Russia invades Ukraine

[87electric]

It may or may not have have started. One thing's for certain, no one will be making a grand announcement, much to the disappointment of Sky News. Nor will the Ukrainian military be giving a running commentary.

Propaganda on both sides will continue to maintain media headlines.

 

[takno]

Propaganda on both sides will continue to maintain media headlines.

If the hostilities between the Russian army and Wagner group keep on like they are we might have to start saying three sides.

 

[DustyBin]

It may or may not have have started. One thing's for certain, no one will be making a grand announcement, much to the disappointment of Sky News. Nor will the Ukrainian military be giving a running commentary.

I’m of the opinion that it probably has. However, we don’t know what exactly the counteroffensive will look like, and as you correctly point out there’ll be no grand announcement or running commentary.

 

[ainsworth74]

It would seem that there has been a massive failure of the Kakhovka Dam in the city of Nova Kakhovka. Ukraine are pointing the finger at a deliberate act of destruction by Russia which, if true, would be a monstrous war crime considering the threat to civilian life and the wider economic and ecological impacts of the huge flooding which will now result. There is also concerns for the safety of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear power plant as it draws water from the reservoir that was formed by the dam whilst there are implications for Crimea as the North Crimean Canal drew its water from right next to the dam so will no longer be able to supply water to Crimea (something which was only restored by the invasion and was hailed a massive success by Russia as Crimea had been struggling without access to its water). It perhaps also speaks to Russian desperation that they're willing to trigger a massive flood in the hopes that it will prevent further Ukrainian amphibious activity below the dam for some weeks or months.

There are some suggestions floating around that the collapse might not be deliberate as the dam was likely damaged late last year by both Ukraine and Russia and has not received maintenance and repair since meanwhile water levels have been rising significantly in recent days placing the dam under more pressure so the collapse might not be a deliberate act. However, of course, if Russia had not invaded the dam would never have been placed in a position where it could collapse so Russia must still bear responsibility in the final analysis even if they didn't intend for its destruction.

MOSCOW/KYIV, June 6 (Reuters) - A major Soviet-era dam in the Russian controlled part of southern Ukraine was breached on Tuesday, unleashing floodwaters across the war zone in what both Ukraine and Russia said was an intentional attack by the other's forces.

Unverified videos on social media showed water surging through the remains of the dam with bystanders expressing their shock, sometimes in strong language. Water levels raced up by metres in a matter of hours.

Major dam breached in southern Ukraine, unleashing floodwaters

A major Soviet-era dam in the Russian controlled part of southern Ukraine was breached on Tuesday, unleashing floodwaters across the war zone in what both Ukraine and Russia said was an intentional attack by the other's forces.

www.reuters.com

 

[Couru]

If people could stop playing chicken with the ninth largest nuclear reactor on the planet, I would be very grateful.

 

[najaB]

There are some suggestions floating around that the collapse might not be deliberate as the dam was likely damaged late last year by both Ukraine and Russia and has not received maintenance and repair since meanwhile water levels have been rising significantly in recent days placing the dam under more pressure so the collapse might not be a deliberate act.

I just saw footage that clearly shows an explosion. While this YouTube channel is pro-Ukrainian and so the commentary needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, the video speaks for itself (25 seconds in):

 

[ainsworth74]

I just saw footage that clearly shows an explosion. While this YouTube channel is pro-Ukrainian and so the commentary needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, the video speaks for itself (25 seconds in):

That video was from November 2022 when Russia destroyed the road bridge next to the dam. For instance:

https://twitter.com/maria_avdv/status/1591352157382795264?s=20

 

[Killingworth]

Whilst spontaneous structural collapse is the least bad explanation the timing is somewhat suspicious. The balance seems to suggest the breach is more to Russia's potential advantage.

Advantage for Ukraine? Flooding a large civilian area to, deter a new Russian attack - very unlikely. Fooding Russian defences. Damaging water supplies.

Advantage for Russia? Flooding a large stretch of border to deter Ukrainian attack and allow deployment of forces elsewhere.

