By Noah
Rothman
Tuesday,
June 06, 2023
‘It’s a
massive disaster.” That was the assessment Swedish hydrological-engineering
expert Henrik Ölander-Hjalmarsson provided NBC News when asked for comment on the
overnight destruction of Ukraine’s Kakhovka dam. That’s a forgivably common way
to describe devastation of this magnitude, but it’s also a description that
would apply to ravages of an earthquake or a structure fire. The implosion of
the edifice holding back the full force of the Dnipro River was no accident nor
an act of God. It was most likely a deliberate, indiscriminate attack on
Ukrainian civilians and on global ecology.
The
destruction of the dam in the early-morning hours on Tuesday could not be
immediately attributed to one side of the conflict in Ukraine. Jim Geraghty
has the details.
Perhaps the Ukrainians flooded their own land — displacing thousands of
residents and cutting off a potential axis in the coming counteroffensive but
also displacing the Russians from the positions into which they had dug on the
Dnipro’s left bank. Maybe the dam simply burst due to the
negligence of
the Russians occupying it. The reserves it was holding back had risen to
dangerously high levels, and the dam was previously damaged amid the fighting.
But all this rationalized the likeliest explanation for this terrible event:
deliberate Russian sabotage.
Just
before 3 a.m., local residents reported hearing loud
explosions —
an unfortunately common occurrence in wartime, so they didn’t overthink it.
Russian news sources reported that “nothing at all” had occurred at the dam, but
predawn videos shot by locals began chronicling the rising floodwaters. With
sunrise, the wholesale destruction of the dam was evident to all. Catastrophic
flooding to the surrounding towns and cities, including the regional capital of
Kherson, would follow within hours.
The
Russian-based Interfax news agency’s sources finally admitted only to
structural failure. “The dam of the Kakhovskaya hydroelectric power station in
the Kherson region collapsed on Tuesday night due to the collapse of one
support, a representative of the emergency services of the region said,” the outlet’s
report read. Even
as the floodwaters rose around them, Russian-backed officials in Ukraine comically insisted that all was well. But this
was no accident. “The U.S. government has intelligence that is leaning toward
Russia as the culprit of the attack, according to two U.S. officials and one
Western official,” NBC News
reported later
that day.
But why,
some asked? What does Russia have to gain by compromising its own defensive
positions, choking off the supply of water the dam diverts to occupied Crimea,
and flooding thousands of hectares of arable land Moscow had only recently
annexed into the Russian federation proper? The questions are based on a false
premise, one that presupposes Russia has any interest in preserving land it is
attempting to seize or safeguarding the people it seeks to subjugate.
Russia
had the motive. The dam’s collapse, which occurred within 24 hours of Kyiv’s
admission that it had shifted from defensive to “offensive
actions,”
forecloses on the prospect of a Ukrainian river-crossing operation across the
Dnipro into southern Kherson Oblast. At least for some time, access to the
other bank of the Dnipro and a southern axis in the counteroffensive, if one
was in the cards at all, will have to swing south from Zaporizhzhia. If little
else, Russia’s beleaguered forces in Ukraine have bought themselves time and
space to attrite Ukrainian attackers.
Russia
had the means. The Financial
Times’s Europe editor, Ben Hall,
summarized the Russian actions that preceded this egregious event:
Russian forces had rigged explosives to the dam last autumn after
Ukraine’s army liberated the right bank of the river. They have attacked other
hydroelectric plants in their attempt to destroy Ukraine’s critical
infrastructure. And last September, they fired eight cruise missiles at a dam
over the nearby Inhulets river, unleashing a torrent and hampering the advance
of Ukrainian troops in the area.
Moreover,
Russia has the mentality to pull off an operation this egregious — a classic
scorched-earth tactic from the country that popularized the term. We don’t have
to look back to the Napoleonic era for evidence of Russia’s will to salt the
earth behind it in retreat, Vladimir Putin’s obsession with
the 19th century notwithstanding.
While falling back amid the Nazi onslaught in the summer of 1941, Soviet secret
police acting on Stalin’s orders destroyed a
dam on this
same river not far from Nova Kakhovka to delay the German advance. It would be
fitting to see this tactic resurrected amid Russia’s war in Ukraine, the
largest war on the European continent since 1945 and the closest thing to total
war the world has witnessed since.
Moscow
may have temporarily succeeded in blunting some of Ukraine’s capacity to
recapture its territory under Russian occupation, but the cost is steep. The
flooding has compounded an already terrible humanitarian disaster in Ukraine.
For those who are not displaced by the flooding, the shortages of power and
potable water will
add deprivation to the already horrible features of this war. It has introduced
thousands of gallons of
oils, gasoline, and agricultural chemicals into the waterway that is now
spilling into the Black Sea. This act of desperation has exposed (for all who
are willing to see it) the hollowness of Moscow’s claim on Ukraine’s land and
people. The Ukrainians whom Russia cannot yoke it would subsume in a great
flood. Most shortsightedly of all from Moscow’s point of view, the effort to bog
Ukraine down has truncated its own vital supply lines from the Crimean
Peninsula. It was a cost that Moscow was apparently willing to accept if only
to temporarily impede Kyiv’s advance.
By
denying its involvement in this event, despite all evidence to the contrary,
the Kremlin is tacitly admitting that the dam’s destruction is a great crime.
The deniability Moscow is cultivating will complicate the message it likely
hopes to send: Russia reserves the right to escalate its war, and it is not
afraid to decimate population centers in the process. Those who are susceptible
to the deterrent force of this threat don’t need convincing. But the atrocity
of which Russia is likely guilty will steel the resolve of Ukrainians more than
it will frighten them. The Ukrainians are still coming, now with even more
barbarities to avenge.
No comments:
Post a Comment