Russia withdraws from Kherson to reorganize its tactics even if there are costs
General Sergey Surovikin, the highest authority of the Russian armed forces in the area, assured, despite having successfully repulsed around 80-90% of Ukrainian missiles, the constant attacks on the Dnieper river crossings have complicated the supply of the soldiers and the population of Kherson.
Surovikin affirmed that this decision responds to the logic of war, but it doesn’t mean that the objectives of the military operation are abandoned; on the contrary, the intention is to form a new line of defense along the Dnieper River after the evacuation of more than 115,000 people living in the area.
The decision was taken as a strong defeat for Russia by most Western media, but for the specialist Imelda Ibáñez, a teacher in international relations, it is not like that: in reality it is about assuming “a tactical operational cost” in a key region for the conflict.
For the specialist in Russian Diplomatic History and Foreign Policy from the Saint Petersburg State University, Kherson is a key point, since it functions as a corridor between Crimea and Donbas, as well as being a strategic point for a later offensive in the Nikolaiev and Odessa region, areas where Russia has shown influence after the accession referendums in Zaporozhie, Donetsk, Lugansk and Kherson.
Precisely because of the importance of the region, and because “Russia must carry out its objective” of reaching Odessa, the withdrawal makes it possible to rethink how the military operation can continue without sacrificing lives in the process.
In recent weeks, the Ukrainian army has dedicated itself to carrying out attacks against different strategic points in Russia. The first occurred on October 8 when the Crimean Bridge was attacked, an event described as a terrorist attack by the Kremlin.
After Russia’s response (attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure), a new attack against Russia was reported, this time against the Black Sea Fleet, which led to the temporary departure of the Russian Government from the humanitarian corridor established for grain exports and Ukrainian fertilizers.
These attacks would have the objective of forcing Russia to withdraw so that an agreement proposed by them is not negotiated, according to the interpretation of the teacher Imelda Ibáñez.
Ukraine as a theater of operations for other interests
The internationalist considers that there is “a very acute scenario, one of non-settlement and eventual escalations”, since we are experiencing “a proxy conflict”, that is, a situation in which “Ukraine is being the theater of operations between other external actors” that they participate with military and economic support, even if they are not fighting directly.
After 9 months of conflict, the specialist considers that both armies have worn out, but the Ukrainian is resisting only “due to the support of other factors that are not in the conflict”, which has led kyiv to a critical financial situation that can only be It will get worse when they start to rebuild and have to pay back the support received from the West, actually provided as a kind of loan.
For Ukraine, in addition, other fronts are opened, the main one of a political nature, as it becomes the seat of the West’s proxy conflict; the internal one related to the support that the Ukrainian oligarchs still intend to offer and that of the ultra-nationalists.
The foregoing, without mentioning that the support provided from Europe, the United States and NATO is beginning to be a weak point for Western governments in the midst of generalized inflation and an energy crisis directly caused by the economic sanctions against Russia. This situation , “if it is not possible to go to a complete erosion of the support of the Euro-Atlantic countries, the United States, NATO, is going to change towards the Ukrainian leaders”.