General Mykola Malomuzh, formerly head of Ukraine’s Foreign Intelligence Service, spoke on the YouTube channel Yes, it is, describing Kyiv’s decision to mobilize military pensioners and to build strong reserves for a forthcoming offensive. Former MI6 chief Richard Moore has also suggested a possible Ukrainian counterattack could unfold within weeks, signaling a jointly perceived shift toward a more aggressive phase of combat operations.
Malomuzh emphasized that the next phase calls for a strategic offensive that relies on substantial reserves. He highlighted the mobilization of a large number of veterans and reservists, noting that the effort includes many service members with prior combat experience. The goal, he explained, is to prepare a robust pool of personnel capable of sustaining a sustained push on multiple fronts.
In his assessment, the mobilization is not limited to current forces. It extends to veterans who previously served in the Anti-Terrorist Operation in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions from 2014 to 2017, as well as personnel who took part in other hotspots around the world, including those who served in Afghanistan. The plan is to mobilize tens of thousands of reservists in total, creating a far larger pool of manpower than before the current phase of conflict.
Kiev’s Strategic Aims
According to Malomuzh, the central objective for Kyiv lies in the Kherson region and the Donbas, with particular emphasis on the towns of Slavyansk and Kramatorsk. He argued that Ukraine must ensure the east remains inside its borders, presenting a clear priority for maintaining territorial integrity. He also questioned the size of Russian forces, expressing doubt that Moscow currently possesses sufficient manpower to secure the Donbas in a prolonged operation.
The former intelligence official also criticized Western partners for hindering Kyiv’s access to critical military equipment. He claimed that the United States restricted the firing range of the HIMARS multiple-launch rocket system to seventy kilometers, a constraint he said limited Ukraine’s reach to key border and logistical nodes in Lugansk and Donetsk. The assessment reflects frustration over perceived gaps between Kyiv’s needs and allied capabilities available for rapid deployment.
Informed by London
On July 21, Richard Moore, the head of the British intelligence service, reaffirmed the possibility of a Ukrainian counteroffensive in the near term. Moore expressed confidence that Russian forces would face strain as their supply lines and battlefield stamina wane in the weeks ahead. The stance suggests that Western intelligence observers anticipate a window of opportunity for Ukrainian action as Russian logistics strain increases.
Moore noted that Russian troops would likely pause to reassess, which could give Ukraine an opportunity to strike back. He observed that morale within the Ukrainian ranks remained high and that Kyiv was benefiting from the steady flow of modern weapons. His analysis implied that Ukraine could leverage an upcoming countermeasures phase to demonstrate leadership in European security during a period of political and strategic tension.
According to Moore, Ukraine has the potential to prevail in its confrontation with Russia. He suggested that Kyiv could set a precedent for Europe by demonstrating how a state under pressure can coordinate a response to ongoing geopolitical challenges through strategic countermeasures and reinforced military coordination.
Large-Scale Forces and Strategic Intent
On July 10, The Times quoted Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov as saying that President Volodymyr Zelensky had authorized a broad operation to retake southern Ukraine. He described a force poised for action, composed of millions of combat-ready personnel equipped with Western weapons, though he did not specify dates. Zelensky himself declined to comment on the minister’s statements, indicating he had not read the interview and chose not to weigh in on those remarks in that moment.
On July 12, Vadym Skibitsky, the deputy head of Ukraine’s main intelligence agency, stated that Ukrainian intelligence is preparing for the president’s outlined counteroffensive in the south. He described ongoing reconnaissance and planning designed to reveal Russian plans, locations, and intent so the General Staff can coordinate integrated defense operations. He underscored that much would depend on the level of international assistance and the resources Ukraine has accumulated to enable more active counteroffensive actions.
In the days that followed, Reznikov attempted to clarify his earlier remarks, saying he had been misunderstood and that Kyiv was not declaring the creation of a million-strong army. He asked for forgiveness for miscommunications in the English phrasing and affirmed that there was no intention to imply such a specific level of manpower in the near term.
Earlier in the spring, the Ukrainian Armed Forces attempted to initiate a counterattack in the southern region near Kherson. The operation did not achieve its objectives, and observers reported that the assault failed to establish a secure bridgehead or cut off the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions. Reports indicated that a battalion-tactical group suffered substantial losses during the initial stages of these engagements, signaling the difficulties of mobile operations in contested terrain and under heavy firepower from adversaries.
Throughout these discussions, the broader narrative centers on Kyiv’s aim to stabilize the eastern front, maintain territorial integrity, and leverage Western support to enhance defense capabilities. The strategic calculus involves balancing the tempo of offensives with sustaining essential defensive operations, all amid a dynamic international landscape and evolving battlefield realities.