of training and co-ordination,' said Mr de Bretton-Gordon.
'Most of the soldiers on the front line now are barely trained conscripts who can just attack in a straight line,' he added. 'Many cannot even clean their rifles properly.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump cancels Bedminster vacation to work on Ukraine-Russia talks
Trump cancels Bedminster vacation to work on Ukraine-Russia talks

The Hill

time28 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Trump cancels Bedminster vacation to work on Ukraine-Russia talks

President Trump canceled his August vacation to his Bedminster resort to work on talks to end the Ukraine-Russia war, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday. Leavitt said Trump considered continuing peace talks while at his New Jersey golf resort but decided to stay at the White House instead. 'This is normally the time when the president goes on vacation, but not this president,' she said. 'There [were] discussions about him working from Bedminster for a couple of weeks, but he decided against it.' 'He's a man on a mission. He wants to move. Get things done quickly,' Leavitt added. 'He wants to strike when the iron is hot.' Presidents typically take a vacation in August while Congress is out for its recess. Trump took a 17-day trip to Bedminster in 2017 during his first term. Trump has been focused on ending the Ukraine-Russia war and met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. Days later, on Monday, Trump hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and several European leaders at the White House for talks. The president announced after those talks that he is working to arrange a bilateral meeting between Putin and Zelensky, followed by a trilateral meeting that would involve him. When asked about the timing of the trilateral meeting, Leavitt replied, 'It's hard to judge. I think he wants to see how the bilat goes.' The White House has been optimistic about the meetings taking place, without giving a timeline. Leavitt told reporters that Putin promised he would have a direct meeting with Zelensky.

Trump offers assurances that US troops won't be sent to help defend Ukraine
Trump offers assurances that US troops won't be sent to help defend Ukraine

Boston Globe

time28 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Trump offers assurances that US troops won't be sent to help defend Ukraine

The Republican president, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other European leaders held hours of talks at the White House on Monday aimed at bringing an end to Russia's war against Ukraine. While answering questions from journalists, Trump did not rule out sending U.S. troops to participate in a European-led effort to defend Ukraine as part of security guarantees sought by Zelenskyy. Trump said after his meeting in Alaska last week with Russian President Vladimir Putin that Putin was open to the idea of security guarantees for Ukraine. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up But asked Tuesday on Fox News Channel's 'Fox & Friends' what assurances he could provide going forward and beyond his term that American troops would not be part of defending Ukraine's border, Trump said, 'Well, you have my assurance, and I'm president.' Advertisement Trump would have no control over the U.S. military after his term ends in January 2029. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later on Tuesday emphasized that 'U.S. boots will not be on the ground' as part of any potential peacekeeping mission. The president also said in the interview that he is optimistic that a deal can be reached to end the Russian invasion, but he underscored that Ukraine will have to set aside its hope of getting back Crimea, which was seized by Russian forces in 2014, and its long-held aspirations of joining the NATO military alliance. Advertisement 'Both of those things are impossible,' Trump said. Putin, as part of any potential deal to pull his forces out of Ukraine, is looking for the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, as well as recognition of Crimea as Russian territory. Trump on Monday said that he was arranging for direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy. But the Kremlin has not yet said whether Putin, who has resisted previous calls by Trump and others for direct negotiations on ending the war, is committed to a face-to-face meeting with the Ukrainian leader. Asked whether Putin has promised Trump that he'll meet directly with the Ukrainian leader, Leavitt responded affirmatively. 'He has,' Leavitt said of Putin. Trump, early on Monday during talks with Zelenskyy and European leaders, said that he was pressing for three-way talks among Zelenskyy, Putin and himself. But after speaking to Putin later in the day, Trump said that he was arranging first for a face-to-face between Zelenskyy and Putin and that three-way talks would follow if necessary. 'It was an idea that evolved in the course of the president's conversations with both President Putin, President Zelensky and the European leaders yesterday,' Leavitt explained. But when discussing a phone call held after the meeting between Trump and the Russian leader, Putin's foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov gave no indication that either a bilateral or a trilateral meeting with Ukraine had been agreed. Trump said he believed Putin's course of action would become clear in the coming weeks. Advertisement 'I think Putin is tired of it,' Trump said. 'I think they're all tired of it. But you never know. We're going to find out about President Putin in the next couple of weeks. That I can tell you.'

Ukraine wants a ‘ceasefire,' Putin and Trump want a ‘peace deal.' Here's the big difference
Ukraine wants a ‘ceasefire,' Putin and Trump want a ‘peace deal.' Here's the big difference

CNN

time28 minutes ago

  • CNN

Ukraine wants a ‘ceasefire,' Putin and Trump want a ‘peace deal.' Here's the big difference

