[If you like my articles and analysis, feel free to share them and pass them along. And if you have a few bucks to spare, for a coffee or beer to keep me going, I’d be most grateful. Keeping up with the news, writing these articles, and fact-checking and vetting everything takes a lot of time!]
This article is a follow-up to my previous one on the Kakhovka Dam Failure.
I received some great input from some of my readers, that helped me finetune my analysis on what caused the Kakhovka Dam to collapse.
Before we dive into that, a quick stat on the current water levels:
(For some reason, they stopped the measurements on June 9, for the time being.)
One question was really intriguing, and important, to answer.
“A question: is it possible that the release of all that water upriver, flowing into the reservoir & overburdening the dam could have been merely the necessary release of seasonal rise in water levels?
This is done here in Oregon & is a delicate balance, requiring (I would think) well-considered coordination between the other dam systems management, both up- and downstream — Something not easily done given the Kakhovka dam situation. Because of damage or danger, it was unable to release what in other years may have been a manageable volume of water. So, it very likely was not a conscious or intentional act on Ukraine’s part.
I’m inclined to think that’s the case — or perhaps the war itself impacted the dam system management personnel in the other upstream dams — who also HAD to release the volumes coming to them.”
That is an excellent observation, that needs to be looked at.
The information that is relevant to this question, is rather hard to come by, it seems. The site that provided the information on the level of the Kakhovka Reservoir, only has info on the Kremenchuk reservoir, but not on the 2 reservoirs between the Kakhovka and Kremenchuk reservoirs, namely the Middle Dnieper Reservoir and the Dnieper/Zaporizhzhia Reservoir. They did have 2 measuring points on the river between the Middle Dnieper and the Dnieper reservoirs, and a side river very close to the Dniepr Reservoir (marked A and B, respectively, on the below map, also indicating, in pink, the Kakhovka Reservoir).
Measuring station A, River Dnipro:
Measuring station B, River Mokra Sura, close to the confluence with the Dnieper:
Let’s add to this the other large reservoir in this cascade, the Kremenchuk Reservoir (marked D on the below map, for reference, with the previous measuring stations A and B, and an indication of the Middle Dnieper Reservoir, for which I could not find level information).
The measuring station at the Kremenchuk Reservoir:
But let’s take a closer look:
And even closer:
Another set of data I found on the water level in the cascade reservoirs, is this one, with the first 3, and the Kakhovka reservoirs. What would have been of interest, however, is the level in the 4th and 5th reservoirs, which is missing.
Looking at the data for the Kremenchuk Reservoir, we see a large release end of March, which shows up in the Kakhovka reservoir in April (with a delay that is to be expected, as the water has to pass 2 other reservoirs first). That release from Kremenchuk is apparently halted, but Kakhovka continues to fill rapidly, nonetheless.
Anything conclusive? Not really. We know that Ukraine protested against the low levels in the Kakhovka Reservoir, and we have this interesting testimony from an NPR article, from end of March, 2023: “The Ukrainian government has tried to stem the flow by releasing water from other Ukrainian-controlled reservoirs along the Dnipro River to refill Kakhovka, but it's at best a temporary solution.” This is a pro-US source, also reporting and admitting that Ukraine was trying to refill Kakhovka unilaterally.
To answer that question: did Ukraine only perform seasonal draining of high spring rain and winter snow melt water, to preserve the higher reservoirs on the Dnieper Cascade? In part, for sure. But it cannot be excluded that they did not indeed try to fill the reservoir, themselves, as several sources indicate. In the data we have available, there is no clear smoking gun, either way, but (because of that) leaning slightly more towards seasoning draining. Yet the sudden increase in water, starting slowly in February 2023, sharply increased in speed in April 2023, coinciding with a larger release from Kremenchuk. That speed remained until the level plateaued because of the over-spilling: where did that water come from in such a sustained, high volume, as we know that water wasn’t drained from Kakhovka any differently during that period? That is a question that for now does remain, and also needs answering.
