Foreign Policy Diary – Donbass People’s Militias: History & Capabilities

Donate

Loading the player...

If you’re able, and if you like our content and approach, please support the project. Our work wouldn’t be possible without your help: PayPal: southfront@list.ru or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

Written and produced by SF Team: Brian Kalman, Daniel Deiss, Edwin Watson

The armed forces of the break-away republics of Donetsk and Lugansk have grown significantly in professionalism, effectiveness and size since the civil war escalated with the start of the Kiev government’s Anti-Terrorist Operation in April, 2014. What started out as a ragtag group of militias that refused to recognize an illegitimate government, which was openly hostile to them, has grown into an effective, conventional fighting force. Although hard to verify, the army numbers between 40,000 and 45,000 active personnel, as well as a pool of volunteer reserves that may be as high as 40,000.

When the Euromaidan turned violent, with the active support of neo-Nazi groups, and western backing became glaringly evident, especially on the part of the U.S. State Department, the ethnically Russian majorities of eastern and southeastern Ukraine saw the writing on the wall, and began to take measures to protect themselves. After the coup that overthrew the Yanukovich government, and the solidification of power by western-aligned oligarchs and ultra-nationalist fascists in Kiev, the militias moved to acquire closer parity of force with the new government by taking over police and army arsenals in their territories. Kalashnikovs, RPGs, and grenades supplemented the various improvised weapons of the militias, as the Kiev junta’s ATO started on April 15th, 2014. It was obvious from the early, dramatic downing of Mi-24 attack helicopters with MANPADS by the militias, that they most likely had received some aid from Russia.

The militias soundly defeated the UAF’s two successive offensives, which the militias skillfully turned into encirclements and routs. The encirclement battles of Iliovansk in 2014, and Debaltsevo in 2015, provided the militias with a large number of captured vehicles, heavy weapons and munitions. It is estimated that the DPR captured and recovered approximately 471 pieces of heavy equipment from the Debaltsevo cauldron alone, including 58 tanks, 141 IFVs and APCs, and 180 trucks. In addition, 18 self-propelled artillery pieces, 28 towed guns, and 10 large caliber mortars were recovered. NAF equipment workshops have proven capable of rendering approximately two thirds of the equipment they acquire, serviceable once again. Copious amounts of ammunition for all calibers of small arms and heavy weapons were also abandoned by the UAF in their rush to escape encirclement.

After two years of fighting against a much larger and well equipped adversary, the various militias have been converted into a more disciplined and structured fighting force, based on Russian standards and organization. While the overwhelming majority of their vehicles and heavy equipment are of Ukrainian origin, having been requisitioned or captured, they obviously have received material support from Russia in the form of munitions, uniforms, communication and signals equipment, and reconnaissance UAVs. Russia has also provided military trainers, advisors, and intelligence support. This is evident from the high degree of tactical proficiency exhibited by the militia in attacking and defending against a numerically superior adversary, their ability to quickly adapt to changing circumstances on the battlefield, and the proper use of infantry, IFVs and MBTs together in a mutually supportive combat role. Whether this Russian support is official, or carried out by private Russian citizens, especially military veterans, is hard to determine. The Russian government denies any official military involvement in the conflict.

The Donetsk Peoples Militia is composed of a number of motorized and mechanized brigades, as well as specialist units such as special operations, reconnaissance units, artillery batteries and at least one armored brigade. The “Sparta” battalion and the 1st Independent Battalion Tactical Group “Somalia” are arguably the two most recognized and effective units within the DPR militia. These two units have been quite effective in reinforcing hotspots in the defensive line and infiltrating the front lines and exploiting breakthroughs offensively. The DPR Militia is supported by a number of independent units of international volunteers, predominantly Russian. The importance of Russian volunteers cannot be denied, especially experienced veterans of Russia’s conflicts in the Caucasus Republics. The added positive effect on morale that these volunteers provide, in letting the militias know that Russians have not abandoned them, is of great importance.

The Lugansk Peoples Militia is comprised of approximately two battalions of mixed composition; however they most closely resemble mechanized battalions. They also possess separate reconnaissance, special operations, and artillery units. They are supported by a number of independent units, including Cossacks, international and Russian volunteers, and the famous “Prizak” (“Ghost”) Mechanized Battalion. The Ghost Battalion was formerly lead by Aleksey Mozgovoy, before he was killed in an ambush on May 23rd, 2015, by unknown assassins. This unit has remained semi-autonomous from the LPR chain of command, due to the questions surrounding Mozgovoy’s murder.

