The secret of the withdrawal of Russian forces from the strategic city of Kherson

In a strong Ukrainian counterattack that began at the end of the summer, the Russian army announced that it was withdrawing from the northern part of the Kherson region

While the Ukrainian army began entering Kherson on Friday, a major city in the south of the country, following the withdrawal of Russian forces from it, after nearly nine months, observers are wondering if the Russian withdrawal was tactical or another setback for Moscow, which it does not want to acknowledge.

More than 30,000 Russian soldiers withdrew from the region in southern Ukraine, leaving the western bank of the Dnipro River to deploy on its eastern bank, as the Russian army announced on Friday.

“More than 30,000 Russian soldiers and about 5,000 armament units and military vehicles have been withdrawn,” the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement from the western bank of the Dnipro River.

On the other hand, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense wrote on Facebook, “Kherson returns to Ukrainian control, units of Ukrainian forces enter the city”.

The Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba wrote on Twitter, “Ukraine is writing another important victory at the present time and proving that whatever Russia says or does, Ukraine will win”.

In the face of a strong Ukrainian counterattack that began at the end of the summer, the Russian army announced, last Wednesday, that it would withdraw from the northern part of the Kherson region, including the capital of the region of the same name located on the right bank of the Dnipro River, “in order to strengthen its positions” on the other side of the river.

Despite this, the Kherson region will remain “belonging to the Russian Federation,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.

“There can be no change,” Peskov added, in the Russian presidency’s first comment on the withdrawal of its forces from Kherson.

Former US general and military expert, Mark Kimmitt, believes that Russia withdrew for one reason, “which is its inability to deliver supplies to its soldiers on the other bank of the Dnipro River”.

Kimmitt, who held the position of Assistant Secretary of State for Political and Military Affairs (2008-2009) under President George W. Bush, also drew attention to the severe shortage of equipment that Russian soldiers complain about, and the inability of those in charge of the Russian army to resupply the numbers stationed on both banks of the river.

Kimmitt denied that the decision to withdraw was a military plan or a trick – as some circles in Kiev said – inasmuch as it was an urgent need necessitated by the ferocity of the ongoing battles in Ukraine in general and Kherson, and its environs, in particular.

Ukraine had been cautious over the past two days about the Russian withdrawal from Kherson, fearing that the matter would be a trick or that the Russian army would mine the area to make it difficult for the Ukrainian forces to return.

The Ukrainian forces bombed the Antonovsky Bridge that extends over the Dnipro River for weeks, and it is the only one in the city of Kherson, to make it difficult for the Russian forces to cross it, and thus cut off the Russian supply lines and force Moscow to withdraw.

This fact is what “accelerated the withdrawal of the Russian forces,” according to Kimmitt, who emphasized in the context of his speech the strength of the continuous strikes from the Ukrainian side and their role in exhausting the combat capability of the Russian army.

However, the Russian analyst, Vyacheslav Mutazov, believes that the withdrawal doesn’t indicate the weakness of the Russian forces.

Mutazov stressed that “there is no room for talking about a military defeat,” and he said, “Did you hear any of the Russian leaders talk about surrender or retreat due to the loss of strength?

Did you hear that Ukraine beat the Russians during the battles in Kherson?”

Mutazov said, on the other hand, that the question that should be asked is, “Is withdrawal a military plan or a political decision?”

Washington encouraging Kiev to open channels of communication with Moscow, in order to reach negotiations between the two parties to end the war, which may be behind the sudden withdrawal decision, according to him.

The Washington Post revealed about a week ago that the administration of US President Joe Biden encouraged Ukraine’s leaders to express an openness to negotiating with Russia and to abandon their public refusal to engage in peace talks unless Russian President Vladimir Putin is removed from power, according to people familiar with the matter on discussions.

The Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, praised Friday a historic day and said that special military forces were inside the city of Kherson in the south of the country, after Russia announced the withdrawal of its forces from it.

“Today is a historic day… We are retaking Kherson,” Zelensky wrote on Telegram.

“Currently, our defenders are on the outskirts of the city, but special military forces are present in the city,” he explained.

“Our people are ours… Kherson is ours,” he added, alongside an emoji of the Ukrainian flag and amateur scenes from the city showing Ukrainian forces gathering with the city’s residents.

However, Mutazov insists that the withdrawal has technical reasons, most notably a new vision carried by the newly appointed commander of the Russian forces.

About a month ago, Putin appointed a new commander for Russian forces in Ukraine, General Sergey Surovikin.

“Sorovikin saw that the previous plan adopted by the army didn’t work, so he took a number of decisions, including this decision to withdraw”.

Mutazov added, “I know Surovikin’s personality… he cannot accept surrender, his appointment came to pursue the war until all goals were achieved, and he saw the necessity of withdrawing to achieve those goals”.

Mutazov believes, although he admitted that some tactics had changed during the nine months of the start of the war, refused to talk about the change in the strategy drawn up by Putin in the beginning, on February 24.

In addition, Mutazov didn’t deny that the most important goals set by the Kremlin through the invasion of Ukraine hadn’t been achieved.

In this regard, he said: “The feeling of hatred has increased due to Western and Ukrainian propaganda, and the arming of Ukraine has doubled due to the equipment provided by the West… That’s why the war continues”.