Whatever, it will divert both sides from activities they would, otherwise be doing. How well they've planned for this eventuality (surely both must have done) will now become apparent.

 

[najaB]

That video was from November 2022 when Russia destroyed the road bridge next to the dam. For instance:

https://twitter.com/maria_avdv/status/1591352157382795264?s=20

They are similar, but I'm not convinced it's the same footage. In the November footage the blast is towards the left-hand side of the image (left of the structure)



Where in this (apparently more recent) footage it is towards the right:

 

[ainsworth74]

Where in this (apparently more recent) footage it is towards the right:

View attachment 136724

Appears to match this footage from November to me!

https://twitter.com/EUFreeCitizen/status/1591336410598051840?s=20

 

[357]

The head of "Energoatom" Petro Kotin said that the explosion at the Kakhovska HPP will not affect the operation of the Zaporizhzhia NPP. He explained that the reactors are cooled from a pond that is not connected to the Kakhovsky Reservoir and does not depend on it.

According to him, water from the pond is used to cool the reactors, but they are not working now. If all the reactors were operating, the ponds would need to be refilled roughly every month as the water evaporates. But now, the water level in the pond has hardly changed, it has not been replenished since September last year. In case of a critical situation, the ponds can be replenished with water from alternative sources to the Kakhovsky Reservoir.

 

[ainsworth74]

The head of "Energoatom" Petro Kotin said that the explosion at the Kakhovska HPP will not affect the operation of the Zaporizhzhia NPP. He explained that the reactors are cooled from a pond that is not connected to the Kakhovsky Reservoir and does not depend on it.

According to him, water from the pond is used to cool the reactors, but they are not working now. If all the reactors were operating, the ponds would need to be refilled roughly every month as the water evaporates. But now, the water level in the pond has hardly changed, it has not been replenished since September last year. In case of a critical situation, the ponds can be replenished with water from alternative sources to the Kakhovsky Reservoir.

Well that's something at least I suppose!

 

[357]

Before destroying the Kakhovka dam today, the Russians raised the water level to a record 17.5 meters.

 

[kristiang85]

Before destroying the Kakhovka dam today, the Russians raised the water level to a record 17.5 meters.

It could well be that they did that and the structure failed due to the pressure. If you look at photos of the damaged dam, there isn't much evidence to the untrained eye of explosions.

So right now I'll refrain from saying the Russians blew it up, but certainly this action has not helped at all, whether intentionally or not.

But I will say that Crimea went without water supplies for many years since 2014, so I don't think this will affect them as drastically as some say. So ultimately Russia would gain most from this right now, but again we can't say for sure who did it until there is more evidence.

 

[DustyBin]

Whilst we don't know for certain who (if anyone) blew up the dam, it has "Russian act of terror" written all over it. It was always possible (some would say probable) that this would happen, ever since the Russians rigged it up last year (presuming they actually did of course). Whilst there may be some benefit militarily, I suspect it's more about the mass targeting of civilians and destruction of infrastructure, without crossing any "red lines", more than anything.

It could well be that they did that and the structure failed due to the pressure. If you look at photos of the damaged dam, there isn't much evidence to the untrained eye of explosions.

So right now I'll refrain from saying the Russians blew it up, but certainly this action has not helped at all, whether intentionally or not.

But I will say that Crimea went without water supplies for many years since 2014, so I don't think this will affect them as drastically as some say. So ultimately Russia would gain most from this right now, but again we can't say for sure who did it until there is more evidence.

Fair point(s).

Another possibility is that the Russians simply overloaded it to the point of failure deliberately. I'm sure they could do the calcs....

Again, we don't know so we should really wait for more information, but personally I find it difficult to give them the benefit of the doubt having witnessed what we have since February last year.

 

[ainsworth74]

But I will say that Crimea went without water supplies for many years since 2014, so I don't think this will affect them as drastically as some say. So ultimately Russia would gain most from this right now, but again we can't say for sure who did it until there is more evidence.

