Why would the Ukrainian army need galvanising? They don't seem to have any major problems with morale. Western media is full on fascist controlled and only putting out a pro-Ukrainian narrative and are happy to burn their economies to keep the Ukrainian war machine going.
If the territories were so important to the Ukrainians why give them up a few months ago? They could have carried on reinforcing and resupplying units and it would have been much better.
The only reason why this suicidal offensive could be considered a good idea is to demoralise Russians into a complete collapse. That's why as well twitter and forums like here have been bombarded with bots. I think it has worked to a degree, but not enough to cause the regime change they want.
When the Russians gather their thoughts they will find themselves in a very favourable position. If reinforcements do come I hope they aren't all sent to Donbass and they actually consider opening up a new front in western Ukraine again.
I think it's overly optimistic to say this offensive was not bad for Russia. They made a smart choice of retreating in a safe manner while inflicting some casualties, but Ukraine has won some territory.
And there are legit reasons why Ukraine would want to trade lives for territory, so it's not like its a psyop to make Russians break or anything like that. Russia's army in Ukraine is all volunteers following the RU command, they're not gonna break because some guy on reddit now thinks Ukraine will enter Belgorod. For one, Ukraine has a lot of lives to trade with.
The South is most important for Russia, but they must have more troops in order to open new fronts. In that regard, it is actually almost irrelevant if Ukraine can make gains in the North if Russia is storming the South. If Odessa and Mykolaiv falls, it is pretty much game set match for Russia, because the northern territories of Ukraine are landlocked.
And regarding a point which some people have raised here, that AFU will massacre civilians and this will cause problems for the RU army later, this is a mind-boggling conclusion. In no conflict in recent history has atrocities made the civilian victims more attached to the side that committed atrocities while making them distrust the side that "couldn't protect" them.
Did the French in ww2 hate the British and US armies for not liberating them sooner, or did they hate the nazi German armies for killing them? Did the Chinese civilians hate the communist army for not protecting them or did they hate the nazi Jap armies for killing them?
It makes absolutely no sense to draw this conclusion would be any different in the Donbass.
And for this reason, AFU will not engage in large scale massacres against civilians. RU supporters claim a genocide of Russians will happen because it fits their image of barbarian AFU. US/NATO nationalists claim a genocide will happen because as usual like the very democratic and not at all authoritarians nor fascists they are, they happily wish for genocide against those who they don't like.
Yes, some "national (read:national socialist) battalions" might run amok and kill dozens, because they're not rational organizations. But it is inconceivable that AFU itself will commit ethnic cleansing in the newly recaptured territories.
