The breach of the Nova Kakhovka dam in Ukraine is one of the most important events in the whole year-and-a-half old war, and, if it turns out to have been a deliberate action, a war crime under the rules of the Geneva Convention.
The 30-metre high Soviet-era dam is one of six along the huge Dnipro River near Kherson in southern Ukraine. It holds - or held - a huge reservoir of water of a similar size to the Great Salt Lake in the USA, and is the major source of fresh water for drinking and agriculture for much of southern Ukraine, as well as providing cooling water for the nearby Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. A large hydroelectricity plant on the dam, now destroyed, is - was - also a major provider of electricity for the whole region.
Furthermore, the river is believed to have been contaminated with industrial lubricant and oil from the hydropower plant as a result of the breach, and the consequences of the flooding are likely to be felt for years to come. And, as if more furthermores were needed, the breach is also believed to have dislodged Russian landmines, which are now floating downstream unmonitored.
The dam was breached on 6 June, and is now considered fully destroyed and beyond repair. Flood waters have completely enveloped several nearby villages, and a mass evacuation is currently under way. Ukraine and most of the West is accusing Russia of a "terrorist attack" and that Russia bears "criminal liability" for the act. Russia, for its part, is accusing Ukraine of "sabotage". And indeed it is hard to see the benefit of such an egregious act for either side.
As with last year's unexplained explosions on the Nordstream pipeline, Russia has responded to Western outrage along the lines of "Why would we do this? This hurts us." For one thing, the flooding has forced Russia to evacuate troops and civilians away from the broad Dnipro River, which marks the rough line of control between the two sides. It also disrupts the supply of fresh water to the Russian-held Crimea peninsula, which heavily relies on the North Crimean Canal which runs south from the Nova Kakhovka reservoir. It could also be seen as benefitting Ukraine's summer offensive as it seeks to break through Russia's defensive lines south of Zaporizhzhia, and thereby isolate Crimea from Russia's Donbas holdings.
On the other hand, the whole area around Kherson and Zaporizhzhia has now become a no-go area for Ukrainian troops too, and it is hard to see how it might be seen to benefit Ukraine's military aspirations. Getting an armoured brigade across such a body of water under fire from Russian artillery, missiles and drones would be extremely hazardous.
It also seems quite possible to me that Russia is facing the prospect of not being able to achieve its stated goals in Ukraine, and has instead reverted to a policy of complete destruction and devastation of the country, the beginning (or rather escalation) of a new scorched earth policy. That would not surprise me at all. After all, Soviet troops did something very similar on the Dnipro back in 1941, to slow the advance of Nazi forces. For what it's worth, the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War opines, "The balance of evidence, reason and rhetoric suggests that the Russians deliberately damaged the dam".
Add into the mix the possibility that NEITHER side deliberately destroyed the dam, and the picture becomes hazy indeed. Ukrainian President Zelinskyy claims it was destroyed by an "internal detonation", and Russia claims it was due to Ukrainian shelling. But satellite images suggest that a road across the dam was significantly damaged as early as June 2, although it is not quite clear if this damage is directly related to the ultimate catastrophic breach on June 6. Some local officials also maintain that the 67-year old structure had been suffering from poor maintenance for years, and record high water levels may have stretched it beyond its capacity. After all, Russia has been in control of the dam and the hydro station for over a year now, and so poor maintenance is almost a given (although that fact also lends credence to the theory that the breach was an inside job by the Russians).
The destruction of the dam certainly represents a major environmental, economic and humanitarian crisis in what is already a war zone. But exactly who perpetrated it, if anyone, remains far from clear.
No comments:
Post a Comment