(Paris) The partial destruction of a hydroelectric dam in southern Ukraine, of which Moscow and Kyiv accuse each other, will overwhelm Russian defensive lines along the Dnieper, but above all hinder a potential Ukrainian operation in the area to reconquer occupied territories.
This dam is designed in particular to supply water, via a canal, to the Crimean peninsula, annexed in 2014 by Moscow, which could thus experience significant water supply difficulties in the future.
But many Western observers nevertheless lean towards Russian sabotage penalizing Kyiv in the short term, at a time when the Ukrainian army is preparing to launch an offensive.
In any case, this is the thesis of Kyiv, which on Tuesday accused Russia of having “blown up” the dam to “slow down” its operations.
These floods have already caused hundreds of evacuations at this stage and risk hampering the ongoing Ukrainian military operations.
Militarily, the rising waters in the Kherson region will also make it particularly difficult to cross the river via a potential Ukrainian amphibious operation to try to reconquer the eastern bank, towards Crimea.
“If we follow the logic of ‘cui bono’ (who benefits, editor’s note), Russia would be the logical culprit, because by causing floods downstream of Nova Kakhovka, the Russians would complicate the efforts of crossing of the Ukrainians, thus saving time and allowing them to focus on other sections of the front ”, extended over approximately 1000 kilometers underlines on Twitter the British historian Sergey Radchencko, professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
“I see almost nothing near or far that benefits Ukraine in the case. Another destroyed infrastructure, another electricity production tool on land, more suffering for Ukrainian civilians, a limitation of Ukrainian offensive and logistical options, ”adds Stéphane Audrand, independent French consultant in international risks.
The flood as a weapon of war
The risk of strikes on this strategic installation of Kakhovka, located in the areas of the Kherson region occupied by Russia, has been brandished since October by the Ukrainians and the Russians. The Ukrainian president had accused Moscow of having “undermined the dam”, one of the largest in Ukraine. “Lies”, reacted the Russian occupation authorities.
Destruction of this type, likely to cause serious harm to civilian populations, has been considered a war crime since 1949, under the Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions.
“Dams, dykes and nuclear power stations shall not be attacked, even if they constitute military objectives, when such attacks can cause the release of these forces and, in consequently cause severe casualties to the civilian population”, underlines article 56.
Contemporary history has numerous examples in Europe of the destruction of dams and floods with a defensive or offensive vocation.
In 1941, the Soviets mined the massive Ukrainian barrage at Zaporizhia to slow down the German advance.
In May 1943, Britain’s Royal Air Force (RAF) bombed German hydraulic dams in the Ruhr Valley, the country’s industrial heartland.
Led by RAF 617 Squadron aircraft (nicknamed the ‘Dambusters’), the operation breached two of the three dams and damaged the third. She was immortalized in the movie “The Dam Busters” (1955).
Offensive floods were also organized during the First World War.
In Belgium, in the fall of 1914, the battle of the Yser opposing German units who wanted to cross the Yser river in the direction of Dunkirk to Belgian and French troops ended in a vast flood, triggered at the end of October, which succeeded to definitively halt the advance of the attackers. A result obtained by playing with the complex of locks of Nieuport, which regulated the influx of sea water and the drainage of the polders located at the rear.