Russia has announced that is withdrawing his forces from the city of Kherson. This represents another setback for Putin’s campaign. The Black Sea port on the Dnieper River is the only major city Russia has managed to occupy, and is the administrative capital of Oblast Oblast. Kherson, which was one of the four regions that Russia annexed in September. Its apparent abandonment will surely have important implications.
Throughout the north and center of Ukraine, the conflict it is becoming more and more static, although it does not lose any of its rawness. the change of season hinders rapid advances by both sides as the weather worsens. On the front lines, ground forces will simply fight for survive the drop in temperatures.
During the last weeksattention has been focused on the Kherson region, with the expectation that it would represent one last major showdown before winter changes the nature of the conflict.
Now the commander of the Russian forces in Ukraine, General Sergei Surovikin, has announced that Russian forces will withdraw from the city and that they will do so by the Dnieper to the south. This has been something of a surprise. She had been talking about Russia he had entrenched himself in the city, preparing for a great battle. Surovikin’s announcement included a rare public acknowledgment of the inadequacy of the Russian forces: he cited the logistical challenge of getting supplies to the troops under his command as the reason for the withdrawal. This is naturally quite suspicious.
Urban warfare?
A withdrawal at this point it makes some practical sense. Russia is now mostly defensive, and you need to choose your battles carefully. Kherson offers the possibility of the Russians forcing the advancing Ukrainians into engaging in urban warfare, an expensive type of combat which is usually disastrous for the attacking side. However, this would come at a terrible cost to the defending Russian forces, and Russia cannot afford to take losses of this magnitude at this time.
There are some indications that the withdrawal could be a hoax, an example of the Russian tradition of mixing politics and military action to deceive the adversary: his famous “maskirovka”, or masked war. Having learned from their disastrous urban confrontations in ChechnyaRussia may be trying to give Ukraine a taste of what they themselves experienced in the past. But if this is the case, it seems that Ukrainian intelligence has already noticed of the ruse
Whatever the truth of the matter, the decision is causing division in Moscow. While some, including the influential head of the Wagner mercenary group Yevgeny Prigozhin, are willing to see the move as somewhat pragmaticothers – like the Chechen leader Kadyrov, who recently called for a “great jihad” against the people of Ukraine – they are probably less tolerant of the setback.
This division speaks of the material and symbolic value of the city. The largest population nucleus captured in the course of the “special military operation” Russia is the center of industry and agriculture, as well as a port with access to both the Black Sea and the adjoining Dnieper. If Ukraine is able to retake Kherson, it will be one step away from Crimea.
Russian President Vladimir Putin cannot afford another humiliation: losing the city would compromise his control over the Zaporizhia region, illegally annexed. However, a costly fight would further deplete his already battered ground forces. Behind the recent disastrous advance of Russian elite forces in the north, the military leadership may be taking steps to preserve its remaining experienced soldiers.
Next steps
Instead, in the coming months, Russian forces are likely to eschew the formula of a confrontation decisive while continuing the war in other ways, such as their drone strikes on civilian infrastructure. Furthermore, they may be betting on NATO aid tapering off during the winter months, hoping that economic pressures and power shortages will force Ukraine supporters to refocus on their own populations.
For their part, Ukraine’s military planners would be willing to continue the offensive. President Volodimir Zelensky is also aware that a stagnation it could cause Western military support to dry up. The Ukrainian leadership has remained steadfast in its promise to recover all the occupied territories, including Crimea, annexed in 2014.
However, the success at Kherson represents a test of a different kind. Yes ok United States and other key allies have supported Ukraine so far, it remains to be seen whether this commitment extends to the recapture of territory that Russia claims to have annexed earlier. A much greater advance would make the recapture of Crimea a real possibility, and there is speculation about Russia’s next move if that is likely, with concerns that it could lead to a nuclear response. Fear of such a reaction could make Ukraine’s supporters reconsider their options.
In the short term, the flow of support is likely to continue, but the long term outlook it’s more complicated. In the United States, an important part of the population considers that too much aid is being sent abroad. Given the Republican Party’s position on this issue, some –including the Russian leadership– speculated that the US mid-term elections would represent a critical moment. Of course, US President Joe Biden has also had to deny members of his own party that they have made it clear that they would prefer a negotiated solution.
American presidents make mistakesof course, but after the disastrous outcome of the withdrawal of US support for the former government of Afghanistan, expect the same mistake repeat twice in the same administration is an illusion.
Regardless of what happens south of Kherson, Ukraine can probably count on the flow of weapons and support at least for a while longer.
CChristopher MorrisTeaching Fellow, School of Strategy, Marketing and Innovation, University of Portsmouth.
This one to thertArticle was originally posted on The Conversation. read the original.
