Connect with us

RUSSIA

The future of war after Kherson

Published

on

What had been rumored anxiously for some time by the supporters of Russia’s ‘Special Military Operation’ in Ukraine came true; the commander of the operation, Sergei Surovikin, announced that they would withdraw the troops from Kherson region to the left bank of Dnieper River. Civilians had already begun to be evacuated in mid-October, based on the intelligence that Ukraine could destroy the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant, causing flooding.

The Russian general staff seems to have decided that the troops in Kherson cannot rely on supplies coming through Dnieper. The Ukrainian general staff agrees: their army destroyed Russia’s logistic hubs, command, and supply systems, and therefore “the enemy had no choice but to resort to fleeing from Kherson.”

So, both sides are convinced that the Kherson issue is a military imperative. There is no doubt that this is one of the aspects of this matter. However, it is not difficult to predict that the issue will have far too political dimension and consequences, given that Kherson is one of the Ukrainian oblasts that joined the Russian Federation in a referendum last September and the “forever with Russia” billboards in the city are kept in mind.

Public reactions in Russia

In Russia, it is doubted that the left-wing and right-wing parties of United Russia have significant differences in their political stance toward Ukraine. It’s not possible to find a party in Duma against ‘Special Military Operation.’

However, the forces led by the right-wing Rodina and Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and the left-wing Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) are critical of the way in which the operation is conducted, and this is becoming increasingly political. In particular, the CPRF argues that the military issue cannot be resolved unless the operation is called ‘war’ and the economy is restructured accordingly. Russia’s left-wing also expected the Putin administration would carry out a ‘left turn’ with the Ukrainian war because of its nature. But the United Russian government continues following its way, ignoring calls from the left to nationalize the economy.

Another criticism is the fate of local people, now in the hands of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, in Ukraine’s oblasts next to Russia. One of the reasons for Putin’s leadership’s intervention in Ukraine was the liberation of the Russian-speaking people living in the east of the country from neo-Nazi pressure. Although it is now considered Russian territory, the lives of pro-Russian people are feared in Kherson, which has been abandoned to Ukraine. Indeed, Ukrainian troops’ posts shared on their Telegram account after entering the city reveal that this terrible expectation has become a reality.

The Russian media, on the other hand, exhibits a great deal of criticism and polyphony, contrary to our perception and that of the West. For example, an article in Russia’s most popular military news portal topwar.ru states that Kherson was handed over without a single bullet being fired, yet ‘sold’ and ‘shameless propagandists’ would legitimize it. The article remarks that what the Russian leadership calls a ‘Special Military Operation’ means war all over the world, and that Russia must now put aside ‘commercial interests’ and engage in ‘a real war’.

According to another website, Katyusha, if the withdrawal from Kherson is not due to a cunning strategy, this is the greatest defeat of the Russian army since 1991, and it is inevitable that the confidence of ordinary people in the leadership of the country will be shaken. Katyusha remains hopeful that the retreat is a trap, but it also does not rule out the possibility that the abandonment of Kherson was due to a backdoor diplomacy between the U.S. and Russia. Both publications suggest that the death of Deputy Governor of Kherson, Kirill Stremousov, who was reportedly killed in a car crash, was questionable, as he opposed the evacuation.

Domestic political conflicts in Russia

While the war continues and the cracking voices in the local public are rising, some polarizations in politics also emerge. Although it is not the first ring of Russian leadership, the polarizations in the second ring are getting deeper.

The most obvious example of this is the interaction between Yevgeny Prigozhin, the founder and owner of Wagner, and Alexander Beglov, Governor of St. Petersburg. Prigozhin and media outlets close to him had been claiming for some time that Beglov had established a ‘criminal organization.’ Prigozhin’s company Concord took another step and applied to the Prosecutor General’s Offices of the Russian Federation and the intelligence organization FSB to have Beglov investigated on charges of ‘high treason’. If we give the Latvian-based Meduza website the benefit of doubt, the reason Prigozhin has been waging war on Beglov is because the Governor of Petersburg interfered with some of Wagner’s founders’ business ventures. Finally, the business center Wagner wanted to build in St. Petersburg was denied by the governor’s office.

It should also be noted that Prigozhin’s side also includes Chechnya leader, Ramzan Kadyrov. The two were targeted by General Alexandr Lapin, the commander of the Central Military District, who left his post citing health problems and was replaced by Andrey Mordvicev, close to the Prigozhin-Kadyrov duo.

Kadyrov’s actions are not limited to this. The Chechen leader has long been criticizing the Russian army openly. After the defeat at Liman, Kadyrov blamed General Lapin and Prigozhin immediately joined him. Some believe that the Kadyrov-Prigozhin duo’s public criticism of the Russian armed forces stems from Wagner’s ‘private business relations.’

It’s clear that this issue is more intricate than it seems. The two are thought to be mainly aimed at Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu and the Chief of the General Staff, Valery Gerasimov. Several retired officers and columnists also responded to the salvos of the Kadyrov-Prigozhin duo, describing the pair’s behavior as ‘demotivating.’

