VIGIL CONSILIUM
Le contexte, pas les gros titres.
Une partie de cette page est présentée dans sa version canonique anglaise : la traduction n’en est pas encore disponible. Version anglaise

Campagne

L’invasion de février 2022 et l’échec devant Kyiv

La campagne d’ouverture sur quatre axes, qui supposait qu’un État s’effondrerait en quelques jours, et les six semaines qui ont prouvé qu’il n’en serait rien.

Février – avril 2022 Le front de l’Est

Terminée
Évalué au
2022-05
Dernière revue
2026-07-26

ÉvaluationConfiance élevée

Contexte, pas ciblage. Les fiches de campagne décrivent les objectifs, les participants, les phases et les issues au niveau de l’analyse publiée ; elles ne contiennent aucune position actuelle, aucun rapport de forces, aucun emplacement ni effectif d’unité.

Carte de localisation — contours terrestres Natural Earth 110m (domaine public) ; 6 lieux que cette fiche nomme, aux coordonnées que le module publie déjà. Aucun itinéraire, aucune frontière, aucun contrôle ni aucune activité n’est tracé.

Ce qu’a été cette campagne

Russia's multi-axis invasion of February 2022 aimed at rapid political collapse rather than at defeating an army, and failed at Kyiv within six weeks. The withdrawal from the north converted a planned regime change into the attritional war that followed, and set both sides' subsequent posture.

Everything after this campaign is shaped by its failure. It converted an intended coup de main into an attritional war neither side had planned or resourced; it established that Ukraine would fight and that Western states would supply it; it produced the atrocities at Bucha that ended any prospect of an early negotiated settlement; and it delivered the southern land corridor that remains Russia's most significant territorial gain and the object of every subsequent Ukrainian offensive.

Confiance : élevée Au 2022-05Revu le 2026-07-26

Synthèse

Russian forces entered Ukraine on multiple axes on 24 February 2022 — from Belarus toward Kyiv, from the north-east toward Kharkiv and Sumy, from the Donbas, and from Crimea into the south. The design assumed the Ukrainian state would collapse quickly: airborne troops seized Hostomel airport outside Kyiv on the first day in an attempt to open an air bridge, columns advanced on road axes with limited infantry protection, and the operation was conducted with a secrecy that left many Russian units unaware of their mission until it began. Hostomel was contested and the air bridge never opened. The northern advance stalled on constrained forested and marshy approaches, and Russian forces withdrew from the Kyiv, Chernihiv and Sumy axes by early April. In the south, the campaign achieved its most durable result: a land corridor to Crimea, taken at the cost of the siege and destruction of Mariupol.

Objectifs déclarés

Ce que disent les participants. Chaque entrée cite où la position a été exprimée ; Vigil consigne qu’elle a été exprimée, non qu’elle est vraie.

Objectifs évalués

La lecture de Vigil, assortie d’un degré de confiance. Tenue structurellement à l’écart des positions déclarées, afin qu’une évaluation ne puisse jamais être publiée comme l’objectif déclaré de quelqu’un.

Forces principales

  • Armed Forces of Russia Force principale · Confiance : élevée · au 2022-04

    The invading force as a whole. Component commands are recorded separately where the module publishes them.

Forces adverses

  • Armed Forces of Ukraine Force adverse · Confiance : élevée · au 2022-04
  • National Guard Force adverse · Confiance : élevée · au 2022-05

    National Guard formations, including the Azov Regiment, were central to the defence of Mariupol.

  • Territorial Defence Forces Force adverse · Confiance : élevée · au 2022-04

    Territorial Defence expanded enormously in the opening weeks and held urban approaches the regular army could not cover simultaneously.

Soutiens et acteurs extérieurs

  • Airborne Forces (VDV) Supporting force · Confidence: High · as of 2022-02

    The Hostomel air-assault operation on the first day is the clearest documented VDV action of the campaign and its clearest failure.

Phases

24 février 2022 Confiance : élevée

Opening strikes and the four axes

Missile and air strikes across the country preceded ground entry on four broad axes — from Belarus toward Kyiv, from the north-east, from the Donbas, and from Crimea. The airborne assault on Hostomel aimed to open an air bridge into the capital's approaches on the first day.

Sources : ISW campaign assessments↗ · Reuters↗ · Established historical record

Mars 2022 Confiance : élevée

The northern advance stalls

The advance on Kyiv did not develop. Constrained approaches, unprotected road columns, ambushed logistics and a defence that did not collapse produced a stalled envelopment rather than a seizure. The air bridge was never opened.

Sources : ISW campaign assessments↗ · RUSI component and capability analyses↗

Issue et situation actuelle

A failed campaign with one durable achievement. Russia did not take Kyiv, did not replace the government, and withdrew entirely from the northern axes within six weeks; it did establish and retain a land corridor from the Donbas to Crimea. The strategic result was to convert a war designed to end in days into one measured in years, on terms — attrition, industrial supply, political endurance — that neither side had prepared for.

Adaptations observées

Implications politiques

Bucha ended the Istanbul negotiating track and made a negotiated settlement politically unavailable in Kyiv for the foreseeable future.

Implications militaires

Established that the Russian army could not conduct a rapid deep operation against a defended state, and that Ukraine could absorb an opening blow.

Implications humanitaires

Produced the war's largest single displacement wave and, at Mariupol, its most complete destruction of a major city.

Ce qui reste inconnu

  • Russian planning documents are not public. The intended timetable and objectives are inferred from force composition, axis selection and captured material rather than from disclosure.
  • Casualty figures for the opening period are contested by an order of magnitude between the parties and are not stated here.
  • The Istanbul negotiations of March–April 2022 have been described inconsistently by participants, and what was actually on the table remains disputed.

Lectures que les éléments permettent aussi

  • The failure at Kyiv can be read as the collapse of a bad plan, or as a deliberate fixing operation intended to hold Ukrainian forces in the north while the south was taken. The second reading is asserted mainly by Russian officials after the fact; the force composition and the losses sustained fit the first more closely, but the module records that both readings exist.
  • The withdrawal from the north can be read as a defeat or as a negotiated de-escalation gesture during the Istanbul talks, which were live at the time. The subsequent revelation at Bucha makes the distinction largely academic in its effects, but not in what it implies about Russian decision-making.

Figure ici parce que l’évaluation propre à la fiche n’est pas la seule que ses sources permettent — et non comme une réserve sur l’évaluation ci-dessus.

À surveiller

La manière dont la campagne est décrite rétrospectivement par les deux gouvernements

Both have revised their public account of the opening period. Changes in how it is narrated track changes in what each is preparing to accept in any settlement.

Procédures de responsabilité pour Bucha et Mariupol

International investigations continue. Their progress is the clearest measure of whether the campaign's civilian record has legal consequences.

Voir dans Explorer la force qui conduit cette campagne Interactif : sélectionnez cette fiche et suivez ce qui s’y rattache.

Évalué au — 2022-05 Dernière revue — 2026-07-26

Fiches liées

13 fiches que cette campagne nomme, ou qui la nomment — chacune étant une référence explicite dans une fiche publiée, rien n’étant déduit du sujet traité.