Crossing the Dnipro: what a Ukrainian military operation could mean

Bands of Ukrainian soldiers are fighting to regain territory on the eastern bank of the river The Dnipro Riveran area long controlled by Russia, have been bombed by Russian warplanes, attacked by Russian infantry and pursued by drones.

Yet Ukrainian forces, battered and outgunned, have managed to hold a handful of positions across the river for more than a month and are expanding their attacks on Russian forces there to target their vital supply lines.

The ultimate objectives of the Ukrainian campaign remain unclear: is it primarily aimed at unbalancing Russian forces – using limited attacks to force the Kremlin to move troops into the area, hoping to weaken weaknesses along other parts of the to create a front? Or does Ukraine have more ambitious goals, such as trying to launch a major assault across the rivers, aimed at taking back a significant portion of territory and dramatically reshaping a front line that has barely moved in a year?

Many Western military analysts have expressed skepticism about whether Ukraine can establish the kind of bridgehead that would allow its forces to move artillery and heavy armor across the river, which they would need to conduct large-scale offensive operations.

Still, the continued attacks could prove difficult for Russia, especially if Ukraine can interfere with critical Russian supply lines. Whatever Ukrainian intentions, the swampy wetlands along the Dnipro are simmering.

Here’s a brief look at how the fighting has unfolded, where things stand, and the risks and rewards as Ukraine attempts the most ambitious battlefield river crossing since World War II.

What happens on the battlefield?

Much of the current state of affairs is still shrouded in mystery and deliberately concealed by both sides.

But military analysts using geolocated battle footage confirmed last month that Ukrainian forces are holding several positions and engaged in clashes in a series of villages stretching from Oleshky, opposite the city of Kherson, to Korsunka, a town about 30 miles (48 kilometers) upriver.

The commander of a Ukrainian special unit fighting on the eastern bank said his soldiers made their first forays across the river in August.

The end of OctoberUkrainian Marines joined the battle, and in mid-November the Marines announced that they held several beachheads. It was at this point that President Volodymyr Zelensky first mentioned the operation.

As Ukrainian attacks across the river intensified, so did Russia’s response.

In late October, Russian warplanes began blanketing the area with 500- and 1,000-pound bombs and using TOS-1A thermobaric artillery systems, which suck oxygen from the surrounding air, with devastating results, according to soldiers and battle footage.

Why is Ukraine opening this front?

By attacking Russian forces on the eastern bank of the river, Ukraine is forcing Russia to move troops from other parts of the front, according to Russian military bloggers. the Ukrainian army, British Military Intelligence And military analysts.

But the fighting is taking a heavy toll on Ukrainian forces, with soldiers being released battle images of fierce fighting and harsh living conditions.

Ukraine appears willing to risk exposing some of its best fighters to such an uncertain and difficult fight because the rewards of a successful operation could be transformative.

If Ukraine manages to establish lasting positions across the river, its forces would be within 50 kilometers of Crimea – creating a vital transit hub on the peninsula within range of Ukrainian artillery, expanding the geography of the battlefield is being reshaped and it becomes even more difficult for Moscow. to bring food, fuel and ammunition to tens of thousands of soldiers during the winter.

Yevhen Dykyi, the former commander of the Ukrainian Aidar battalion, said Ukrainian forces were “connecting” a crucial highway connecting Crimea to Melitopol, a vital artery in Russia’s supply chain.

“The next task is more difficult,” he said on Ukrainian television last week. “In particular, to expand this position, break through Russian defenses and gain operational space.”

How has Russia responded?

A choir of prominent figures Russian military bloggers have criticized Russian commanders for not taking the threat from Ukraine seriously enough.

As reports of increased Ukrainian activity increased in October, the Kremlin replaced the commander in the area, Colonel General Oleg Makarevich, with Colonel General Mikhail Teplinsky, who had previously served as head of Russia’s elite airborne forces.

The Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, said in a report last month that the Russian military “will likely struggle to redeploy combat-effective fortifications” to the area, while also engaging in defensive operations in the region Zaporizhia. the northwest, and continuing other offensive efforts in eastern Ukraine.

The Kremlin’s main response has been to use its air dominance to bomb the areas where it believes the Ukrainians have a foothold, hoping that the devastating bombardments will drive them out. Recently released Russian and Ukrainian drone footage shows once peaceful riverside villages now razed to the ground, without a single building standing.

Several prominent Russian military bloggers have done so reported mid-level command problems with Russian soldiers to post videos complaining about being ordered to go on suicide missions while living in difficult conditions.

What can happen next?

To extend their tenuous hold on the eastern bank of the Dnipro, the Ukrainians must find reliable ways to get supplies and reinforcements across the river – no easy task.

“A river crossing under fire is one of the most difficult operations in land war,” said John D. Hosler, professor of military history at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. “Imagine an hourglass, in which sand flows from one large container through a narrow channel to another: river crossings are the horizontal expression of that.”

Soldiers and equipment are vulnerable at every stage of the operation: as they gather to prepare for the crossing, as they move across the ‘wet gap’, and again on the other side.

While the Dnipro River narrows as it passes the port city of Kherson, and Ukraine has combat-tested engineering units – and bridging equipment designed for the task – it would be difficult to move large amounts of material across the river without being noticed.

The widespread use of drones has made an already treacherous business even deadlier. Once across the river, the swampy plains on the eastern bank provide little natural cover.

In addition to the possible operational benefits for Ukraine that could accrue from expanding the area under its control along the river, a successful crossing would also likely be a major boost to morale, especially after a year of toil and bloodshed, but little progress on the ground .

But a failed campaign would mean losing more of the country’s best soldiers.

No modern army has attempted anything of this magnitude under these conditions since World War II, and historians said it might be better to look further back for an analogy: George Washington led his soldiers through Delaware in December 1776 .

“Washington’s boldness was ultimately worth the risk: it not only won him a victory in Trenton, but also boosted the morale of his own beleaguered forces,” Mr. Hosler said. That war would continue until 1783, but victory on the battlefield gave the struggling Continental Army something it desperately needed at the time: hope.

Anna Lukinova reporting contributed.