The DPR and LPR militias are predominantly comprised of infantry units; however, they do possess enough heavy equipment to approximate the establishment of at least two Russian Independent Motorized Rifle Brigades. The tank elements are comprised predominantly of Ukrainian T-64BMs and T-64BVs and a small number of T-72s. Inconclusive photographic evidence of vehicle identification numbers points to the possible Russian origin of some T-64s in NAF service.

The militias lack any conventional air assets, yet have made extensive use of UAVs of numerous types, including those commercially sold, for the purposes of surveillance and reconnaissance. They have proven quite adept at using UAVs in the combat role of artillery spotting. The NAF also possess enough anti-aircraft missile systems to provide effective air-defense against both ground attack fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, and to prohibit UAF employment of tactical airlift operations close to the territories of the DPR and LPR. The UAF have lost at least 21 aircraft to enemy action since the conflict began.

In a direct comparison to the militias, the Ukrainian Armed Forces consists of over 200,000 personnel, with approximately 70,000 stationed at the eastern conflict zone. The 2016 defense budget of Ukraine is approximately $4.4 billion USD, or 5% of national GDP. The UAF has far greater depth as of the summer of 2016, and thus can rotate units in and out of combat and establish a sizeable mobile reserve. Where the militias lack both of these advantages, they do; however, gain the advantage of shorter lines of supply, transport and communication, and a much higher degree of combat effectiveness, motivation and morale. Both forces utilize the same basic weaponry; however, the militias have proven far more proficient in the use of both armor and artillery.

The Militias are in a precarious situation, and their continued survival rests as much on their own resolve and ability as it does on the geo-political struggle of foreign powers. Perhaps the greatest variable exerting restraint on the UAF, and a renewed military offensive on Donbass is the threat of direct Russian intervention; however this may change dependent upon developments in other theaters of conflict. As the Syrian government forces continue their advances on both Aleppo and Raqqa, with the aid of renewed Russian airstrikes, the US may pressure the Poroshenko government to open a second front against Russia in Donbass. The Militias will once again be forced to comprise their role as a pawn on a chessboard that they do not control, all the while struggling to maintain their survival and independence in a deadly geopolitical game not of their choosing.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Pampalon

    Lots and lots of mistakes here. Outdated information. False pronounciation and names.

    • You are free to provide Your conclusions here and point out the mistakes.

      • George Washington

        Can we get an update on Russia’s current strategy in Syria? For example:

        Is there a (friendly) debate going on between Shoigu and Lavrov (guns vs diplomacy)

        Were recent setbacks in Aleppo and Raqqa related to the withdraw of SU-25’s

        What effects do the Shamal (sandstorms) have on modern military operations

        How does ISIS utilize these low-visibility conditions to their advantage (VBIED’S)

        An honest analysis of this very difficult situation would go a long way to rebuild some of the credibility South Front lost when you falsely claimed Sheikh Maqsoud fell…

        Not a Kurd just a long-time American reader who is a bit puzzled by your tone of late.

      • Pampalon

        Allright, since you’re asking. I’ve been monitoring this conflict since the beginning, I’ve stopped actively watching news because nothing much happened since Minsk 2.

        Prizrak is a brigade now, as are a lot of other formations that people now as batallions. The DPR and LPR forces fight better than their (brotherly) enemies, but not as good to be called truly sophisticated. They have problems with communicating among themselves and planning. They are paralyzed by the 5th column in the Kremlin, else they’d have gone farther and responded to Ukrainian aggression heavily. They’d have taken Mariupol.

        • Semi-autonomous part of the “Prizrak” calls themself “battalion”. There is no such thing as “Brigade Prizrak”, it’s just 4th Brigade of the LPR militia that had been created on the basis of the “Prizrak” battalion after Mozgovoy’s death. As result of the ongoing developments there won’t be such thing as “Prizrak” in the nearest future. This is the answer if we talk about the facts. Another part of the comment is your opinion. Different people have different vision of the situation, for sure.

    • Gabriel Hollows

      Such as?