Potential secret alliance with the United States

The media also voiced their suspicions that there might be a secret compromise between Moscow and Washington. The Kherson retreat is still more suspicious after Nikolai Patrushev, the secretary of the Security Council of Russia and Jake Sullivan, the United States National Security Advisor, allegedly held a secret meeting.

Sources close to Russia say the Putin leadership has decided to end the war by reaching a comprehensive agreement with the ‘Collective West’. The fact that both Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said they did not exclude negotiations with Ukraine and the West could also be seen as a signal. Following the missiles that fell on a village in Poland, regardless of Kyiv’s and Warsaw’s call for the implementation of Article 5 of the NATO treaty, U.S. President Joe Biden’s refusal to blame Russia is also a sign that something has been ‘cooked’ behind closed doors.

The understanding that such an agreement is favored by the Russian leadership, as well as China, India, Turkey, Iran, and other Middle Eastern countries, is becoming widespread. In the West, the influence of the Kadyrov-Prigozhin duo, which comes from Russia and is thought to be a ‘hawk’, is not much exaggerated. The closest example of this is an article published on Carnegie discussing the influence of the Kadyrov-Prigozhin duo on the Kremlin. “They talk the talk, Putin won’t listen to them,” concludes the article’s author in a nutshell.

The weak Trumpist wave in the U.S. by-election also seems to have pushed the Russian leadership to seek a deal. Undoubtedly, the possible presidency of Trump, seen as the voice of American industrialists, will be preferred in Russia. But now that these hopes have been shelved, a need for contact with the ‘Collective West’ seems to have arisen. The meeting of U.S. and Russian spy chiefs in Turkey also speaks volumes more than nuclear fear.

RUSSIA

Putin signals readiness for Arctic cooperation, including with the West

Published

on

Russian President Vladimir Putin, speaking at the plenary session of the International Arctic Forum in Murmansk on March 27, stated that Russia is ready for cooperation in the Arctic with both friendly nations and, should they express interest, Western countries.

Putin noted that international interaction in the Arctic is not currently experiencing its best period.

The President mentioned that the Arctic Council was previously established for cooperation, but this mechanism “has weakened today.”

“As they say in such cases: If you don’t want to, it’s up to you,” Putin added.

According to the Vedomosti daily, Putin also addressed US President Donald Trump’s idea of purchasing Greenland from Denmark.

According to Putin, “this might only seem surprising at first glance.” He stated it would be incorrect to consider these discussions unusual, adding, “In fact, such plans by the US emerged in the 1860s. At that time, the American administration was considering the possibility of annexing Greenland and Iceland, but this idea did not receive support from Congress.”

Putin then recounted the history of the matter, including the US establishing military bases on the island during World War II and subsequently offering to buy Greenland from Denmark after the war concluded.

According to the President, this issue primarily concerns relations between the US and Denmark and does not involve Russia. However, “the only fact that certainly worries us is that NATO countries are increasingly designating the Far North as a potential springboard for conflicts and are practicing the use of troops under these conditions.”

Furthermore, Putin stated that Russia is not threatening anyone in the Arctic but is establishing a defense line.

He detailed that the Arctic region constitutes more than a quarter of Russia’s territory, is home to approximately 2.5 million Russian citizens, and accounts for 7% of the country’s GDP and about 11% of its exports.

The President highlighted that cargo flow on the Northern Sea Route has increased tenfold over the last decade, rising from 4 million tons in 2014 to approximately 38 million tons in 2024. Projections estimate cargo flow will reach 70-100 million tons by 2030.

Putin emphasized that the primary objective is to transform the Northern Sea Route into a key segment of the Trans-Arctic Transport Corridor, extending from St. Petersburg via Murmansk to Vladivostok.

According to Putin, this route “should connect the world’s industrial, agricultural, energy centers, and consumer markets via a shorter, safer, and economically profitable route.”

Putin outlined several tasks for developing the Trans-Arctic Corridor. Noting that Russia currently possesses the world’s largest icebreaker fleet, he stressed the need to strengthen this position and commission new-generation icebreakers, including nuclear-powered ones currently unique to Russia.

“Four of these—the newest 22220 series—are already operating in the Arctic. Three more nuclear icebreakers of this series are under construction—Chukotka, Leningrad, and Stalingrad—as well as the super-powerful 120-megawatt Rossiya icebreaker,” Putin stated.

He also mentioned Russia’s need for its own merchant fleet, including cargo and emergency rescue vessels, to facilitate transportation in the Arctic.

Observing that current capacity is insufficient, Putin said, “It is necessary to move in all directions: purchase and order ready-made ships, establish cooperation with global manufacturers, and generally align the entire Russian shipbuilding system with upcoming strategic tasks.”

He added that the government should support Russian shipbuilding and repair enterprises and explore the issue of shipyard construction.