As an unconfirmed report, Intel Slava made mention that the Dnieper dam stopped all discharge of water and stated that this was “for an offensive in the Kherson direction. The termination of the discharge at the Dnieper HPP will lead to the maximum shallowing of the Dnieper River along its entire course (in particular, in the Kherson region). This will help the Armed Forces of Ukraine to force the riverbed to the south.” A video shows the dam, without any run-off discharge of water, and a much lowered water level in front of the dam, indicating this is indeed a recent video, after the Kakhovka Reservoir had drained considerably. If they could afford to stop all discharge, why only now, almost a week after the failure? Questions, questions… Instead of having to wade through all those different layers of ‘who benefits’, it really does help to simply go back to the analysis of what happened to the dam, in which sequence, and start from there, as my previous article did.
A few other points:
Looking at this later image, we see that the control building also slightly collapsed, but towards the lock. This makes perfect sense, as the water rushing passed on over the earther portion, undercut the foundations for it.
This is another important picture that supports my explanation. Do you see the direction of the main flow? It comes from the left, and pushes towards the power plant buildings, creating heavy turbulence along the side of the first part of the building. The power exerted on that building are enormous, and indeed could have pivoted the building, even slightly, enough to create cracks in the middle portion (which likely was already damaged, anyway, because of repeated shelling, one of which took out 3 of the 6 turbines present).
We also see references to the Russians having blown up the Oskil Reservoir Dam, as a precedent that proves the willingness of the Russians to blow up dams. This makes little sense, and digging around creates more questions than answers.
We have reports of Ukrainians blowing up dams near Oskil when the Russian invasion had just started. A Ukrainian media outlet reported on the flooding caused by that breach early April. Then there are reports of the Oskil reservoir being drained in July 2022, but why would the Russians do that? They already controlled that area, and were to be expected to keep pushing. This is also 2 months before the September 2022 Ukrainian offensive that took back large portions of Karkhov Oblast, all the way past Izyum, where the Oskil river became the line the Russian drew to take their stand and stop the Ukrainian forces, ending the offensive. Why would Russia shell this dam? It makes much more sense if Ukraine did it, to stop and make more difficult any subsequent Russian advance.
Also important is an Oct 24, 2022 article by the Ukraine War Environmental Consequences Work Group, which stated “Another hydropower plant on the Oskil River (capacity 4 MW) was blown up to slow the Russian army’s advance on Kharkiv and is once again under Ukrainian control. Unfortunately, the destruction of this particular small hydropower plant is quite important for residents in Eastern Ukraine. It is the Oskil Reservoir that maintains a stable water supply across the entire Donbass region.” It assigned responsibility to the Ukrainian forces, and gives a possible reason: cutting of that stable water supply to the Russian held ‘separatists’ and ‘traitors’ in the Donbass region.
It becomes a lot more interesting, when you take a look at this June 13 article by Volodymyr Dacenko, titled “No, the Kakhovka dam could not have collapsed on its own”.
On the author:
“Forbes analyst Volodymyr Dacenko offers seven reasons for why any version outside of Russia’s deliberate destruction of the Kakhovka dam on 6 June, resulting in immense flooding, should be discarded.”
Let’s look at those 7 reasons, one by one.
First: “The water discharge patterns gave no indication that the Kakhovka dam was weak”
He gives several pictures as evidence how there is no indication of a weakened dam, but he leaves out the relevant picture, as I provided in my last article:
Here we see no spill-off, except at 2 places with known damage: the place where Russians blow up the road deck, on the right, and on the left where the Ukrainians had deliberately targeted the structure and sluice gates. No signs of major damage, but damage nonetheless. On a dam, even such slight damaged areas can compromise the whole structure, weakening it.
Second: “The epicenter of destruction is far from the place the dam was the weakest”
Here, the author points at the ‘epicenter’ of destruction the location of detonation when the Russian troops retreated, and blow up the road and railroad parts over 3 sections of the structure. He ignores, however, the many shelling attacks carried out by Ukraine, concentrated, among other places, on the part where the spillover section of the dam connects to the power plant buildings. Not just the road and railroad structures were targeted and hit, but the sluice gates and structures themselves, exactly where the main cascade of destruction began. This is either very sloppy work, or willful deception, wanting us to forget the shelling, even deliberate targeting to create a flooding event, by the Ukrainian forces.
