Who could be behind the blowing up of the Kachowka dam What the war in Ukraine means for the climate

After the explosion of the Kakhovka dam in southern Ukraine, the consequences are becoming increasingly visible: flooded streets, houses and fields. People are fleeing the floods. Countless fish perish on dry land.

Tens of thousands of people were evacuated to safety on the Ukrainian-Russian-held banks of the Dnieper River. Washington warns of “possibly many deaths”, the UN spoke of humanitarian consequences for “hundreds of thousands of people”.

One thing is for sure: “The destruction of the Kakhovka dam is likely to have a significant impact on the fighting in the Kherson region,” says conflict observer Nikita Gerasimov of the Free University of Berlin when asked by Watson. But it remains unclear who was behind the explosion.

Ukraine and Russia: blame each other

According to Gerasimov, the situation currently remains “extremely confusing”. Meanwhile, the blowing of the dam sparked wild debates on both sides of the frontline: Who are the “real” beneficiaries and who suffers? “Both sides blame themselves for the destruction of the dam and warn of huge problems for their own troops and logistics,” the expert explained.

He explains:

Russian defense positions, minefields and barricades that had been laboriously built for months on the Dnieper coast have now literally been washed away by the floods. According to Gerasimov, images have now surfaced of Russian soldiers leaving their defenses chest-high through the water.

“As a result, the Russian defense systems on the east coast of the Dnepr near Kherson no longer exist,” Gerasimov points out. But the Ukrainian side also suffered heavy losses.

Kachowka blast: problems for both sides

Gerasimov here emphasizes the flooded islands in the riverbed of the Dnieper, which are owned by Ukrainians. “Numerous shots are circulating from Ukrainian soldiers who, taken by surprise by the floods, hastily leave the islands and head for the western shore on speedboats – all under Russian artillery fire,” explains the conflict monitor.

The favorable positions on the islands, through which Ukraine planned its landing operations on the eastern coast of Kherson, have also disappeared. Gerasimov Highlights: “The long-awaited Ukrainian counter-offensive would have lost one of its most important front sections.”

To sum up: According to the expert, the situation and the beneficiaries of the destruction of the dam are therefore more than ambiguous. He says:

Gerasimov makes it clear that whoever destroyed the dam must have accepted not only the flooding of enemy positions, but also their own. “This makes the situation all the more confusing and difficult to assess at the moment,” he explains. But the consequences are, of course, serious – for every warring party.

Dam explosion is considered an act of terrorism

“This new crime in southern Ukraine is close to using a weapon of mass destruction.” says Andreas Umland at Watson’s request. The analyst from the Stockholm Center for Eastern European Studies explains:

According to him, former Ukrainian environment minister and ecology expert Ostap Semerak already pointed out the many consequences of the collapse of the dam on June 6, 2023. But already in November 2022, the focus was on the Kakhovka dam when the Russian army withdrew from Cherson.

It was said at the time that Russian troops had to mine the dam in order to stop a Ukrainian counter-offensive in Kherson with a tidal wave. However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stressed that the incident had no impact on his country’s counter-offensive to push back the Russian army.

However, the consequences for humans, animals and nature are obvious. This is evident, for example, from the recordings of the American reporter Matthew Luxmoore from Kherson, which he shares on Twitter.

“On the one hand, villages, large agricultural areas and a number of nature reserves are under water,” Umland explains. On the other hand, with the draining of the dam, the water supply of many places, including some cities such as Berdyansk and Crimea, was interrupted.

In the medium term, the water supply for the cooling system of Europe’s largest nuclear power station in Zaporizhia is also at stake.

The Zaporizhia nuclear power plant could run out of cooling water

There is growing international concern that the cooling of the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant could be endangered by the dam burst. IAEA chief Grossi warns that in “a few days” the level of the reservoir could be so low that the water can no longer be pumped to the power plant.

However, Russia-appointed head of the nuclear power plant, Yuri Chernichuk, explains in the Telegram online service that “the water level in the cooling pool has not changed”. The consequences for agriculture, on the other hand, are already visible.

Fields can become desert after destroying dams

According to initial estimates, the Ukrainian Ministry of Agriculture expects about 10,000 hectares of agricultural land on the north bank of the Dnieper in the Kherson region to be flooded. On the southern bank, in the area occupied by Russia, a large part of this area will be flooded, the ministry reports on its website.

“In addition, the man-made disaster will disrupt the water supply of 31 field irrigation systems in the Dnepropetrovsk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions,” the ministry said. “The destruction of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power station will mean that the fields in southern Ukraine could turn into deserts as early as next year“It goes on.

The drinking water supply in populated areas is also affected. According to the Ministry of Agriculture, it also expects negative consequences for fisheries. Eastern Europe expert Sergei Sumlenny shares a video on Twitter showing a sea of ​​stranded fish.

Conflict observer Gerasimov is sure that the further course of the war will depend a lot on how quickly the water masses decrease.

Conflict expert Gerasimov ventures into a prognosis

“Should the flooding become some kind of permanent state, the Russians would be more likely to benefit from it, because Ukrainian landing attempts across the river are difficult to imagine under the circumstances,” he says. On the other hand, if the bodies of water sink quickly, the Russians are likely to lose, Gerasimov predicts.

Defense lines and minefields had been wiped out within days, logistics had become unsustainable, and at the same time the river had returned to normal. According to the expert, nothing would stand in the way of a Ukrainian landing operation on the eastern bank.

(With material from dpa/AFP)