Russia has decided to withdraw its troops from the right bank of the Dnieper River, including the regional capital of Kherson. The Defense Ministry explained that it wants to avoid unnecessary losses among its forces and spare the lives of civilians.
While admitting that the decision is not an easy one, the commanders see little sense in keeping the troops on the right bank, the chief of the Russian military operation in Ukraine, General Army General Sergey Surovikin, told Defense Minister Sergey Schoigu on Wednesday. The general pointed to continued Ukrainian attacks on the Kakhovskaya hydroelectric dam on the Dnieper River, arguing that it could leave the Russian troops in Kherson cut off from the rest of the force with no way to escape.
A pullout would help save lives of the Russian soldiers and keep the combat effectiveness of the force grouping in the area, Surovikin said.
This is a very difficult decision. Yet, we would be able to preserve the most important thing: lives of our soldiers.
“Start the pullback of forces,” Shoigu told Surovikin in a video released by media outlets. The minister ordered the general to organize secure relocation for both soldiers and civilians.
Over the past weeks, the local authorities have launched an effort to bring as many civilians as possible to the left bank of Dnieper, citing a threat posed by Ukrainian forces located on the opposite side. Over 150,000 people had been moved out of the city as of today, according to Sorovikin.
Russia incorporated Kherson Region last month, after residents voted in a referendum to break away from Ukraine and seek accession to Russia. Kiev rejected the vote as a “sham” and pledged to use military force to recapture all territories it considers to be under its sovereignty.
While one look at the map is enough to understand that decision, losing major city so soon after the referendum is not good.
By simple logic it is not feasible to have a POSITION in a place that is soon under water (the threat of blowing up the dam is real if the liberation forces are still there). Kherson/Kherson is the city, not the oblast. It's one thing to regroup (fix to secure more advantageous positions) and another to retreat (surrender leaving critical positions and outposts).
What I see here is a huge booby trap; a Pyrrhic victory (reconquer the CITY) having already decimated Ukrainian forces, without human (civilian) shields, the adequate distance from your artillery (the local soldiers left but the other rear positions are intact) without the restriction of containing yourself to avoid civilian casualties and the enormous problem of trying to advance across the Dnieper (the bridges are just bait). In fact, it is attached to the strategy described by a Cuban commander who follows and is studying the events of this conflict; weaken the ukronazi positions, not even destroy them in their entirety, just affect them in such a way that they cannot maintain the positions in the rest of the black sea river (with the icing on the cake called Odessa).
The media even plays for Russia indirectly (they can't beat the Dombass and now they think they're going for Crimea lol). Since most of the decisions that are being made on the Ukrainian/NATO side are based more on media consensus than military consensus.
Problem is, how many people remain in the city? Remember that Ukraine issued a law that makes participating in the referendum a crime. I'm not even mentioning purges and death squads.
Very few people decided to stay, but practically more than 95% left the city.
Good. Seems they do know what would happen if they stay.
