ConflictClarifier

2026 Iran-Gulf Crisis Tracker
CC
Main
Live Data
Analytics
Tools
Reference
Events Archive
strikeAug 27, 2026

Expert: Ukraine conflict experience requires reassessment

Summary

News of the story "On Point" MINSK, 27 August (BelTA) – The experience of the Ukraine conflict cannot be incorporated into combat regulations, Andrei Bogodel, Candidate of Military Sciences, said in a recent episode of BelTA’s V Teme [On Point] project. “We talk about the experience of the special military operation, the experience of Iran, the experience of other wars. But look at this: neither the Russian Federation, nor the Republic of Belarus, nor Lithuania, Poland or other countries, including the United States of America, have rewritten their combat and field manuals to reflect these armed conflicts,” the military expert noted. Andrei Bogodel referred to recent reports that the United States is winding down and disbanding an experimental drone strike battalion in Europe established within the 173rd Airborne Brigade. In other words, the United States has concluded that the Ukrainian experience does not suit it. “These conclusions were made immediately after an exercise with the Ukrainians, where we were all told that some Ukrainian drone-equipped unit had completely decimated the U.S. forces. But the Americans are not fools; they understand and realize everything perfectly well. They said that a drone is primarily about artificial intelligence. A drone is only a tool for a soldier, just like a rifle or a grenade. And under no circumstances should we lose the soldier who is capable of operating as a soldier in these complex conditions. Therefore, anyone who applies this experience and takes it as the basis will most likely suffer a crushing defeat in the next war. That is why there has been no wholesale rewriting of combat manuals,” the expert explained. He agreed that control of the low-altitude airspace is becoming one of the key tasks for military units, while infrastructure warfare is also introducing new factors. “The issues of gaining air superiority, achieving fire superiority and using large formations, these are the new elements into which everything needs to be integrated, and we need to take a real look at the role and place of artillery, the role and place of aviation, and the role and place of large tank formations that will drive wedges into the enemy's defenses. That is what we really need to reconsider today. After all, no country, neither European countries nor the Americans, has abandoned tank production,” Andrei Bogodel stressed. He is convinced that artillery, despite the active use of unmanned aerial systems, remains the “god of war.” Moreover, an artillery shell has considerably greater destructive power than an explosive-laden drone. “People talk about 10, 20, 30, 50 or 100 drones per kilometer of the front. But everyone seems to have forgotten that at one point there was such a figure as 100-150 guns per kilometer of the front. Now imagine what artillery can do when it can deliver repeated strikes on the same area, essentially turning everything in front of you into a lunar landscape. Then add aviation dropping FABs and other bombs, and whoever survives will have no idea where they are or what is happening,” the expert said. “We talk about the experience of the special military operation, the experience of Iran, the experience of other wars. But look at this: neither the Russian Federation, nor the Republic of Belarus, nor Lithuania, Poland or other countries, including the United States of America, have rewritten their combat and field manuals to reflect these armed conflicts,” the military expert noted. Andrei Bogodel referred to recent reports that the United States is winding down and disbanding an experimental drone strike battalion in Europe established within the 173rd Airborne Brigade. In other words, the United States has concluded that the Ukrainian experience does not suit it. “These conclusions were made immediately after an exercise with the Ukrainians, where we were all told that some Ukrainian drone-equipped unit had completely decimated the U.S. forces. But the Americans are not fools; they understand and realize everything perfectly well. They said that a drone is primarily about artificial intelligence. A drone is only a tool for a soldier, just like a rifle or a grenade. And under no circumstances should we lose the soldier who is capable of operating as a soldier in these complex conditions. Therefore, anyone who applies this experience and takes it as the basis will most likely suffer a crushing defeat in the next war. That is why there has been no wholesale rewriting of combat manuals,” the expert explained. He agreed that control of the low-altitude airspace is becoming one of the key tasks for military units, while infrastructure warfare is also introducing new factors. “The issues of gaining air superiority, achieving fire superiority and using large formations, these are the new elements into which everything needs to be integrated, and we need to take a real look at the role and place of artillery, the role and place of aviation, and the role and place of large tank formations that will drive wedges into the enemy's defenses. That is what we really need to reconsider today. After all, no country, neither European countries nor the Americans, has abandoned tank production,” Andrei Bogodel stressed. He is convinced that artillery, despite the active use of unmanned aerial systems, remains the “god of war.” Moreover, an artillery shell has considerably greater destructive power than an explosive-laden drone. “People talk about 10, 20, 30, 50 or 100 drones per kilometer of the front. But everyone seems to have forgotten that at one point there was such a figure as 100-150 guns per kilometer of the front. Now imagine what artillery can do when it can deliver repeated strikes on the same area, essentially turning everything in front of you into a lunar landscape. Then add aviation dropping FABs and other bombs, and whoever survives will have no idea where they are or what is happening,” the expert said.

Actors involved

USIranRussiaUkraine

Sources

  • CurrentsAPI

    News of the story "On Point" MINSK, 27 August (BelTA) – The experience of the Ukraine conflict cannot be incorporated into combat regulations, Andrei Bogodel, Candidate of Military Sciences, said in a recent episode of BelTA’s V Teme [On Point] project. “We talk about the experie…

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedIranUNRussiaUkraine

Oil Prices On August 28: Brent Crude Slips Below $88 As Hormuz Uncertainty, Russia Risks Weigh

○ 1 source

Oil prices slipped on Friday as traders balanced fresh uncertainty over the Strait of Hormuz against escalating risks to Russian energy infrastructure. WTI crude was down 0.29% at $83.29 a barrel, while Brent crude fell 0.19% to $88.35 in early trade on August 28.