To add another source for such Ukrainian attacks, consider this article from Meduza, “Banned in Russia, but here for you”, from August 10, 2022:
“A Ukrainian strike has significantly damaged a bridge in Nova Kakhovka, a Russian-occupied city in the Kherson region, according to the Ukrainian authorities. The Kakhovsky Bridge, which crosses over the dam at the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant, has been one of the Russian army's few remaining options for transporting supplies across the Dnipro river.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces reported that Wednesday’s attack “consolidated the bridge’s status as unusable.”
Third: “Self-destruction would have started from the sluice gates”
The author makes this statement, as if this contradicts a proper timeline and analysis of what happened. I agree with him, it should have started from the sluice gates, and it DID. His argument itself makes no sense: “The structure of the HPP is not monolithic, and therefore the cascading nature of the destruction should not, in principle, occur. In essence, each section that holds the sluice gate is a separate reinforced concrete support.” Cascading destruction ONLY occurs when a structure is not monolithic, but is comprised of separate elements. Which is why there is a time in between each subsequent phase, where stress is built up against the next part, before that gives way, and a new phase begins, adding new stresses to the next part that is exposed, etc. Some of those cascades are rapid, such as the collapse of the superstructure over the spillway. Once parts of the dam had moved (as inferred from the collapsed roadway deck slabs), even ever so slightly, the structure was comprised. When a single section broke down, the sudden release of energy of the rushing water started to push against the adjacent ones, breaking them down as well, until halfway through the spillway.
Fourth: “Russians pumped up the water levels to the utmost, preparing for detonation”
This is in contention, as the first part of this article explains. Remember also how the Russians were first blamed for keeping the level at a complete minimum…
Fifth: “The Kakhovka hydropower plant was built to withstand a nuclear strike”
Correct. But the impact of a nuclear strike is very short, and a single moment, and the direct of force comes from above, not from the side. A can of soda is also designed to withstand a lot of force from top down. You can even stand on a can, if you carefully shift your weight on it straight down. But even the slightest pressure from the side, makes it collapse in on itself. Also, the power of a nuclear blast is transferred through air, not water, which also makes a difference. The Kakhovka dam was brought down because of weakened structures (age and shelling), and immense water pressures and erosive processes.
The author points out: “It is very difficult to believe that the engine room was “washed away with water.” And it is not clear why it was “washed away” not from the side of the previous explosion, but from the side of the left bank.” First, the engine room wasn’t ‘washed away with water’, but cracked when immense water pressure pushed down on the far most corner of the building, which was already compromised through prior shelling (that did so much damage it took out 3 of the 6 turbines). That pressure, as seen on the picture I showed earlier in this article, was aimed directly on the corner of the power plant, making it bear the full force of a massive amount of water. It didn’t move much, but it DID move, as the pictures show.
Second, it did not wash away from the left bank, but exactly from the site of where the spillover structure connected to the power plant, in a clear cascade of destruction, as the succession of pictures shows.
Sixth: “Soviets needed 20 tons of explosives to destroy Kakhovka HPP 1.0”
This brings us to a major argument that keeps being brought up: “The Russians blew up the dam from within! They must have!” Except, there is ZERO proof of such. And it is absolutely impossible, and contradicted with what little picture evidence that is available.
The collapse of the dam took place over several hours, and was not the result of a single explosion. First, if the Russians blew it up, they started by blowing up the spillover structure. There is no internal space in that part of the dam. What do see, is how the superstructure was pushed outwards, away from the reservoir, in the part that remains. At that initial stage, locals heard several loud sounds, minutes apart. This is consistent with a gradual structural failure cascading through the spillover structure, and not with a demolition through explosives. Next, the collapse of the power plant building: that part of the dam did indeed have internal parts where such explosives could have been placed. But 20 tons needed for the first dam, when this one is so much stronger and better? There is absolutely no indication of such an explosion ever taking place. No sound, no video, and this when people had already been alerted that the dam was failing. The damage pattern in the building itself disproves such theory, as it is not consistent with such a huge explosion, either. For starters, the floor sections seem to have collapsed downward, without evidence of any huge outward blast, or any epicenter of such an explosion. The break with the other sections of the building is extremely clean: is that the work of 20 tons or more of explosives? Or of other stresses that resulted in a structural failure and collapse, predicated by the design and built of the power plant itself?