The impression I had was that it's more of a long term decline and ecological issue than a sudden sharp shock. The amount of land under cultivation is, for example, significantly less than it was pre-2014 due to the lack of water, the salinity of some soils is rising and parts of Crimea are succumbing to desertification. None of these things are immediately a problem but they represent issues that will get worse and worse without access to the water from the canal.

 

[adc82140]

Whilst we don't know for certain who (if anyone) blew up the dam, it has "Russian act of terror" written all over it. It was always possible (some would say probable) that this would happen, ever since the Russians rigged it up last year (presuming they actually did of course). Whilst there may be some benefit militarily, I suspect it's more about the mass targeting of civilians and destruction of infrastructure, without crossing any "red lines", more than anything.



Fair point(s).

Another possibility is that the Russians simply overloaded it to the point of failure deliberately. I'm sure they could do the calcs....

Again, we don't know so we should really wait for more information, but personally I find it difficult to give them the benefit of the doubt having witnessed what we have since February last year.

Whoever or whatever caused the collapse, it will fuel an enormous (dis)information war.

 

[ainsworth74]

Again, we don't know so we should really wait for more information, but personally I find it difficult to give them the benefit of the doubt having witnessed what we have since February last year.

But I do keep coming back to even if this wasn't a deliberate act by Russia, the collapse would not have happened without Russia invading Ukraine and therefore creating the conditions for it to become damaged and eventually collapse. So as far as I'm concerned they remain responsible for this disaster.

 

[DustyBin]

But I do keep coming back to even if this wasn't a deliberate act by Russia, the collapse would not have happened without Russia invading Ukraine and therefore creating the conditions for it to become damaged and eventually collapse. So as far as I'm concerned they remain responsible for this disaster.

I completely agree.

 

[Annetts key]

The head of "Energoatom" Petro Kotin said that the explosion at the Kakhovska HPP will not affect the operation of the Zaporizhzhia NPP. He explained that the reactors are cooled from a pond that is not connected to the Kakhovsky Reservoir and does not depend on it.

According to him, water from the pond is used to cool the reactors, but they are not working now. If all the reactors were operating, the ponds would need to be refilled roughly every month as the water evaporates. But now, the water level in the pond has hardly changed, it has not been replenished since September last year. In case of a critical situation, the ponds can be replenished with water from alternative sources to the Kakhovsky Reservoir.

Yeah, I believe all the reactors were taken off line last year. As they are not producing power for electrical generation, the reactor cores have had their power outputs reduced to as low as is possible (minimal reaction). The level of heat in each reactor core is therefore low compared to when in normal operation. Hence, although constant cooling is required, the water loss due to the production of steam and evaporation is low.

If the water level was intentionally allowed to get to record levels, or it occurred because the operators were unable to control the water level because the Russians would not allow access, then it’s definitely Russia’s fault.

I also don’t see any significant advantage in it failing from the Ukrainian point of view. Will it flood Russian positions down river? Yes. But that was never going to be a significant line of attack from the Ukrainian army. And now they have to deal with the evacuation of large numbers of the population on the side of the river that they control.

Further, when they do push the Russians back from the rest of the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts, Ukraine would have wanted the hydroelectric dam to be repaired and power generation restarted, as well as the rail and road sections to be repaired and reopened.

Looking at the videos, that is now an enormously large job compared to before the dam failed.

In terms of long term advantages for Russia, I frankly don’t see any. Once the water level behind what is left of the dam have stabilised to the new level of what remains of the dam, downstream will return to approximately the same water as it was before. The flooded areas will dry out. But any trenches will be full of wet or damp mud and any accommodation left standing will be similarly full of mud, meaning defending the area will be far more difficult.

Meanwhile, up river, the water level will be significantly lower, and once the previously flooded land dries out, it means it may be easier for the Ukrainian army to cross the river.

