Jamie Dettmer is opinion editor at POLITICO Europe.
Russia’s retreat from Kherson city is being celebrated cautiously — as it should be.
The withdrawal from the only provincial capital the Russian military has managed to seize since launching its February invasion isn’t only a symbolic and morale-boosting victory for Ukraine, it’s also a major setback for the Kremlin’s previous ambitions of occupying Odesa and controlling all of Ukraine’s Black Sea coastline. Russia has now been thrown back in south Ukraine, to the point where its land bridge with Crimea is now imperiled.
But Kyiv’s caution, and its doubt as to whether this is a genuine withdrawal or a feint, reflects founded fears.
Ukraine now faces a dilemma: Should it quickly move forward to occupy the city, risking likely casualties from booby-trap devices, mines and improvised explosive devices, which security officials in Kyiv are convinced have been seeded everywhere?
Meanwhile, the country’s political leaders and military commanders also dread the prospect of Russia launching barrage after barrage from the east bank of the Dnipro River, seeking to raze a city that Russian President Vladimir Putin annexed only weeks ago.
The withdrawal was announced by Russia’s Minister of Defense Sergei Shoigu on Wednesday, as he told General Sergei Surovikin to “start with the withdrawal of troops and take all measures to ensure the safe transfer of personnel, weapons and equipment across the Dnipro River,” according to TASS.
Surovikin said on Russian state television that it was no longer possible to keep supplying the troops exposed in the city on the west side of the river, adding that the move was necessary to “preserve the lives of our troops and the combat readiness of our units … the civilian population could be in danger and our group of forces on the right bank of the Dnipro could be isolated.”
The move is not surprising.
POLITICO had foreshadowed the likelihood of a withdrawal by Surovikin, who was appointed as the overall commander of Russia’s so-called “special military operation” earlier last month, as security analysts and British defense officials had shared that how Surovikin handled Kherson city would be telling as to whether he’s possessed of better tactical skills than his predecessors.
As Ukraine bore down with a counteroffensive that started over the summer, Russia’s tactical position on the river’s west bank was hopelessly compromised, and Moscow risked losing some of its best soldiers — mainly paratroopers — unless it retreated. “From a battlefield geometry point of view, it is a terrible position for the Russians,” Jack Watling, a land warfare expert at Britain’s Royal United Services Institute, told POLITICO.
“From a purely military point of view, the Russians would be much better off withdrawing from Kherson city and focusing on holding the river [from the east bank], and then putting the bulk of their forces on the Zaporizhzhia axis. But for political reasons, they have been slow to do that and seem ready to fight a delaying action,” he added.
But whatever the reason for the delay in withdrawing — likely political opposition from the Kremlin — according to retired United States General Mark Hertling, a former commanding general of United States Army Europe, a retreat has been on the cards for some time now, as he tweeted it had been“predictable” since October 3.
Retreating is among the most difficult of military maneuvers to pull off in an orderly fashion, as the route of Russian forces near Kharkiv demonstrated in September. However, Surovikin does hold some advantages for his withdrawal that weren’t available to the commanders near Kharkiv. He has a natural feature — the river — to fall back to, and in the vanguard, he has more experienced troops.
However, though a smart tactical move the retreat might be, Hertling noted that even if it goes smoothly, “from experience, an enemy’s withdrawal provides many opportunities” in terms of operational intelligence gathering and working out the capabilities of one’s adversaries. “Add to all this the associated lowered morale of the withdrawing force. It’s never a boost to a force’s will to be ordered into a retrograde or withdrawal operation. This action will only further lower the morale of the RU force, and increase the fight in the UA,” he tweeted.
With Russian paratroopers now being freed up from Kherson city, the expectation is that they will be transferred further north and deployed near Donetsk, where Russian forces are under pressure from another Ukrainian counteroffensive.
It’s also worth noting that the Russian withdrawal is a personal strategic triumph for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Security sources in London and Kyiv told POLITICO early last month that the Ukrainian General Staff had opposed the big offensive around Kharhiv, fearing it would drain them of material, leaving them unable to press on to Kherson city quickly. Zelenskyy argued they could do both — maintain traction in the south, while also attacking in the northeast.
He’s been proven correct.