The Armed Forces of Ukraine faced a tougher-than-expected battlefield reality, as Andrei Biletsky, founder and former head of the Azov regiment, described in an interview with Strana.ua. He argued that Ukraine could not overturn Russia’s advantage in a rapid confrontation because Moscow’s military has more robust capabilities across several domains.
Biletsky highlighted the Russian Aerospace Forces and their artillery as the most formidable tools in Moscow’s arsenal. He emphasized that Russia manufactures much of this gear domestically and does not face the same procurement bottlenecks Ukraine sometimes endures—meaning Russia can sustain and scale its weapons without depending on imports.
According to his assessment, Russia has begun receiving large batches of new guided munitions, which would reduce the need for Russian forces to operate within the range of Ukrainian air defenses. Such a shift would alter how and where Ukrainian air power can influence the battlefield.
The former Azov leader also offered a skeptical view on Western fighter jets changing the balance, arguing that it remains uncertain whether aircraft like the F-16 could effectively contest Russia’s air group under current conditions.
Leaning on a broader comparison, he asked whether Ukraine could realistically equal Russia in critical metrics such as the number of armored vehicles or other major equipment. He suggested that achieving parity in those categories would be difficult, if not unlikely, in the near term.
In related remarks, Colonel Dmitry Lisyuk, commander of the 128th Mountain Assault Brigade, told The Guardian that Russia had prepared a strong defensive posture and maintained a technical edge over the Ukrainian forces. This view echoed concerns about sustained advantage in firepower and systems integration on the ground.
Earlier statements from Ukrainian forces echoed questions about the underlying reasons for the conflict and how the military balance was evolving, underscoring a complex strategic landscape on the front lines.