Brent had rebounded in the previous session, but the broader weekly trend remained weaker as markets assessed whether diplomatic efforts involving Iran could eventually improve crude flows through the key Middle East chokepoint. Iranian officials have indicated that Tehran is preparing conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz after mediators asked it to outline its demands.

Iran's Supreme National Security Council secretary Mohsen Rezaei said Iran had agreed with Oman on a shipping corridor through the strait, but linked reopening to conditions including an end to the regional conflict. A Guards spokesperson separately said the strait would not reopen unless Washington lifted what Tehran calls a blockade of Iranian ports, paid compensation and removed sanctions.

At the same time, the Russia-Ukraine conflict is creating fresh concerns over global refined fuel supplies. Reports that Russian President Vladimir Putin said talks with Ukraine had produced no results and that Moscow was preparing to intensify the war have shifted some market attention towards Eastern Europe.

Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries and ports are disrupting energy infrastructure, potentially limiting Russia's ability to export crude and refined products. The disruption comes as diesel markets are already showing signs of tightness. Separately, Venezuela is examining a potential exit from OPEC, according to people familiar with the matter.

While its diminished production means an immediate supply impact would likely be limited, a withdrawal could raise fresh questions over OPEC's cohesion and its ability to influence global crude prices. ALSO READ: Stock Market Today: All You Need To Know Going Into Trade On August 28 Essential Business Intelligence, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice, Daily Fuel, Gold and Silver Prices and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.

Yukta Baid
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIran

US informs Israel of plans to intensify attacks on Iran in coming days

○ 1 source

Israeli public broadcasters reported that the United States notified Israel of plans to escalate military operations against Iran in the coming days. This information, attributed to unnamed sources, has not been independently verified by official U.S. or Iranian government channels.

Location: Iran
www.aa.com.tr
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIran

Iran-Oman Hormuz talks: What the new temporary corridor means for oil trade

○ 1 source

RIYADH, Aug 28 — Iran and Oman are negotiating the opening of a temporary shipping corridor and the clearance of mines in the blockaded Strait of Hormuz, which both nations border. They have yet to agree on the conditions for the waterway’s reopening as the Middle East war nears the six-month mark, but talks are ongoing.

Here’s what we know about the latest negotiations between Tehran and Muscat. Why Oman? Both countries sit on the strait crucial for the global oil and gas trade, and are trying to define the terms of a controlled resumption of shipping, which has been paralysed by Tehran since the US-Israeli attacks that started the Middle East war in late February.

A US-Iran memorandum of understanding signed in mid-June provided for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and left it up to Iran and Oman “to define the future administration and maritime services” in the waterway, in discussion with Gulf states and in line with international law.

But the deal, which was supposed to pave the way for talks on permanently ending the war, has since fallen apart. Is there any progress? In Tehran on Tuesday, the Iranian and Omani foreign ministers discussed a framework agreement that would establish a “temporary corridor” for shipping and a project to clear mines in the strait, according to a joint statement.

Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said on X after the talks that he hoped the new corridor and “practical arrangements to restore safe navigation” would be announced “soon”. He added that “future management of the strait and a permanent solution will follow in due course”.

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, in an interview with local media, explained that the proposed arrangement would see ships entering the Gulf pass through Iranian waters, while those leaving would use Omani waters then Iranian waters.

He also said that if the plan with Oman was agreed upon, the two would have 30 to 60 days to hammer out a permanent route, adding that Iran’s Revolutionary Guards were involved in the talks and that the maps under discussion were drawn up by the armed forces.

The Guards said on Wednesday that they had agreed in negotiations with Oman to share revenues earned from any fees imposed in the strait – an idea rejected by Washington. Why are talks held up? Tehran continues to make the full reopening of the strait conditional on US concessions, particularly as the US imposes a counter-blockade on Iranian ports.

“Before any action is taken to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the United States must fully implement all the commitments it has breached,” Gharibabadi warned Washington late Tuesday. “The Strait of Hormuz will only be reopened in exchange for an end to the war on all fronts, the lifting of the blockade and a resolution to the situation in Yemen.

” Experts say such negotiations are not a quick process, as they focus on sovereignty, jurisdiction, the control of vessels and potential fees, as well as ensuring that any agreement complies with international law. “Oman and Iran are effectively negotiating elements of a post-war governance and security architecture for Hormuz – which explains the slow pace,” Omani researcher Abdallah Baaboud told AFP.

For Iran, the Strait of Hormuz is also not an isolated maritime issue. Tehran links the full reopening of the strait to its standoff with Washington in the war, demanding the lifting of US sanctions, compensation for war damage and security guarantees.

Oman, for its part, is seeking to “separate freedom of navigation as much as possible from the wider conflict”, with the two nations’ different strategies “the real source of the delay”, said Baaboud. What about Washington? Washington has not responded to the Iran-Oman joint statement, but beforehand it reported progress on the Hormuz issue.

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly asserted that the strait is under US control – a claim denied by Tehran – and threatened Oman with bombing if the sultanate were to “stand in the way” of the US’s path through the waterway. That has put Muscat in the awkward position of trying to maintain its role as an intermediary to Tehran, without giving the impression of full support for Iranian control over Hormuz shipping for fear of risking its strategic relationship with Washington.

“Washington may be uncomfortable with aspects of Oman’s diplomacy, but it also needs the channel Oman provides,” said Baaboud. By calling for other nearby coastal Gulf states to be involved in the discussions, Muscat is trying to avoid giving the impression of a one-on-one deal with Tehran, he added.

The aim would be to achieve “a regional understanding in which freedom of navigation is guaranteed collectively”, rather than relying on a permanent US military presence or Iran’s ability to control the strait on its own. “That would be a very Omani outcome,” he said.

“Not a grand peace settlement, but a practical arrangement that removes reasons for confrontation and opens space for wider diplomacy.

Malay Mail