At least three people have died in an explosion on the bridge that connects Crimea to Russia. The explosion took place around 6 a.m., Saturday, October 8, and it destroyed part of it. This bridge is a very important communication route but also a symbol of the annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014.
>> War in Ukraine: what we know about the explosion that partly destroyed the Crimean bridge
If Ukraine is indeed the cause of the explosion on this essential infrastructure, it would of course be “a snub” terrible for Moscow, notes General Vincent Desportes, former director of the School of War and professor of strategy at Sciences Po and HEC.
Franceinfo: This bridge is an important communication route that connects Crimea, annexed in 2014, to the Russian Federation and the province of Krasnodar. Is its importance both strategic and symbolic?
Vincent Desportes: I believe it is primarily a symbol. It is clear that the vast majority of Russian logistics that are needed for fighting today do not pass through Crimea. It is obvious that it is nevertheless an important artery and that therefore it will have repercussions. But it is first a symbol that is attacked. Especially since President Putin had always said that the war in Ukraine would have no influence on this bridge and that it would be protected. It is therefore a very direct attack and a still patent failure for Vladimir Putin. The Russian president has always said that he would react extremely violently if Crimea was attacked. It has not done so so far as the Ukrainians have carried out a number of attacks without any violent response from Russia. We see that this attack increasingly corners the Russian regime and in particular President Putin. And so his reaction is going to be extremely interesting to watch.
A retort is inevitable?
I do not know. First, we don’t know if it’s the Ukrainians. It is very likely that they will not claim. It is still not known who destroyed the gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea, and it may not be known. It is also not impossible that it was an act of resistance on the part of Crimean Tatars or Russians. But whatever happens, it’s a slap in the face for President Putin who cannot fail to understand that he is headed for an inevitable defeat.
The Russian army loses territories, Ukraine regains them. Can Crimea be a military target for Volodymyr Zelensky after this explosion?
It can be an objective since until now, Putin had separated Crimea from Ukrainian territories. But the recent annexation referenda put the four eastern oblasts and Crimea on an equal footing. So, depending on how the fighting progresses, it’s not impossible that the Ukrainian army will indeed seek to retake Crimea, but probably won’t get there because something is going to happen. thing before. We cannot imagine for a second that Mr. Putin will allow himself to be cornered until he loses Crimea and all of what he predated in 2014 in Ukraine because he would be sure to lose power.
What do you mean when you say something will happen first?
Everything is possible. You, like me, heard what the President of the United States, Joe Biden, said [sur un risque d'”apocalypse” nucléaire, le premier depuis la crise des missiles de Cuba en 1962]. All options, even the most terrible, are now on the table. The world is at a tipping point, an extremely fragile moment, and I believe that our leaders must maintain their serenity. We are not in Cuba in 1962, during the missile crisis [entre les Etats-Unis et l’URSS]. In 1962, we had rational actors named Kennedy and Khrushchev who ended up avoiding a major crisis. Today, the situation is very different. We obviously cannot say that Mr. Putin is perfectly calm because he is cornered, which was not the case with Nikita Khrushchev in 1962. As for John F. Kennedy, everyone knows that he was in his forties and he hadn’t passed his 80s [Joe Biden aura 80 ans en novembre]. We are not in the same situation. We are in a situation that is much more dangerous, much more flammable.