Forbes calls the abandonment of Kherson by the Russians "Russiaʼs greatest defeat in a whole generation." "If earlier it was possible to say that the Ukrainians seized the initiative in this war, now it is more correct to say that Ukraine is actively winning in it," writes the correspondent of the publication David Axe. He notes that the commander of the occupying forces in Ukraine, Sergei Surovikin, cited the impossibility of maintaining the proper level of provision of Russian troops as the reason for the retreat from the right-bank Kherson region ― and this is true. Another important truth, which Surovikin did not say, is that having reached the banks of the Dnipro River, the Ukrainian military, using long-range American and European artillery, will be able to methodically destroy Russian military logistics already in the left-bank part of the region ― and, in particular, will easily reach the Perekop Isthmus, which connects the occupied Crimea with continental Ukraine. And the isthmus under fire control means new logistical problems for the Russians ― and therefore, potentially new retreats.
In general, Western observers perceive the retreat of the Russians from Kherson with much greater enthusiasm than the Ukrainian military or politicians. "Ukrainians can be understood," explains journalist Paraik OʼBryan in his story for the British Channel 4. "Experience of contacts with Russians has taught them that what looks like a departure and what is called a departure may not be it." And then he immediately looks for evidence that the Russians made such a decision out of despair, and this is something to be happy about. First, Putin officially declared Kherson a part of Russia, the center of the recently annexed region. Any official statement about the surrender of this territory is a de facto betrayal of it. And even if itʼs a fake, itʼs a very painful blow to the reputation of any dictator, especially the "land collector" Putin. Secondly, symbols important to Russians were taken out of Kherson ― from flags to the remains of their historical figures. Thirdly, Kirill Stremousov ― "the deputy head of the occupation administration, whom Putin pulled out from who knows where", "a poster boy of this occupation, who recited macabre poems about the benefits of Russification", suddenly allegedly died. All this leads to the conclusion that the "PowerPoint-presentation of the retreat" demonstrated by the "Russian soldier with a rocky face" Surovikin and his chief Sergei Shoigu, is not a bluff.
The New York Times devoted a large analytical article to the prospect of peace talks between Ukraine and Russia. Both American and European interlocutors of the publication from among politicians and military experts claim that this is impossible in the near future. From the Russian side ― because Putin, despite a series of defeats on the battlefield this fall, still hopes that over time, especially due to the cold winter, the West will weaken its support for Kyiv. From the Ukrainian side, the view of the situation is more complex. First, the months of war have hardened the Ukrainians, and regular Russian attacks do not weaken their will to resist. And missile attacks on infrastructure, American politicians assure the authors of the article, deprived the civilian population of the remaining illusions about a possible reconciliation with Russia. Therefore, even if Volodymyr Zelensky and his team wanted to prepare the ground for a compromise with the Russians, the Ukrainian people would not understand this and, in the end, would not allow it. Yes, the NYT writes, negotiations are often an effective tool for ending war. However, most often they begin when both sides are exhausted, or one of them foresees its defeat. Russia now assures that it is not against negotiations, but in reality this may be just a tool to delay time and restore the armyʼs resources. "We shouldnʼt fool ourselves into thinking that the Russians ever negotiated Ukraine with a sincere heart at all," Andrew Weiss of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (and author of the graphic novel "The Accidental Csar," which we recently wrote about) told the newspaper. Considering all this, despite the calls of some politicians for peace, the official US and EU recognize that only Ukraine can decide when to hold negotiations with the occupiers ― the West will support Kyiv until a "just peace" is achieved. This is a principle agreed upon by Ukraine with its partners, which includes, among other things, the liberation of all Ukrainian territories occupied by Russia.
The way Ukraine behaves in the informational aspect of this war has already become a subject for training the US Army psychological operations unit. This is written by Defense One. Lt. General Jonathan Braga, who heads this unit, draws the attention of his subordinates to how quickly information spreads in this war. How social networks have changed the perception of war ― in particular, their use by the military. And how Ukraine counteracts Russian fakes, quickly debunking them with the participation of top officials, producing messages for both domestic and foreign audiences. Also, the US military now takes into account the practice of Volodymyr Zelenskyʼs daily speeches, as this has proven to be a good tool for rallying the nation and reporting verified information about major events. "Two of the first strikes by the Russians on Ukraine on February 24 hit the building where the information special operations unit of the Ukranian Armed Forces was stationed," says Braga. "They aimed at this center with expensive high-precision ammunition. So you can understand how important the information field is in modern warfare."