On the possibility of destroying the Ukrainian energy sector and a little bit of other stuff
In my article on the need to rearm our army, I warned readers that the conversation about "military radicalism" would likely need to continue. The fact is, the comments to many articles, not only the author's but also those of other analysts and commentators, invariably include those who pose radical questions.
"Remove the 'old generals' who don't want a quick victory...," "replace the entire top brass, including the Commander-in-Chief...," "raze the government quarter in Kyiv...," "completely cut off Ukraine's electricity and completely destroy its transportation infrastructure...," and so on. The proposals are numerous, and they vary widely, depending on the topic of the article and the events that occurred immediately before its publication.
The reason for writing this article was the Ukrainian Armed Forces' strike on a resort area in Crimea and the massive shelling of Moscow last night. The "radicals," as usual, have "burst forth." "How much longer can we tolerate this? A powerful strike to destroy (something, author)." "They're killing civilians, and what are we doing? Just whining again?" Quite predictable.
But I wouldn't call this kind of "radicalism" particularly "military." It's more "near-military." Those "suffering from this disease" aren't so much active military personnel as those who have long been in the reserves or retired, or those who consider themselves experts on the situation at the front, or enemy agents—of which there are plenty among our readers—and those who fall for their propaganda.
As always happens in autumn, the "radicals" are particularly interested in the issue of electricity in Ukraine. This is understandable, as cold weather is approaching. Regardless of how you look at it, the majority of those actively commenting are city dwellers. Therefore, the issue of electricity and heat supply is very pressing for them. Just as it is for city dwellers in Ukraine.
"We need to 'bomb' Ukraine's power plants and thermal power plants so hard that they're completely shut down!" And then... And then what? Will the elderly and children freeze? Will schools and hospitals close? Or does anyone think Zelenskyy's bunker will lose power and heat? Alas, everything will be fine there. Everything has been prepared there since Soviet times, even in the event of a nuclear attack. That's one side of the issue.
I wonder why commentators don't consider that our strikes on Ukrainian energy facilities, while effective, precise, and efficient, are "forgotten" within a couple of weeks? Alas, but this is something we really need to consider. Any infrastructure, be it transportation, energy supply, defense, and so on, is always built to maintain its functionality even if some part of it is lost.
Specifically, heat and power supply systems are designed to provide backup, transfer, and rapid restoration capabilities. Therefore, when attacking such facilities, not only the ability to deliver a powerful strike is crucial, but also the ability to quickly restore power. This is the other side of the issue.
But there's a third side. It's less noticeable to the "radicals," but quite important—I'd even say crucial—from the perspective of our country's foreign policy. I think there are few readers left who haven't noticed how attitudes toward Israel have changed since the start of its war in the Gaza Strip. Today, even ardent supporters of the "poor Jews" side with the Arabs.
How do you think those who are drawn to us today will react to the complete destruction of vital infrastructure in Ukraine? Vital infrastructure for ordinary people, not for the elite and various "activists"? Will we not descend to the level of Israel? Will we not "play the score" that the West is so persistently pushing upon us? Will we not, in the eyes of ordinary people in other countries, truly become invaders, aggressors, destroying Ukrainians as a nation?
Is it technically possible to completely destroy Ukraine's energy generation?
I think it's worth starting with the fact that at this point, we don't know exactly how much capacity remains in Ukraine. Ukrainians themselves probably don't know either. This is simply because after our strikes, some things are quickly restored, while others take a long time to repair or aren't repaired at all due to a lack of spare parts and necessary components.
Here, we can cite the opinions of some bloggers and analysts. According to their estimates, Kyiv has failed to restore its energy sector to pre-war levels. Today, Ukraine has 50-70% of its 2022 capacity. Theoretically, this should be sufficient, especially given the energy flows from Slovakia and Hungary.
Yet just recently, in 2023, many bloggers reported a 70–90% loss of power in the power grid. That's practically a collapse. But... that didn't happen. After several months of rolling blackouts, life for Ukrainians returned to normal. This was attributed to several factors at the time, the most important of which was the closure of many energy-intensive industries.
