The Russian army’s formidable reputation has been dented with the withdrawal from Kherson, internally the war has been unpopular and affected President Putin’s reputation as a winner.
The withdrawal of Russian troops from Kherson is a defining moment in the Ukraine war. President Vladimir Putin’s decision for a military confrontation may have backfired, but is this the end of the road? It is too early to make a prediction but the Russian army’s much vaunted reputation has been dented.
The Russian army’s tactical pullback has given a boost to the Ukrainian fighting units and is being celebrated not just by Ukrainians but the US and other NATO allies that has provided sophisticated equipment, unlimited funds and political and moral support to President Zelensky to fight Vladimir Putin’s forces.
To place things in perspective, it is important to remember that the Russians have pulled back from the city but are still in control of 60 percent of the Kherson region. The problems of maintaining supply lines across the Dnieper River to frontline troops in Kherson has forced Russia to withdraw its forces. Most analysts agree that leaving Kherson is a practical move and will help to reinforce Russian defences. This was the best that Russian commanders would do to save resources and soldiers for better fortification of their positions across the east bank of the Dnieper River.
General Sergey Surovikin, appointed in October as overall command of the war in Ukraine, had privately made it known, much before he took charge, that Russian forces should withdraw from Kherson. His fear was that the soldiers could be surrounded and overwhelmed by Ukrainian forces if the Antonivskiy Bridge the only crossing from Kherson city to the Russian-controlled eastern bank of the Dnieper River was destroyed. Ukraine had been consistently targeted the bridge. If the bridge was destroyed mounting rescue operations or keeping supply lines intact would be impossible. So, pulling back the army from Kherson was the practical option. Since the pullback of Russian troops, the Antonivskiy bridge is said to have been damaged whether by the retreating Russian army or the Ukrainians is not clear.
The withdrawal of troops is being projected in Moscow not as a humiliating retreat but a tactical move to save the lives of civilians and soldiers. Ukrainians have been targeting both the bridge as well as Russian ammunition depots and pickets before the withdrawal. In whatever terms the Russian military may wish to garb the retreat from Kherson, it is being perceived inside Russia as a setback.
with the Ukrainian army now back in control of Kherson, they would be in a position to use artillery fire within range of Crimea, the adjoining area. Western supplied artillery has helped the Ukrainian army to accurately target Russian defence supplies. US-led western alliance would redouble efforts to provide Ukrainian forces with more arms to press home its advantage. After all this war is much more than a military confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, but a continuation of the Cold War between the US and its western allies on one hand and the Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s Russia. US President Joe Biden himself has the mindset of a Cold war warrior and want to make sure that Putin is destroyed.
Domestically, the withdrawal does not play well into the narrative of a strong Russia and is a major blow to the reputation of Vladimir Putin who had till the action in Ukraine, been regarded as the man who delivers for Russia. Hardliners inside Russia are not happy about the pullback from Kherson and believe that not enough troops were deployed in the city. For the hawks casualties are not important. However, President Putin knows that the majority of Russians are not for war and not happy with the mounting casualties. Politically it would not be acceptable to hold on to the town and continue bleeding. Putin himself has said nothing on the withdrawal, leaving it to the military to couch the announcement in tactical terms.
Meanwhile the US and Europe seeing the Ukrainians take on the mighty Russian army, is likely to further arm the Zelensky government to fight what is seen as an unprovoked aggression of Ukraine. More arms will be rushed to get the Ukrainian army take back as much territory as possible. The Spanish government in a fresh announcement last week promised to deliver two HAWK missile defence systems to Kiev. This is besides the four already delivered, and an Aspide system. Other NATO members have delivered. NATO members have not just supplied equipment but helped to train Ukrainian soldiers. According to the Spanish defence ministry 64 Ukrainian soldiers are being trained in Toledo on precision shooting, disposal of explosives and demining. 21 others are being trained in handling 150/14 howitzers in Almeria, according to a statement by the defence ministry. American and British intelligence have also helped Ukraine in pin pointing and guiding strikes that has helped in precision strikes on ammunition dumps as well as other Russian military infrastructure.
When Putin decided on a military confrontation with Ukraine, he possibly did not take into account the fact that NATO members would unitedly rally behind President Biden and support President Zelensky. Putin obviously misjudged the European leadership.