Thread by @MarkHertling

Just now, @jaketapper on @ccn asked me about the strategic & operational importance of the Moskva sinking.

In my view, this is a very big deal for a variety of reasons.

Here's a new 🧵 1/14

First, many are still asking "was this a ship board accident (fire), or was this really a Neptune strike?"

DoD indicates the latter.

Having said that, this was MORE than a simple matter of a couple of missiles hitting a ship that was a great distance away. 2/

There will be an after-action review (AAR) on this strike, and someday we will learn what went into it.

But anytime a military unit conducts a strike as complex as this, there is MUCH more than just launching a couple of missiles that surround the event.

Let's leave it there.3/

But I would say that it is open-source reporting that Ukraine has had this ground-to-ship missile in experimentation for about 5 years.

Now I'm not a sailor, but it seems the Russians sure didn't incorporate that info into their naval maneuver planning.

Shame on them. 4/

Back to the question: Will this sinking be strategically important?

I'd say, emphatically: Yes, for a variety of reason!

First, this the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet. But this ship was also the flagship during the 2008 invasion in Georgia, and it's named for MOSCOW! 5/

This ship was tasked to provide overall Fleet C2 (command and control), Air Defense (it is filled with different ADA systems), and it would have discharged Naval Infantry (Marines) during a planned amphib assault on the shores near Odesa. 6/

As Putin revised his plan for "eastern & southern attacks" after failing to take Kyiv, the seizure of the Black Sea coast (& perhaps the continued attack toward Transnistria in Moldova) was likely part of the "new" plan.

It will be hard to execute that western assault now. 7/

But there's more...

Russia/Putin should NOT take this sinking as a singular event.

Let's add the Moskva sinking to other failures: 8/

-The destruction of the Russian Parachute Regiment (the famed "palace guard" VDV/Spetznaz) north of Kyiv during the first week of the war.
-The loss of at least 7 generals & an unlimited number of Colonel Commanders of key Combined Arms Armies and Tank/Motorized Rifle Units. 9/

-The increasing number of Russian soldiers (mostly conscripts) killed in action (Ukraines count is now 20,000...and that's likely conservative).
-The destruction of over 700 tanks and literally hundreds of other armored vehicles during the first 50 days 10/

-The inability of the Russian Air Force to provide close air support to Russian ground troops or deep strikes against Ukrainian forces due to fear of UA air defense
-Russians communicating using unencrypted devices that leads to intelligence leaks 11/

-Ukraine Army helicopters conducting a cross-border operations into Belgorod to destroy multiple fuel tanks
-UA special operations striking behind Russian lines against key logistics targets.
-RU failure to resupply/medically evacuate their troops 12/

Again, the strike against the Moskva was a big deal.

But combining it with other the Russian military failures, it should be difficult for Putin to explain to his citizens.

The advantages of being an authoritarian w/ a friendly RT news channel. 13/

I've learned never to underestimate my enemies, but it's going to be VERY hard for Russian General Dvornikov to turn this around. 14/14

Sorry, that should be @cnn. Didn’t catch that mistake.