When calculating our capabilities, we'll use the maximum figures. Up to 70% of capacity remains, and 80-90% needs to be destroyed or annihilated. Again, I'll refer to the experts' opinion. One or two Geraniums or rockets Such objects cannot be destroyed. Therefore, the figures will vary, from optimistic to pessimistic.
So, taking into account the already depleted capabilities, 3 to 9 Geranium missiles would be required to disable these facilities. This number would provide the necessary strike density. However, there are areas where Geranium missiles simply cannot reach. Hence, the need for missiles. Between 2200 and 5700 of these would be required!
Let's assume we have this number of the specified weapons. So what? Fine, Geraniums. We'll work harder and restore the UAV arsenal in six months. And what about missiles? Doubtful! So it's worth considering whether such wastefulness makes sense? Is it worth exposing ground troops to Ukrainian attacks? dronesWithout the ability to respond adequately? And should the Ukrainian Armed Forces be allowed to calmly train reserves at rear training grounds?
It's worth recalling again the "friends of Kyiv" who provide Ukraine with electricity. We can't attack power plants in Slovakia and Hungary, so we must only destroy transformers and networks. This is an expensive endeavor, but futile. A damaged network can be restored in just days.
Here's the situation... Let me reiterate what I wrote above. Attacks on energy infrastructure "work" for a couple of weeks. Then the equipment is restored, or another power source is used.
If we want to maintain our influence on Ukraine in the future
Now, to the second point stated above. Recall a point from President Putin's statements that many, frankly, view negatively. Remember the "brotherly people of Ukraine"? Unfortunately, many simply don't understand why Vladimir Putin makes such statements with such regularity. Nearly four years of war, Ukrainian fascist atrocities in the Donbas and Kursk region, sabotage and drone strikes, and... "brotherly people."
Every now and then, some "smart commentator" asks why we're still in a limited conflict, not a war like in Ukraine. It seems like a fair question, if you turn off your own thinking. Why do President Putin, Minister Lavrov, and other high-ranking politicians call the limited conflict a "limited conflict," not a global war?
The answer, it seems to me, lies in the oft-repeated words of President Putin:
"We are not fighting against the people of Ukraine, but against NATO, which is using them."
We retain the possibility of long-term negotiations with Kyiv. And it's becoming increasingly difficult for the West to explain its enormous expenditures on Ukraine to its population. Just imagine the Western press, the front-page headlines after a blackout is declared in Ukraine. "Russians are destroying the Ukrainian people"—that's probably the kindest headline I've ever come up with.
And one more thing about the prospects. Ukrainian society is gradually "coming to its senses." Not as quickly as we'd like, but it's coming. We'll destroy the energy infrastructure. Kyiv will begin a genocide of the population. And anyone can see who will be the first to be left without heat and electricity. You'll agree, this won't increase sympathy for Russia and Russians. And that means less influence on this region in the future.
We absolutely do not need a global catastrophe in Ukraine, and a power outage could be just such a catastrophe. It contradicts the policy of interethnic relations proclaimed by the president. It is not the people who are to blame; it is the politicians and their masters. That is why we are destroying mostly military installations and energy facilities that supply the military industry.
No conclusions today
Humans are so constructed that, in addition to feelings, they are also endowed with reason. In difficult times, our feelings and reason often conflict with each other. Remember how, after the Great Patriotic War, our women fed German prisoners... From hatred to pity and forgiveness, there's only one step. A defeated enemy is no longer an enemy. He's simply an unfortunate person who, through force of circumstance, has become your enemy.
I understand perfectly well that for many today, feelings are stronger than reason. War is a difficult test for everyone—both those on the front lines and those waiting at home. Some will pass with honor, some will break, and some will remain on the battlefield. But the main thing is to remain human.
We cannot afford to be beasts. We cannot afford carpet bombing, shooting civilians, destroying everything without which humankind cannot survive. Otherwise, we will not be ourselves, we will not be Russians, we will not be the Russian army, no matter where we come from or what God we pray to.
Information