  • Gabriel Hollows

    What happened to Givi and Motorola?

  • chris chuba

    I am not being arguing with the article here. I am going to post some common claims made that get repeated on Reuters and U.S. sites like realclreadefense.com. If anyone wants to comment on it, or post a link to a site that would give a good overview of this conflict it would be appreciated. I don’t trust the wikipedia article.

    1. The DPR makes extensive use of Russian provided aerial drones.
    2. The DPR was on the verge of being defeated at the early stages of the conflict and was only saved by significant intervention.
    3. The UKA was able to capture and defend Donetsk airport for a very long time and it was only captured by the DPR after they shelled the airport terminals into dust.
    4. The Russians are jamming all UKA communication in eastern Ukraine.

    I won’t bother posting the more inflammatory lies, these are at least technical claims that are worth mentioning.

    • Few additional notes:
      1 – Most drones, used by Donbass militias are DJI Phantom https://southfront.org/drones-over-syria/ This is far away from “extensive”
      2 – It’s hard to deny some Russian help, but we should to clarify what we mean under “significant intervention”
      3 – It’s urban warfare. There is nothing to add.
      4 – No proofs provided by the Kiev side.

      • George Washington

        Nice to see a SouthFront contributor sticking around to defend/explain his ideas.

      • chris chuba

        Thanks. I was just summarizing what is said in the western press, not giving my own views. The west characterizes Russian intervention in the Donbas as an ‘invasion’. I see no evidence that the Russian Federation has anything close to what they put in Syria into the Donbas and probably a small fraction of that. Most likely what the U.S. likes to call military advisors for a few key specialty areas.

    • Z Rekoning

      testing testing 1 2 3

    • falcemartello

      Check the youtube site ETO under the name Tex of Donbass and he will fill u in on the battle of Donbas with a Texas accent

  • dochi

    These “militias” are just drunken goons & thugs hired by Putin to murder innocent civilians and help Czar Putin build his new “Great Russia”.

    • I don’t see or saw evidence of that, although of course everything is hard to say if you don’t live there – and even if you do it will probably be difficult. One point I liked making is that the above video tries to make a guess as to the Russian involvement, private or public. For Russia as a whole, something like Donbass is a fairly small territory. It seems to me that Russia is able to do with it, whatever it pleases. To guess the Russian involvement, as an involvement *against* the people who live there or an involvement with generaly neutral/apathic local population, it is likely to see that the Novorossian Government would be dominated by operatives of the Russian Oligarchy / Government.

      To contrast it seems that the political development of the events can be seen as natural and grass roots created – to be honest that is the impression I have strongly. It started already long before the Maidan, where local Novorossian poeple refused entry to a certain ‘Freedom Caravan’ who did propaganda on behalf of the USA, by in part US born individuals. The whole split of the country in 2 parties suggests that opposition in Donbass was going to be strong. The Novorossian Government is apparently lead by a local and is comprised of locals in the highest offices. If Russia was strongly involved, wouldn’t one expect heavy handed involvement of the top posts from various Kremlin type offices, or other professionals of the Russian system ?

      That brings the Ukraine itself to mind, where instead you do see just such high level involvement in the Kiev junta from America. Hence the picture to my taste is fairly organic and credible: it is a local uprising, aided by Russia; as I would think, they have both the right and obligation to do so.

      I hope everyone is having their personal supplies in good order, because this will probalby escalate into World War 3 (nuclear war at the highest level). That sounds crazy, but in history wars that have killed / depopulated half of a population have already happened with nothing more then swords and mechanic contraptions (such as reportedly the 30 years war in Germany, which was “the 80 years war” for us in NL). Cities being massacred after sieges and suffering famine, are nothing new. The modern toys are new, the brutality and insanity of humanity is the same as ever. Therefore I think the worst is going to happen: full out nuclear war, including nuking each others major cities.

      The only practical question I am still thinking about is: what is a likely target in terms of size. Every million person city could yield one Army (200 000 men), and to nuke that is then to destroy one Army, and that seems to be militarily strategic – almost a magical form of warfare. If anyone is willing to make a reason guess as to how small the likely targets will get, I would gladly read it, thanks. Did South Front make a reasoned estimate of how bad a full nuclear war could become ? It might be useful for various reasons (deterrance, but also survival).