This is a very hard claim to make, based on what we already know, with ZERO proof or even indications for such a story. The only reason people make this claim, is because it ‘must be true’ based on theoretical demands. “If the Russians did it, and they did, how could that have happened?”
Other Western media and analysts are starting to realize that, too. Example: this article and headline by the Swiss paper Neue Zürcher Zeitung. They claim “Various pieces of evidence indicate that Russia did not blow up the Kakhovka Dam, but provoked the catastrophe with criminal indifference. Now there are lessons to be learned for further sources of danger.” At least they lay the ridiculous claim of Russian sappers blowing up that dam to rest. Was it really criminal indifference, however? That is another story, but one that I have answered throughout as well.
Lastly, seventh: “Russia controlled the plant all this time”
True, the Russians controlled both sides of the dam since very shortly after the start of the Special Military Operation, but since November 2022 only the left bank. There are many stories, and evidence, of shelling of the dam, and accounts talking about how snipers from the other, Ukrainian controlled, side, made repair or maintenance work impossible. The fact of who controlled the power plant is irrelevant, by itself. It only becomes important once the method of destruction is determined, and proof of explosives is found. Then the type of explosives becomes important, and if huge quantities are indicated, the question of control becomes relevant. Smaller amounts could be rocket or shell delivered, or by small sabotage teams, even. Stranger things have happened.
All in all, a very disappointing ‘analysis’ by this Forbes Analyst, which does not even come close to delivering any substantive argument to support the very bold and definitive claim made in the title.
________________
Next, some other thoughts on things said and reported in relation to this dam collapse.
Let’s go back to Zelensky’s televised address to his nation.
This part in particular: “Fifth, it is only the complete liberation of Ukrainian land from Russian occupiers that will guarantee that such acts of terrorism will not happen again. Russia uses anything for terror – any object. The terrorist state must lose. […] Regarding our south and Crimea. We will find a way to restore normal life on our land after the expulsion of the ruscists. This applies to water and everything else. This applies to all our regions – from Kherson to Dnipropetrovsk, from Mykolaiv to Crimea.
The fact that Russia deliberately destroyed the Kakhovka reservoir, which is critically important, in particular, for providing water to Crimea, indicates that the Russian occupiers have already realized that they will have to flee Crimea as well.
Well, Ukraine will get back everything that belongs to it. And it will make Russia pay for what it has done.”
What most people likely will not have noticed, is yet another reference to ethnic cleansing: “after the expulsion of the ruscists”. This would take place, logically, either by forced expulsion, or by mass murder (or a combination of the two). Does that sound too far-fetched? Not if you listen to people like Kirill Budanov, chief of the GUR (the Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine). In a video, televised in Ukraine, he spoke openly about this, and not a single Western media outlet or politician took note.
“Budanov: After the victory I will go to Sevastopol, this is my hometown.
Q: What about 3 million not-so-loyal people who’ll come back to Crimea?
Budanov: It is not just ‘not very loyal’. These are people with a modified psycho already, it is not even an ideology, it is a psyche.
Q: And what to do with them?
Budanov: It is very easy: we bring them to justice. In our understanding, for certain people, for their actions there can only be physical destruction.”
This is rather harrowing, to hear this kind of talk, dehumanizing the people in Crimea, as not just having the wrong ideology, but the wrong ‘psyche’. To top that off, Budanov stated in an interview with 60 Minutes, when asked about the murder attempt on Aleksandr Dugin, killing his daughter Darya instead: https://news.yahoo.com/we-will-keep-killing-russians-ukraines-military-intelligence-chief-vows-232156674.html “All I will comment on is that we’ve been killing Russians and we will keep killing Russians anywhere on the face of this world until the complete victory of Ukraine.” And not just Budanov, but Mikhail Podolyak, as well as Alexey Danilov, Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, stated that Russians should be killed wherever they are found, in response to the assassination of a Russian journalist. Such talk from such high places should not be ignored.
