1 Institute for the Study of War & AEI’s Critical Threats Project 2022
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment
Karolina Hird, George Barros, Grace Mappes, and Frederick W. Kagan
July 5, 7:30 pm ET
Click here to see ISW's interactive map of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This map is
updated daily alongside the static maps present in this report.
Russia’s stated objectives in its invasion of Ukraine remain regime change in Kyiv and
the truncation of the sovereignty of any Ukrainian state that survives the Russian attack
despite Russian military setbacks and rhetoric hinting at a reduction in war aims
following those defeats. Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev stated on July 5 that
the Russian military operation in Ukraine will continue until Russia achieves its goals of protecting
civilians from “genocide,” “denazifying” and demilitarizing Ukraine, and obliging Ukraine to be
permanently neutral between Russia and NATO—almost exactly restating the goals Russian President
Vladimir Putin announced in his February 24 speech justifying the war.
Putin had stated that the
operation aimed to protect civilians from humiliation and genocide, demilitarize and denazify Ukraine,
and prosecute genocidal perpetrators.
Patrushev’s explicit restatement of Putin‘s initial objectives,
nearly five months later, strongly indicates that the Kremlin does not consider recent Russian gains in
Luhansk Oblast sufficient to accomplish the initial goals of the "special operation,” supporting ISW’s
ongoing assessment that the Kremlin has significant territorial aspirations beyond the Donbas.
Patrushev’s statement suggests that Russian military leadership will continue to push for advances
outside Donetsk and Luhansk blasts and that the Kremlin is preparing for a protracted war with the
intention of taking much larger portions of Ukraine.
Patrushev’s statement is noteworthy because of its timing and his position as a close
confidante of Putin. Patrushev is very unlikely to stray far from Putin’s position in his public
comments given his relationship with Putin and his role in the Kremlin. His restatement of virtually the
same maximalist objectives that Putin laid out before the invasion even as Russian forces seemed to be
closing in on the more limited objectives of securing Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts—which Putin and
other Russian leaders had hinted were their new aims following their defeats around Kyiv—strongly
suggests that those hints did not reflect any actual change in Kremlin policy. Patrushev’s statement
significantly increases the burden on those who suggest that some compromise ceasefire or even peace
based on limited additional Russian territorial gains is possible, even if it were acceptable to Ukraine
or desirable for the West (neither of which is the case).
Igor Girkin, a Russian nationalist and former commander of militants in the 2014 war in
Donbas, responded to Patrushev’s statements and continued expressing his general
disillusionment with the Kremlin’s official line on operations in Ukraine. Girkin said that
the intended goals of “denazification” and “de-militarization” will only be possible with the total defeat
of the Ukrainian military and the surrender of the Ukrainian government.
Girkin noted that Russian
victory is premised on the capture of "Novorossiya”—a notional territory that encompasses eight
Ukrainian oblasts, including the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts and much of eastern and southern
Ukraine. Girkin also claimed that the capture of “Novorossiya” is the bare minimum and that Russian
goals will be realized through the total capture of “Malorossiya,” which is an invocation of the Russian
imperial concept for almost all Ukrainian territory. Girkin is once again pushing back on the Kremlin
line, which he views as insufficient in securing Russian objectives in Ukraine. Luhansk People’s
Republic (LNR) Ambassador to Russia Rodion Miroshnik similarly suggested that the Kremlin has not
yet met its goals in Ukraine, despite reaching the borders of his claimed oblast, and stated that LNR
authorities are still not confident in the security of the LNR.
Girkin and Miroshnik’s statements, taken
together, indicate that Russian nationalists continue to push for further territorial gains and, at least in
