'Haphazard' Crimean Bridge Attack Shows Kiev Lacks Intent to 'Take Back Crimea'
17:38 GMT 17.07.2023 (Updated: 08:34 GMT 18.07.2023)
© Sputnik / Konstantin Mikhalchevsky
/ Subscribe
On Monday, an attack on the Crimean Bridge that connects Russia’s Krasnodar Krai and Republic of Crimea regions resulted in the deaths of two adult Russian citizens and the injury of a their child. The attack, carried out by two maritime drones, damaged part of the roadway on one of the spans.
The Ukrainian government has indirectly admitted its part in the attack, which is just the latest of numerous attempts to destroy the 12-mile-long structure. A truck bombing in October 2022 killed five people and damaged both the road and rail parts of the bridge, which Kiev denied any connection to until earlier this month, when it admitted to bombing the bridge "in order to break the logistics of the Russians."
Michael Maloof, a former senior security policy analyst in the Office of the US Secretary of Defense, told Sputnik that Monday’s attack had both psychological and military purposes, but also demonstrated that Kiev has no serious plan to "retake" Crimea. The Russian-speaking region declared independence from Ukraine in March 2014 and subsequently requested re-unification with the Russian Federation, following a popular referendum.
"It's a main supply line between Russia and Crimea. Now, the road portion was damaged, that's inoperative for the moment. The rail section, however, still is active,” Maloof said, adding that "it's a parallel bridge which has two lanes for cars on each side and two-track system, because supplies can still roll on the rail. So whatever they were planning didn't seem to be all that effective in that regard. They can probably fix the road portion very, very rapidly and the supplies can still roll through on the rail line."
"That said, it appears to me that it was meant to show that the Ukrainians can strike, but it's very limited, very haphazard. Now, I have had one report that a US Reaper [unmanned aerial vehicle] was in the area and that these were Marine UAVs or unmanned vehicles, which had just a slight surface above the water but were guided to their destination. I have no other reports other than that one so I can't really confirm that. If that's the case and these were Marine drones, if you will, unmanned, and were guided somehow, presumably by this Reaper, which shows US-Ukrainian cooperation, if that's the case. Again, no confirmation. So this is still an unfolding event," he said.
Maloof said that the “meager” capability demonstrated by the attack, combined with its basic inability to actually stop transit from Krasnodar to Crimea, "doesn't indicate to me any serious intent by the Ukrainians to have a plan, if you will, to take back Crimea."
“Blowing up a vital bridge like that and [doing] it in such a piecemeal fashion and haphazard fashion, I just don't see how they could ever be effective in taking back the Crimea as they have expressed a desire to do,” he said.
Indeed, Maloof noted that Ukraine “would have required a lot of technical assistance” to carry out such an attack, which likely shows US or UK involvement.
"The type of drones that I'm hearing about, underwater drones, they didn't have that capability earlier. They had to get it from somebody. And the ability then to manipulate their guidance systems, which suggests either it is out of the UK or the US. If the report that I heard earlier of a Reaper, a US Reaper in the area at that time, which has reconnaissance and attack capability, was used to guide these drones, then that suggests that Ukraine on its own would not have had that capability."
Maloof said the US is "going to have to be very mindful of and careful of" any Russian reaction to the attack on the bridge if they were indeed involved in it.
"Because, let's say the next time the Russians encounter a Reaper over the Black Sea, they shoot it down. There will be a reason for that, and they are laying that basis. So the US has got to be exceptionally careful to not show direct involvement or the Reapers will be shot down. And I think that that could become a consequence if there is any further involvement as reported."
Turning to the subject of the paused grain deal, which provided safe passage for Ukrainian and cereal exports and Russian cereal and fertilizer exports in order to alleviate pressure on global prices, Maloof said Kiev's actions "suggest the Ukrainians don't want to continue the grain deal."
"I doubt that they get a considerable amount of income from it. I think it once again shows a lack of strategic thinking on the part of the Ukrainians, and in terms of timing, Mr. Putin said he wasn't inclined to approve the renewal of the Grain Deal, but Turkey's Erdogan has said that he feels that Mr. Putin will come around and renew it. A renewal of it is vital to a lot of countries", he added strseeing that African states would be particularly vulnerable to any halts in food and fertilizer supplies.