Newsweek reported https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-assassinated-russian-propagandists-1801233?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1684426420 the following: “Major General Kyrylo Budanov made the admission to the Ukrainian YouTube channel Rizni Lyudi. According to a translation by the independent Russian-language outlet Meduza, Budanov said that Ukraine had "successfully targeted quite a few people" associated with Kremlin propaganda since the start of the war nearly 15 months ago.” Are his words just rhetoric? Are attacks such as those on Darya Dugina, Vladlen Tatarsky and Zakhar Prilepin just separate, tragic accidents? Newsweek provided the following quote: “"Outright scum will eventually be punished in any country in the world. Only elimination can be a well-deserved punishment for such actions," Budanov said, per the Kyiv Post.”
From the beforementioned Podolyak:
This kind of talk about hatred, about ‘getting each and every one of you, legally or physically’, is not harmless. Remember all the other examples I have chronicled of such hate in speech by prominent leaders, media figures, and how it tricked down to children mimicking it, making it part of their thinking and ‘normalcy’?
Remember how the British Defense and Intelligence services were concerned about the water levels?
Pro-Russian Telegram account Lord of War posted this:
“ Ukrainian TV channels remind that on the eve of the destruction of the Kakhovka dam, the head of the British Foreign Office visited Kyiv, and they ask a rhetorical question: do you believe in such coincidences?
Of course, there can be no talk of any coincidences. He came to give a personal go-ahead, not trusting communication channels. Which so let down the British prime minister, who hastened to report to Blinken about the undermining of the Nord Streams.”
Readovka Channel reported that a “Major Ukrainian Telegram channel deletes post about imminent blowing up of Kakhovka Hydroelectric Station”… After the fact, the story was that it must have been the Russians, so the scrubbing of all incriminating elements and posts has begun.
Slavyangrad reported:
“Ukraine Telegram channels blatantly lie about the shelling of left-bank towns in the Kherson region
📌 At first, Ukrainian telegram channels mundanely report that the AFU is shelling Novaya Kakhovka, Gornostaevka, and other settlements on the left bank of the Dnieper, rejoicing that "the guys are working on the Orcs". However, after a day, they forget what happened yesterday and start complaining that the Russian Armed Forces are shelling their own towns. Allegedly, after one of these strikes, a substation was damaged in Nova Kakhovka, which left several settlements without electricity.”
This is confirmed in a lot of other posts:
“From the field, it is reported that the APU from the right bank purposefully opened fire on evacuating civilians from flooded areas — in the "Hola Prystan", at least two people were killed, evacuation was suspended.
Having arranged the demolition of the dam and the flooding of the left-bank Kherson region, the APU went even further and continue to cynically kill civilians. In their "best traditions" today, war criminals opened fire on the area of the "Hola Prystan", from where they were taking people out for evacuation. The bus was covered by the shelling, two people were killed, several were injured.
A pregnant woman wounded in the shelling — her arm was torn off — died. In connection with the shelling, the evacuation was suspended by the decision of the acting governor of the region, Vladimir Saldo.”
Another eyewitness account by Crimean volunteer Valeria Petrusevich reported this:
"We have been working in this place since 4 am, here people from flooded houses were taken out by Kherson region residents and volunteers themselves. At the moment when we went on another raid, the AFU shot the unloading point of people... There were several incoming shells, the first one destroyed an evacuation bus full of people, destroyed, the wounded were taken away, several of them were serious, their condition is unknown. The second one rang at the same time, but a little closer to the disembarkation point. A huge puddle of blood - a pregnant girl's arm was torn off at a bus stop... The girl was killed. There is NO military here. Just the people who were already affected by the disaster. And I don't know what to call those who do such things. This is terror against civilians," she said.”
This is not all, but even more reports come in about other attacks on civilian targets. This time a building used to house refugees from the floodwaters:
Of course, what you will see in Western media, is this:
Indeed, EU diplomatic chief Josep Borrell accusing the Russians of doing what the Ukrainian side themselves did, at high level (firing a Storm Shadow is not an action by some lone artillery officer with an axe to grind, but needs very high-level approval, planning and coordination).
