Strategies in Chess, sometimes, inform strategic behavior in wars. In chess there are clear definitions of 2 opponents and their material. Modern warfare has blurred both elements. Opposing parties build alliances and the material allowed or available is hotly debated as well. The war of Russia on Ukraine territory, nevertheless, resembles a variant of a chess game considering the different stages of the game. All starts with Russia choosing its opening attacks. A rather aggressive version of the opening is the King’s Gambit in which a fast attack tries to overwhelm the opponent. Ukraine, because of the surprise and lack of immediate support from neighboring countries, chose a careful defense trying to hold the lines amid a fast forward moving assault. A further restriction for Ukraine was to not use weapons from supporters on Russian territory. In chess this would mean your defense is not allowed to cross the middle line of the chessboard. For example the so-called Sicilian defense does exactly this for many moves of the opening. However, in the middle game this changes and the defense might prepare forceful attacks based on a solid defense. With 2 and 1/2 years into the war the opening has played out and we see middle game strategies take the upper hand. In chess this consist in attempts to gain material advantage, possession of strategically important positions and psychological stamina to mention a few. The middle game can drag out for a long time, especially if a balance of power persists. Even in an unbalanced situation peacemaking takes time as well. In any case, during the opening phase the “Sicilian” defense can handle a defense that is restricted to “own half” of the chessboard, but in the middle phase such a restriction is an even more severe impediment. Relaxing this imposed restriction by supporters opens up additional possibilities for the defense as well as counter strikes. (Image: Shredder Chess App White opens with Kings Gambit and Black answers with Sicilian defense)