 

[adc82140]

Not to detract from what Russia has done, but there is some utter nonsense by so called "experts" on Sky News regarding the Zaporizhe Nuclear Power Plant. The head of the IAEA has said that there is no danger, the head of the Ukrainian nuclear industry has explained how the cooling ponds have alternative sources of water, yet they've just had someone on there stating that the next Chernobyl is about to happen. It's simply not possible with this design of power plant even if the worst happened.

 

[DustyBin]

Not to detract from what Russia has done, but there is some utter nonsense by so called "experts" on Sky News regarding the Zaporizhe Nuclear Power Plant. The head of the IAEA has said that there is no danger, the head of the Ukrainian nuclear industry has explained how the cooling ponds have alternative sources of water, yet they've just had someone on there stating that the next Chernobyl is about to happen. It's simply not possible with this design of power plant even if the worst happened.

It's typical Sky News really. As you say, there's sufficient water available, and the reactors are inherently safer than those at Chernobyl. When Russia first started "messing around" at the plant I read a very good in-depth article on the subject, which explained why a Chernobyl-like incident is extremely unlikely to occur at Zaporizhzhia. Again, that's not to say Russia isn't behaving completely irresponsibly in this regard, but the scaremongering is unnecessary.

 

[brad465]

Sometimes I do wonder what the point of the UN is, after this tweet on the same day as the dam bust:

https://twitter.com/UN/status/1665932022160965632

Today is Russian language day.

Cont.

 

[najaB]

Sometimes I do wonder what the point of the UN is, after this tweet on the same day as the dam bust:

https://twitter.com/UN/status/1665932022160965632

I'm not sure what the relevance is? The Russian language isn't an enemy of democracy, neither are the majority of Russian-speaking people.

Remember that alleged mistreatment of Russian-speaking people in Ukraine is one reason that the Russian government has used to try and justify their invasion of Ukraine.

 

[Trackman]

Re: Dam, is this the same dam that Ukraine mentioned just after the war started? They had intelligence Russia were going to blow up or something.

 

[Parjon]

But I do keep coming back to even if this wasn't a deliberate act by Russia, the collapse would not have happened without Russia invading Ukraine and therefore creating the conditions for it to become damaged and eventually collapse. So as far as I'm concerned they remain responsible for this disaster.

Agree. About time it was made clear to the Russians that all such destruction achieves is an increased bill.

I hope the amount of weapons that are being "donated" to Ukraine are actually being totted up on tic. Russia is entirely liable for every penny expended in the defence of Ukraine against the wilfully unlawful invasion.

 

[kristiang85]

I'm not sure what the relevance is? The Russian language isn't an enemy of democracy, neither are the majority of Russian-speaking people.

Remember that alleged mistreatment of Russian-speaking people in Ukraine is one reason that the Russian government has used to try and justify their invasion of Ukraine.

Quite. I've said before that stoking Russophobia at every opportunity is only going to end up upsetting a much larger group of people and cause far more resentment and diviision in the future, which is history is anything to go by leads to more conflict.

Yes it probably wasn't the best timing (though likely automated long before the event), but if and when the Putin regime is finally toppled, we want the new order in Russia to be amenable to the West. The current rhetoric is basically making sure this most likely won't happen.

 

[Mike395]

If I had the ability to, I'd make all newsgatherers have a training session in keeping reporting bias to a minimum from Ros Atkins (he's not 100% perfectly unbiased, but he is by some distance the best in the UK I know of dedicated to producing unbiased explainers of just about everything under the sun in terms of major news events): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-65829075 is a particular good explainer of his as to the state of play with the dam, all the facts and none of the aspersions/assumptions we're seeing from some others.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Re: Dam, is this the same dam that Ukraine mentioned just after the war started? They had intelligence Russia were going to blow up or something.

Yes, same one. It was obvious that they were going to blow it as soon as it looked likely that the left bank of the Dnipro was seriously threatened.

What Russia has done is simply destroy a large part of Ukraine for no reason other than malice. They knew they were going to lose, and so they've just destroyed it to make life even worse for ordinary Ukrainians. This is why I'll shed no tears if Ukraine tears apart Russian cities next to the Ukrainian border in revenge.