Now, does this prove that no Russian shells landed in Ukrainian held flood zones? Of course not. There are images of workers bleeding, reportedly on Ukrainian side, but there again, I’d really like to see the full story there. Forgive me if I don’t trust such news stories at face value anymore.
In relation to this, you have this happening too: a Ukrainian TV channel reported on how they were evacuating people in flooded Kherson, in a long TV marathon showing the aftermath of the ‘ecocide’ committed by the Russians, who simply did not care about the impact on so many innocent civilians. Except, they showed workers from the Russian Emergencies Ministry, clearly visible by the markings on boats and vests, for more than 10 minutes!
According to Slavyangrad, “after this was seen in Zelensky's office, the president's curator of Ukrainian television, Matyash, started to threaten Ukrainian television workers with mass dismissals. Obviously, this uncomfortable truth for Kiev shattered the image of Russia as an "evil empire" created in Ukraine.”
Or you get things like this. A Russian man was killed by a shark in Egypt, and Ukrainian and pro-Ukrainian bloggers gleefully report on it. “Best thing I’ve seen all day!” One less Russian! Completely ignoring that the Russian in question was a conscientious dissenter who had fled Russia because he did not want to fight in the war… With friends like this, who needs enemies? The dehumanizing aspects of it bother me, regardless which side commits them. That is a dangerous path to go down on.
Or more silly, but proving the gullibility of many, and the manipulation by some, in this since deleted tweet (don’t underestimate the suggestive power of such pictures, with matching headline, on those who ‘browse’ for news, or see it pass, even subconsciously. Studies have proven that such methods are very powerful, as I wrote about in previous articles, make sure to read those too!):
Look, how sad and cruel! This young boy, forced to save his puppy, as he himself is struggling in high water! How inhumane, what those Russians did!
Except….
Or they posted this picture:
In light of the previous picture story of the boy with the puppy, it is hard not to be reminded of this classic movie shot:
For those who recognize it…
____________________________
A recent satellite image from the Kakhovka reservoir, near the ZNPP (on the right side of their square cooling water reservoir at the bottom of the picture).
Talking about that important nuclear power plant, and as several sources have pointed out to lower alarmist reports:
“Yuriy Chernichuk, Director of Zaporozhye NPP:
In connection with the situation at the dam of the Kakhovskaya HPP, I inform you that:
At the moment, there are no security threats to the Zaporizhie NPP. 5 units are in "cold stop" state, 1 in "hot stop" state. The water level in the cooling pond has not changed and is 16.67 m.
The water cooling the spent nuclear fuel pools is a closed circuit that does not have direct contact with the environment and the water of the Kakhovka reservoir.
The system of heat removal to the final heat sink can be replenished both with water from the Kakhovka reservoir and with several alternative sources.
The situation is controlled by the personnel of the nuclear power plant.
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that you can get information about the current state of the plant on the ZNPP official website and in our ZNPP channel.”
Interestingly, there is talk in Ukraine, that must have started long before the collapse of the dam a week ago, as explained in this article by the Kyiv Independent: “Once the war is over and territory is restored, Ukraine’s government said it plans to dismantle and construct a new plant on the same spot, which could cost up to one billion dollars and take at least five years to complete, according to the Ministry of Economy.
But it doesn’t necessarily have to.
The Kakhovka dam’s destruction provides an opportunity to reconsider the country's approach to energy, food, and water security, much of which still relies on infrastructure built during the Soviet era.
Scientists that have been tracing the long-term environmental effects associated with Soviet-era hydropower plants have discussed the need to gradually, over decades, lower the Kakhovka reservoir (and other reservoirs) altogether.”
They simply might have decided to hurry that process along, while blaming the Russians. This is not proof of anything, of course, but it shows that there was at least talk about out-phasing the Kakhovka dam.
