What will Russia do if Ukraine re-takes Crimea?

With the recent comments of Trump supporting Ukraine and seemingly fully taking their side and hoping they can end the war (see: President Trump Says He Supports Ukrainian Long-Range Strikes Deep Inside Russia), focus should go to Crimea, as Ukraine has Crimea under siege and Russia has lost the ability to do much about it.

If you prefer Youtube:



If you prefer a text article

quote:

---

Ukraine has been forcefully striking strategic routes that act as a lifeline for Russia’s military occupation of Crimea. At the same time, the Kremlin talks tough and is in denial about the possibility of losing territory it has illegally occupied since 2014.

Predominantly using drones, Ukraine has repeatedly targeted military logistics route R-280, which connects Simferopol and Mariupol, including the bridge linking Kherson Oblast with Crimea. The results can be spectacular (see here) and have caused a sharp fall-off in truck traffic. It has also hit oil refineries, Russian vessels, and air defense systems on the peninsula.

This is very much a siege in the modern sense of the term, with serious effects resulting from militarily enforced isolation. It is making the occupation harder. Russian authorities have suspended and reduced passenger train services in Crimea, potential vacationers are canceling their summer hotel bookings, and hundreds of drivers are forced to line up for fuel.

“We will… make it extremely difficult for any military personnel or those working in the defense industry to remain in Crimea, in the temporarily occupied territories, or use the access routes to them,” Ukraine drone commander “Magyar” Brovdi told Reuters on June 11.

---

quote:

---

As the reunification of Crimea with Ukraine becomes a realistic possibility in the eyes of Western skeptics, Ukraine can expect more diplomatic and military support for de-occupation. And the prospect of Russia losing control of such prized Ukrainian territory carries massive symbolic weight.

The peninsula’s cities, such as Yalta and Sevastopol, were heavily integrated into Soviet mythology due to their military significance in World War II and the Cold War. “In the hearts and minds of people, Crimea has always been an inseparable part of Russia,” Putin said at the time of the annexation in March 2014. He has repeatedly said the issue of Crimea is “closed.”

But each Ukrainian drone strike shakes Russian confidence.

When Putin annexed Crimea, he could not have imagined the possibility of swarms of drones and an innovative Ukrainian military-industrial complex threatening his grip. Indeed, eight years later, he believed he would be able to take Kyiv in three days with little damage to his forces.

Russian hubris has meant strategic assets and routes remain exposed and poorly defended, allowing Ukrainian forces to attack them drone by drone. Russia is failing to replenish resources and shore up defenses, and, if the Kerch Bridge is destroyed or made unusable, the outlook for Moscow will be even tougher.

---

It doesn't seem Russia has any way to stop this and it's a matter of time if they can force Ukraine to divert resources elsewhere to remove them from Ukraine. Also, you have to note this Crimea operation is in conjunction with the increase in attacks (now Trump-sanctioned) into Russian territory.

Is this the line where Putin could not survive? Will the oligarchs kill and replace him if he loses Crimea? Will he go fully irrational to stop this reality from occurring?

Russia is clearly weak. Crimea is worth 100x to Russia what the eastern provinces Russia took are worth. Crimea is symbolic, which is why after the Russian-influenced shenanigans that led to Maidan in 2013-2014 caused complete chaos, Russia took Crimea. Crimea is also where the Sevastopol Naval Base is located, and if Russia loses this their already shitty navy becomes impotent for 2/3 of the world.

Also of note, Russia is losing in Mali to a domestic Al Quaeda outfit

The invasion of Ukraine is turning into one of the dumbest military-political moves in decades, if not centuries. And, remember, this is without direct NATO involvement. At this point, I wonder if any Russians wish NATO had been directly involved at the outset to cause them to immediately lose the war, because what actually unfolded is losing the war WITH insurmountable losses (economnic, population, standing in the world, etc.)