I'm not sure what the relevance is? The Russian language isn't an enemy of democracy, neither are the majority of Russian-speaking people.

There are also plenty of Russians speakers outside Russia. It's the official language of Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. It's also spoken by a lot of people as a second or even first language, even when it's not an official language. I've noticed that the Poles in Lithuania sometimes use Russian for some inexplicable reason, probably because their homeland is quite close to Belarus.

 

[brad465]

If I had the ability to, I'd make all newsgatherers have a training session in keeping reporting bias to a minimum from Ros Atkins (he's not 100% perfectly unbiased, but he is by some distance the best in the UK I know of dedicated to producing unbiased explainers of just about everything under the sun in terms of major news events): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-65829075 is a particular good explainer of his as to the state of play with the dam, all the facts and none of the aspersions/assumptions we're seeing from some others.

I'm surprised the BBC haven't tried to dismiss him because of the attributes you point out.




According to Mike Martin the Kremlin is looking to take control of all PMCs (Private Military Companies), which could well go down like a lead balloon among Wagner et al.:

https://twitter.com/ThreshedThought/status/1667818439438737408

Oh wow. It’s all happening. Kremlin now bringing all PMCs (Wagner) under centralised control. Not sure that’s going to go down that well.

Now got a BBC report:

Ukraine war: Russia moves to take direct control of Wagner Group

It appears to be the latest in a public falling out between the Wagner boss and Russian officials.

www.bbc.co.uk

Russia appears to have moved to take direct control of Wagner, after months of infighting between defence officials and the private military group.
Deputy Defence Minister Nikolai Pankov said on Saturday "volunteer formations" will be asked to sign contracts directly with the ministry of defence.
The vaguely worded statement is widely believed to target the group.
But in a furious statement on Sunday, Wagner boss Yevgeny Prigozhin said his forces would boycott the contracts.
The private military group has played a major role in the war in Ukraine, fighting on the side of Russian forces.
But Prigozhin, who is said to hold political ambitions of his own, has been embroiled in a public dispute with Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu and military chief Valery Gerasimov for months.
He has repeatedly accused the pair of incompetence and of deliberately undersupplying Wagner units fighting in Ukraine.
"Wagner will not sign any contracts with Shoigu," Prigozhin said in response to a request for comment on the defence ministry's announcement. "Shoigu cannot properly manage military formation."
He insisted that his group was well integrated with the Russian military, but said that its effectiveness would be damaged by having to report to the defence minister.
While Saturday's announcement did not directly reference Wagner or any other paramilitary groups, Russian media suggested that the new contracts were a move to bring Prigozhin and his forces under control.
But the defence ministry said the move was designed to "increase the effectiveness" of Russian units fighting in Ukraine.
"This will give volunteer formations the necessary legal status, create common approaches to the organization of comprehensive support and the fulfilment of their tasks," the ministry said in a statement, adding that the contracts must be singed by 1 July.
The long-running tensions between the Wagner Group and the army have threatened to boil over in recent weeks.
Last week the group kidnapped a senior frontline army commander, Lt Col Roman Venevitin, after accusing him of opening fire on a Wagner vehicle near Bakhmut.
Lt Col Venevitin was later released, and in a video shared by Russian military bloggers he accused the group of stoking "anarchy" on Russia's frontlines by stealing arms, forcing mobilised soldiers to sign contracts with the group and attempting to extort weapons from the defence ministry.
Prigozhin called the comments - which appeared to be read from a script - "absolutely total nonsense".
He has also suggested that he is ready to deploy his troops on Russian soil, saying on Telegram that Wagner was ready to fight against insurrectionist forces in the Belgorod region.
In December, the US estimated that Wagner had around 50,000 troops fighting in Ukraine.
And the mercenary group has increasingly become a tool of Russian state power around the world. Its troops are currently believed to have been deployed in Mali, the Central African Republic,Sudan and Libya.