Putin also stated that conditions must be created for domestic operators transporting cargo via the Arctic within Russia, adding that Russia is prepared to establish joint ventures in this area.

“International logistics operators can profitably invest in such companies not only with capital and technology but also with a portion of their merchant fleets,” Putin assessed.

Stating that Russia will increase the capacity and turnover of its northern ports, Putin added that Belarus, China, the UAE, and other countries have shown interest in developing the Arctic’s transport infrastructure.

Putin announced that multimodal centers will be established within the framework of the Trans-Arctic Corridor and instructed the government to outline plans for expanding the capacity of Arctic seaports and identify locations for new ones.

He also confirmed that Russia will implement the Arctic Railway Polygon development project: “Today we are aware of the development issues concerning RZD (Russian Railways)… However, it is necessary to start thinking now about this—about what I just mentioned, the development of the Northern Railway.”

Continue Reading

RUSSIA

Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok will revive, Deripaska says

Published

on

One of Russia’s wealthiest men, Oleg Deripaska, announced his belief that the project to create a unified economic zone between Russia and Europe, stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok, will be revived.

In a statement on his Telegram channel, Deripaska noted that this project would exclude Britain.

Deripaska stated, “The inevitable rapprochement after the conflict between Russia and Germany will completely change the political map of the European continent and lead to the revival of the project to create an economic zone from Lisbon to Vladivostok. This situation, along with Scotland’s secession from the United Kingdom, will definitively bury the British Empire in history.”

Deripaska stated that Britain’s problems have been accumulating for years, chief among them being “the virtual bankruptcy of public finances” and the complete failure of Brexit hopes.

Deripaska added, “No one came up with the dream of creating a Singapore on the Thames, and there was no desire for it in a society full of leftist ideas and not inclined to meticulous work.”

Deripaska assessed, “The collapse of the legal system and the terrible incompetence of judges in London have virtually destroyed the investment environment, and tax changes for foreigners have completely finished this situation.”

“But the worst is yet to come,” said Deripaska, adding, “All we have to do is wait and ignore the audacious ideas like ‘boots on the field.’ Let them crow a little.”

Continue Reading

RUSSIA

Ukraine retreats from most occupied areas in Russia’s Kursk oblast

Published

on

According to military analysts and soldiers who spoke to The New York Times (NYT), the Ukrainian army has withdrawn from almost all of the territory it occupied in Russia’s Kursk oblast.

As a result of Moscow’s counterattacks, Ukraine’s months-long operation to seize and occupy Russian territory is nearing its end.

At the peak of the offensive, the Ukrainian army controlled approximately 1,295 square kilometers of Russian territory.

According to Pasi Paroinen, a military analyst at the Finland-based Black Bird Group, as of Sunday, the Ukrainian army was trying to hold on to a narrow area of approximately 78 square kilometers along the Russia-Ukraine border.

“The end of the war is coming,” Paroinen told the newspaper.

While the amount of Russian territory under Ukrainian control could not be independently verified, intense fighting was reported in the region.

With Russia’s rapid advance, supported by continuous air strikes and drone attacks, the Ukrainian army withdrew last week from several villages in Kursk oblast and from Sudzha, the main city they controlled.

The General Staff of the Ukrainian Armed Forces announced that the troops had withdrawn to more defensible areas inside Russia and were taking advantage of the rugged terrain to provide better fire control against the approaching Russian forces.

On Sunday, it published a map showing the narrow area that Ukraine still controlled in Kursk oblast.

However, it remains unclear how long the Ukrainian army will be able to hold this area.

Ukrainian soldiers stated that the ongoing fighting in Kursk is no longer about holding Russian territory, but rather about controlling the best defensive positions to prevent the Russians from entering Ukraine’s Sumy oblast and opening a new front in the war.

An assault company commander, who identified himself only by his radio code, Boroda, said in a telephone interview, “We continue to maintain our positions on the Kursk front,” and added: “The only difference is that our positions have moved significantly closer to the border.”

Military experts say that although Ukraine’s withdrawal from most of Kursk oblast was rapid, it came after months of Russian attacks and bombardment that gradually weakened Ukraine’s foothold in the region and cut off supply routes, eventually making withdrawal necessary.

Austrian military analyst Franz-Stefan Gady, who visited Ukraine’s Sumy oblast on the Kursk border last month and met with Ukrainian commanders, said, “What has happened in the last few months was an operation that prepared the conditions for a successful advance.”

Serhiy Kuzan, the head of the non-governmental organization Ukrainian Center for Security and Cooperation, said, “There was no danger of encirclement of Ukrainian troops, and there is no evidence to the contrary.”

Meanwhile, Trump’s special representative for the Middle East and also a mediator with Russia, Steve Witkoff, told CNN on Sunday that he expected Trump to meet with Putin this week.

Witkoff said he had a positive three-to-four-hour meeting with Putin last week. While refraining from sharing the details of their discussions, Witkoff expressed his continued optimism that an agreement could still be reached.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey