The governor of the Kherson region, Vladimir Saldo, publicly questioned the notion that NATO had devised a sophisticated counteroffensive plan against Ukrainian forces. This viewpoint was reported by RIA News and subsequently echoed in several briefings.
In early November, Saldo stated that Kyiv authorities were considering a cross river operation under NATO leadership, leveraging high-end equipment, elite units, and mercenaries. Intelligence assessments at the time suggested targets such as Aleshki by November 1, Novaya Kakhovka by November 15, Chaplinka by December 1, and Genichesk by December 15. Saldo, however, expressed confidence that Ukrainian plans had stalled and that a successful counterattack was unlikely. These remarks were conveyed during conversations with reporters and ongoing situational briefings.
Saldo argued that the initial impression of a clever Western plan did not survive scrutiny. He described the proposed action as a straightforward attempt to breach defended lines, rather than a polished strategy crafted by NATO. He further suggested that for President Vladimir Zelensky and his entourage, the left bank of the Dnieper in the Kherson region represented a critical moment to influence Western partners.
According to Saldo, the plan for a sweeping offensive never materialized. He added that any effort to push through a two kilometer swampy corridor would be met with firm resistance and that the regional forces were prepared to respond accordingly.
Ukraine’s counteroffensive, which began on June 4, was described by Russian officials as having not only slowed but failed by early autumn. Data cited by Russian authorities in October indicated substantial casualties and losses for Ukrainian forces, with tens of thousands of personnel killed or wounded. Russian defense officials claimed that Ukrainian forces had fallen short of their objectives in multiple sectors. The most dynamic front described was near the small village of Rabotino in the Zaporozhye region, where Western-trained brigades were reported to have been withdrawn from strategic reserves.
p>The Russian side asserted that among the destroyed Ukrainian military assets were a mix of foreign and domestic equipment, with Leopard tanks from Germany, AMX tanks from France, at least one Challenger 2 from Britain, and Bradley infantry fighting vehicles from the United States cited in briefings.
In related remarks, Saldo’s broader assessment touched on what he framed as Ukraine’s strategic misjudgments during counteroffensive operations. The discussion reflected ongoing tensions and competing narratives about battlefield developments and Western involvement in the conflict. These positions have been reported across multiple briefings and outlines of the conflict as it has evolved over the months that followed the initial counteroffensive.