Almost at the end of my overview, this is an example of sheer ignorance, as is sadly all to common in the West. “How Ukraine’s dam collapse could become Ukraine's Chernobyl”. Did none of the editors and writers and experts at Time realize that Chernobyl IS IN UKRAINE? Chernobyl is Ukraine’s Chernobyl! It is emblematic of how we in the West know so little about either Ukraine, or Russia, yet are so confident in our own superiority. We don’t even know how we come across, and what exactly is presented/perceived abroad as ‘Western Culture’. We would be horrified if we knew.
Lastly, after all the examples of propaganda, lies, projection, and the lack of proper investigation of what information IS available already about the Kakhovka Dam collapse, we can make note of the following. The European Parliament, in debate yesterday (Wednesday June 14, 2023) outlining their expectations for the 29-30 June EU summit, officially denounced the destruction of Ukraine’s Nova Kakhovka dam, calling it “the latest war crime committed by Russia and one that must be met with consequences.” In their official press release, they added: “They [the MEPs] called for the EU to continue its strong support for Ukraine, for new sanctions against Russia, and for the billions of frozen assets by Russian oligarchs to be used to reconstruct Ukraine.” Barely a week later, and without ANY investigation, and without ANY proof, Russia is declared guilty, and political consequences are attached to that condemnation.
What happened to ‘innocent until proven guilty’, as protection against miscarriage of justice? No, they needed to strike while the iron was hot. The EU/NATO/US needed a crisis to push through more unpopular decisions and more money, amids rapidly waning support for Ukraine. What better backdrop, but that spectacular dam collapse and subsequent ecological disaster? Who cares about truth when the survival of ‘democracy’ and the world as we know it itself is at danger? Such haste, and such rash condemnations without any proof are never good. Even less so when uttered at the highest chambers of power in the European Union. It is becoming really difficult not to believe what some commentators said as soon as news broke about this dam collapse: Ukraine and the Western elites were to blame, as they needed an emotional lever to drum up support again.
Because how will this move by the European Parliament be perceived? Just look at the following headline: “The European Parliament recognized the undermining of the hydroelectric power station as a war crime of Russia”. Based on diktat, and not a shred of evidence. The emotion based information warfare is continuing full blast.
As Scott Ritter remarked: “This was not done to achieve a military advantage. The dam was destroyed for political reasons. It was an act of ecological terrorism. This was done to cause a surge of enthusiasm in the Western countries so that they would hate Russia again.
Hatred is waning, the counteroffensive has failed. Some battles will still be fought, but it has become obvious to everyone that there is no chance. An important NATO summit is coming up in Vilnius, and if Ukraine doesn't find a way to revive Western support, it's all over.”
Wading through the flood of stories, messages and posts is rather enlightening. So few do their own due diligence, and so many simply parrot what they found and that fits their own respective biases.
Yet, by looking closely, a lot can be learned. I hope this follow-up was helpful!
Amazing follow up to your prior Kakhovka dam analysis — and beyond.
I will have to re-read the parts about the release of water from the dam cascade (and don my strongest reading glasses!) — as I’m still not certain as to the implications of the data. But there is much to digest!
Many thanks again and kudos —
(I read this on the day it landed in my mailbox, but in looking again for replies and any of your further remarks, I saw that no comments had been posted on this equally thorough follow-up! Since new reports attempting to prove ‘Who dunnit?’ are still appearing today, I will renew efforts to get these out there.)
I was thinking that weather & precip data might add a little marrow to the soup. Here’s some info so far:
2022 was apparently a drought year, ”…The extreme heat, combined with rainfall during a time of year when precipitation would normally fall as snow, led to record ice sheet melt, with around a quarter of the ice sheet (442,000 km2) under surface melt on 3 September”… (& More might be gleaned from the source): https://www.ecmwf.int/en/about/media-centre/news/2023/european-climate-marked-heat-and-drought-2022-report
& May ‘23 precip map: https://www.climate.gov/media/15307 (appears higher than avg especially in E Ukraine).
Just some thoughts. Your clear and astute thinking cuts through the data like a chef’s knife; I, on the other hand am gifted with but a rubber mayo spreader, so your incisive analyses are doubly appreciated.
Thanks again.