The dam attack in Ukraine is a ruthless act of destruction – and shows just how desperate Putin is

Destroying the dam may make strategic sense to Moscow – to block Ukrainian troop movements – but it comes at an appalling cost, writes Kim Sengupta

The Nova Kakhovka dam after it was breached (Reuters)

The blowing up of the Nova Kakhovka dam is one of the most spectacular acts of destruction in the war so far. One that will have an impact on the unfolding Ukrainian military offensive, as well as inflicting terrible civilian suffering and environmental damage.

Each side has blamed the other for the blasts. But there is no reason for the Ukrainians to flood the city of Kherson, which they have retaken from the Russians, and make it difficult for operations taking place in the southern flank.

For Moscow it may make strategic sense – albeit with appalling collateral damage – to waterlog the ground where Ukrainian forces were planning an armoured thrust. It has carried out such acts in Ukraine in the past; in 1941, the Dnipro hydroelectric plant was blown up to slow down rapidly advancing German forces.

Routes along the dam were the ones that the Ukrainian forces would have taken to move armour and heavy equipment. There were also plans, according to Western security officials, of landings on islands downstream, where clashes are already taking place.

The submerging of these pathways is likely to slow Ukrainian attacks around Kherson, as tactical plans are redrawn and troops and weapons repositioned – although Ukrainian forces now have enough capability to continue, with adjustments.

The blowing up of the dam shows, however, how badly Vladimir Putin’s original plan in invading Ukraine has failed. The Russians limited their attacks on critical infrastructure for much of the first phase of the war because, as leaks from Moscow and intercepted communications revealed, they believed they would soon be running the country.

That has altered in recent months, with missile and drone attacks on power facilities in Kyiv and major cities, culminating in what happened at Nova Kakhovka – an action that was ruthless but also desperate, reflecting the changing tide of the war.

One immediate cause for concern was the effect of the blast on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station, which is operated using water from the dam.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has warned that a lack of cooling water could disrupt the plant’s emergency diesel generators. Although the situation at the site was said to be under control for now, the organisation’s chief, Rafael Grossi, said the reservoir was falling.

Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, said: “The destruction of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant dam only confirms for the whole world that they must be expelled from every corner of Ukrainian land. Not a single metre should be left to them, because they use every metre for terror.”

The secretary general of Nato, Jens Stoltenberg, called the attack “an outrageous act which puts thousands of civilians at risk and causes severe environmental damage – and demonstrates once again the brutality of Russia’s war in Ukraine”.

But what has happened also has a cost for Russia. Not only are residents in Russian-occupied parts of the area losing their homes, but the rising water is likely to wreck the canal system that irrigates much of southern Ukraine – including Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014.

Following the annexation, Ukraine blocked a channel carrying water from Nova Kakhovka, leading to a water crisis on the peninsula. Russian forces reopened the channel soon after the start of the full-scale invasion last year. But without the dam, dropping water levels could once again stop the flow along the channel. Sergey Aksyonov, the Kremlin-appointed head of the region, said that “work is under way to minimise water losses in the canal”. He sought to reassure residents, saying that “reservoirs are 80 per cent full: there’s more than enough drinking water”.

Moscow has accused Ukraine of blowing up the dam in order to deprive Crimea of fresh water – and to hide the supposed failure of Kyiv’s counteroffensive so far. Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin’s spokesperson, said: “We can state unequivocally that we are talking about deliberate sabotage by the Ukrainian side.”

The threat to their water supply, alongside the fear of imminent military action, is likely to accelerate the departure of civilians from Crimea. Up to 800,000 people moved there from Russia after the annexation; thousands of them have already left as Ukrainian air strikes increased over recent months.

A Tartar resident of the Crimean capital, Simferopol, told The Independent that some of her Russian neighbours are packing to move out. Farida said: “We have been seeing this more and more now, them moving out; they go to places like Krasnador. It was so many from our people who left after the referendum when the Russians took over. Now we see how things have changed.”

Crimea was historically part of a Tartar Khanate. Most of the community was deported to central Asia after the Second World War on Stalin’s orders, for supposedly collaborating with German occupation forces.

The 33-year-old IT technician, who stayed behind to look after her elderly relatives who refused to leave their home, did not want her family name published. “There is a lot of suspicion here. The Russians are always looking for spies, for disloyalty,” she said. “They are getting more and more afraid of what’s coming.”