The #Russian Ministry of Defense has reportedly agreed to and ordered the withdrawal of Russian forces from the Western side of the #Dnieper River, including the city of #Kherson and the #KhersonRegion under current Russian control.
The withdrawal will reportedly take place "in the near future" and in conjunction with a phased retreat, including the destruction of bridges and port facilities on the western side of the river.
This now opens up the potential for a phased retreat-to--defense which may involve the integration of long range fires to compensate for territorial loss, and to maintain pressure on advancing #Ukrainian forces.
It is not clear the pace of retreat, or how the AFU will take advantage the reported withdrawal.
Regardless, the ramifications of Russia losing the city of Kherson are expected to be enormous. That may be manifesting as a political reality as well:
Should Kherson be completely re-captured in the coming days, it will likely represent most consequential victory for Ukraine since the battle of Kyiv, and will certainly signal its ability to continue effective operations in the long-term.
Russia will continue to promulgate a narrative to deflect blame/dissent because of a withdrawal, but that may not be enough to alleviate the political pressure the loss of Kherson represents for the invasion project.
Second, an elemental fact is that there are neo-Nazi factions in the Ukrainian and Russian armies. The quoted thread actually highlights Nazi symbology across several AFU units.
The reasons for this are, understandably, complicated. Just a few points to expand on that.
2/
There are strong-beds of ultranationalism and ethnonationalism across Eastern Europe, including Ukraine, and in Russia.
This includes nationalist anti-democratic outfits, anarchists, and also those whose origins or ideological premises derive from, or interpret, Nazism.
3/
Apparently #Russian TG channels are backtracking on earlier counter-claims, and now report that the #AntonovskyBridge and bridges across the Kakhovka dam have been destroyed.
Rus. TG channels are erratic the past 8 hours—it's just unclear what is true.
To make this even more confusing, the counter-counter-claim is that Russian forces *themselves* blew up the bridge on their retreat (note this is not logical since it could serve as a route of escape for soldiers on foot).
It is very clear that the rapid spread of conflicting information is seeping into individual unit cohesion. Here is an attempt to tamp down the current claims.
I really try and stray away from wading into vapid threads here, but there's something I want to point out that I find incredibly frustrating with ChuckPfarrer .
First, many said "twit-idiots" engaged in a thorough process to investigate the origins of the blast.
A great example is @OAlexanderDK thread which took into account various elements of the attack. The main point I want to drive here is that Oliver made the effort to arrive at a best-judgement hypothesis, and based on the available evidence.
Even I don't fully conclude it was a VBIED—not because I don't believe it happened—but because outcomes can only as conclusive based on available evidence. I leave open the possibility of other outcomes even if they are highly unlikely. It's called a hypothesis for a reason.
3/
A serious Russian retrograde strategy will be to make the recapture of Kherson as costly as possible for the AFU (in the short and long-term), even if Russian forces are not physically present in the city.
The fall of Kherson was a significant #Russian military and political victory. Kherson is critical to Russian maximalist aims; its claims of Russian cultural repatriation in Ukraine; and is central to the #Novorossiya concept (contemporarily the Transnistrian land bridge).
2/
The capture of Kherson (city and ex-urban areas) by March 2 illustrated two key features of the Kherson AO:
1) Russia's capacity to penetrate fronts rapidly with motorized & mechanized elements.
2) Ukraine's partial and over-extended defensive capabilities in the region.
3/