Russia Donald Trump War in Ukraine ImmigrationFacebookTweetLink Follow US President Donald Trump has ditched his call for a ceasefire in Ukraine, backing instead Russian President Vladimir Putin's push for a permanent peace agreement. That has not stopped some European leaders from pushing for a temporary truce first, even though the US president has seemingly decided one is not necessary. It's not that Kyiv and its allies don't want peace. But they understand that the kind of deal sought by Russia can't happen unless the most basic principle underpinning the global order – that a country cannot get what it wants by force – is thrown under the bus. And Kyiv's European allies are not willing to risk that, not least because they could well become the next target of Russia's aggression. Speaking to the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and several European leaders in the Oval Office on Monday, Trump adopted some of Moscow's talking points, questioning whether a ceasefire was 'necessary' if a broader peace deal could be achieved. But international law experts and analysts say that any deal that would force Ukraine to give up its land to stop the killing of its people by Russia would be completely illegal under the UN Charter, a key international agreement which most countries signed up to after the horrors of the Second World War. While often thought of as essentially the same thing, there is a big difference between a peace deal and a ceasefire in the eyes of international law. During a ceasefire, warring parties agree to stop fighting with each side keeping hold of the territory under its military control. But the understanding is that the pause is temporary – usually to provide a window to negotiate, deliver humanitarian help or evacuate civilians. Kyiv and its European allies suggested that a ceasefire might be a precursor for a meeting between Zelensky and Putin, followed by a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelensky, and Putin. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who attended the summit on Monday, said that he 'can't imagine that the next meeting will take place without a ceasefire.' A ceasefire can be short – like the 1914 Christmas Truce that lasted a few days – or it could stretch to decades. The ceasefires between Cyprus and Turkey, and between India and Pakistan have been in place for decades with no permanent peace settlement in sight. What Putin wants – and now, apparently, Trump as well – is a permanent peace agreement. Under international law, a peace agreement is meant to be a formal, long-term treaty that dictates the future relationship between two countries. And that's where things get complicated. 'There is a uniquely core principle to international law that is inscribed front and center in the UN Charter: Use of force is emphatically prohibited. So what that also (means) is that any treaty that you procure by use of force is effectively illegal and is inherently void,' said Jeremy Pizzi, an international lawyer and a legal adviser of Global Rights Compliance, a human rights foundation. Little detail has been shared about the kind of peace deal Putin discussed with Trump last week, but it is clear that the Russian leader has not abandoned some of his maximalist demands, including that Ukraine give up the entire eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions, known as the Donbas, and is banned from joining NATO in the future. This would make the deal doubly illegal under international law: illegal because of the way it would be reached – by force – and illegal because of its content. But even if he wanted to – which he does not – Zelensky cannot agree to give up territory. Under the Ukrainian constitution, any change to the country's borders must be approved by a referendum – a rule that is in place partly because of Russia's tendency to install puppet governments in foreign countries. A survey conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), a leading public opinion pollster, in May and June found that the vast majority of Ukrainians reject the idea of recognizing Ukrainian territories as part of Russia. An even bigger majority is against giving up control over territories that are currently controlled by Ukraine. Speaking to CNN from Kyiv, Pizzi said that even if the Ukrainians somehow changed their minds and voted in favor of giving up their land – which they are unlikely to do, according to KIIS – the agreement would still be illegal under international law. 'Regardless of the Ukrainian constitution, Zelensky, or no one, can hand over territory linked to aggressive military conquest. The prohibition of using armed force to conquer territory is absolute under international law,' Pizzi said. There are also practical and strategic reasons why Ukraine cannot agree to Moscow's demands. The Russian military currently controls almost all of Luhansk and more than 70% of Donetsk, which means that Putin is asking Kyiv to give up even more than it has lost so far. But the parts of the Donbas region that are still under Kyiv's control include infrastructure that is crucial for Ukraine's defense. A string of industrial cities including Sloviansk, Kramatorsk and Kostiantynivka that are connected by main roads and railways form the backbone of Ukraine's defenses. If they were to be taken by Russia, the road to the western parts of the country would be wide open. There is also little incentive for Kyiv to trust Moscow, Pizzi said. 'Russia has engaged in armed attacks against Ukraine for over 10 years now, consistently, repeatedly during that time. Russia has feigned negotiations, feigned good faith, while continuing to use violence and keeping up the same illegal maximalist goals in the background and Ukrainian authorities are painfully aware of this,' he said. 'There is no logical, sensible reason to trust Russia in the absence of a precursor, a good faith decision or engagement that they make on their part to hold off from killing more Ukrainians,' he added. Kyiv, backed by the Europeans, has indicated that it is willing to recognize the current reality on the ground in order to stop the killing. This would likely mean freezing the conflict along the current front lines and essentially giving up on trying to regain its land while the ceasefire is in place. Analysts at the Eurasia Group wrote in a note on Monday that the European leaders would no doubt make it very clear to Trump that there can be no question of acceptance of a permanent annexation of Ukrainian territory by force. 'While there is openness to recognition of the de facto military position on the ground, neither Ukraine nor the Europeans will accept that Russia should be 'given' more land than it has captured,' they said, quoting a Western intelligence assessment that it would take Russia more than four years to occupy the rest of the Donbas. And, crucially, even if Kyiv were to recognize that the reality on the ground gives Russia the de-facto control of some of its land, it would certainly not agree to make this a permanent recognition. Kyiv's goal remains to regain all of its territory in the future. The Eurasia analysts said there was some doubt in the European minds that 'Trump understands, or cares about, the importance of the distinction' between the two. A ceasefire might be the only way out of the current violence. A permanent peace deal would be against international law. 'The reality is that (international law) makes it almost politically impossible to conclude a peace treaty when the victim is not winning. And my response to that is: That's the point,' Pizzi said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store