Cutting off Crimea via missile attack would be so embarrassing and costly for Putin that it has to be worth pursuing
18 June 2024 •
Crimea – totemic, strategically essential, Putin’s “unsinkable aircraft carrier” – is starting to look unseaworthy.
There are four main arteries supplying it. To the east, the Kerch road and rail bridge and two ferries. To the north, partly in response to previous attacks, a rail route. There are normal roads there as well, but they are less useful for moving large stores from A to B. Crimp these arteries and, while you might not sink the carrier, you would render it without propulsion, weapons and food.
The symbolic Kerch Bridge has already been attacked twice, once by a truck full of explosives and once by Uncrewed Surface Vessels (USVs). Both resulted in damage and repair bills, but neither was decisive.
With President Biden lifting the restriction on the use of certain US supplied weapons in Russian occupied territory, the US Army’s Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) could now be used to hit the bridge, as well as existing stocks of Storm Shadow and other air-launched weapons. Getting the latter in position arguably requires greater air control than Ukraine has, but the number of tools Kyiv possesses for wrecking the bridge (and other arteries) for good is increasing.
Now we can add one more to that list: the Stalker 5.0 USV. The reports on this new weapon indicate that it is not dissimilar in terms of range (372 miles) and speed (c 40 knots) to the Magura V5, the USV that has driven Russia’s Black Sea Fleet out of Sevastopol. The payload (150 kg) is a little lighter than the Magura’s 200kg. But the most important difference is cost.
The Stalker costs in the region of £50,000; the Magura £210,000. For the same price, your total payload goes from 200kg to 600.
In a war of sustainability, cost is nearly as important as payload. Ukraine needs to be able to last the duration of the fight in reasonable fiscal and economic shape.
Without detailed plans of the bridge, no one can predict with certainty what payload would bring a span down and take it out for good. But a thousand kilograms of high explosives driven with precision would cause huge damage and, at that price, you might as well just keep going until you succeed.
Russia knows this is coming, and a protective necklace of barges is back in place. But this crude defence mechanism only needs to be breached once, and between the drones and ATACMs the pressure is already ratcheting up, with ferries struck, and the railway to the north exposed.
While railways are easier to repair than bridges. if you are accurate (and ATACMs are) and take out key nodes, the time and cost creep up. This isn’t about retaking Crimea per se, it’s about rendering it useless as an operational node.
Ukraine’s armed forces have already demonstrated that they can conduct simultaneous attacks from land and sea, as well possess an ability to strike this bridge. The Stalker USV now adds mass to this effort.
Extreme caution is required when extrapolating any sense of optimism in the maritime environment into the land battle. But choking out Crimea would be so embarrassing and costly that it has to be worth pursuing. Vladimir Putin knows this and is putting his forces into position to counter any such effort, diverting them from other efforts – with no guarantee of success.
Tom Sharpe is a former Royal Navy officer and frigate captain
Selected comments from DT readers :
five dialogues
Ah, well if it has to go it has to go. The people who lived there were Tartars and the Russians shipped them out and those who remained can see their houses occupied by Russian people. So when these clowns start telling it us it is Russian territory they are simply lying.
The Crimea or an island off the coast is the burial place of Hercules. So people have been coming for millennia. The only way to establish true ownership is who is on possession when they join the UN. That is when sovereign rights are established and without the rules and rights there is no Law.
The Russians are getting steam rolled at this moment and they are getting everything they deserve ` no mercy’ is the memorable line from the great David Lean film Lawrence of Arabia. Unfortunately that is what must happen.
Matt Forster
There is also the political dimension; Crimea is the big summer playground of Russian families from Moscow and St. Petersburg who Putin wants to shelter from noticing the war. It will be extremely embarassing for him if Crimea’s summer homes, beaches and hotels are no longer safe to visit. Losing control of this cannot be swept under the carpet.
Robert Crabtree
The Russians will make a plan if the bridge is destroyed and use barges to ferry goods. The bigger issues are:- that the population of Crimea would start to feel trapped; the local tourist economy would further decline; and it would show that nowhere is safe in Crimea.
The military impact would be low unless Ukraine advances to the borders of Crimea.
Graham Boyd
Reply to Robert Crabtree
Crimea would run out of food and fuel very quickly. It becomes unsustainable. Siege mentality.
Jonathan Karmi
The Ukrainian armed forces are now saying that the Kerch Bridge is being used far less for transporting munitions to the front and that it’s no longer a strategic priority. Hopefully this is a ruse to encourage the Russians to relax their guard. The psychological effect of the bridge’s destruction will be enormous. Putin will be humiliated, which is dangerous, but he’s going to end up humiliated one way or the other, so we may as well prepare for that.
Charlie Wimbledon
It’s probably enough for Ukraine to simply keep the bridge at risk… For example, it’s been closed to vehicles for 2 days now… Basically be such a pain in the behind that the Russians can no longer trust.
tom sharpe
AUTHOR
Reply to Charlie Wimbledon
That’s an interesting thought – perpetuate the tease. Effect vs cost, as ever. I suppose the point of this article (vs the one the other day) is the cost just went down.
Graham Boyd
Reply to tom sharpe
With so many air defense installations recently destroyed, I would bet on a combined SCALP / Storm and Stalker attack. If the bridge is taken down properly i.e. an entire span, then the rail routes can be picked off with relative ease as and when.
My guess is the war ends when Crimea becomes untenable. Recent history suggests winning the initial war is straight forward, (well, except this one), but continued occupation of a country that doesn’t want to be occupied, eventually becomes unsustainable.
Carpe Jugulum
The obvious platform to destroy the bridge are F16s. Before they could be employed delivering over a tonne of explosive ordnance each you would first need to –
Shoot down the Beriev A50 AWACS aircraft covering Ukraine and Crimea. ( Two were shot down at the beginning of the year and the dedicated A50 repair facility attacked possibly damaging a third. ).
Start destroying air defence systems like the S300, 400 and ( supposed ) 500. ( already happening.)
The Ukrainians have proven themselves masters of innovation and adaptability.
Putin’s ‘Interesting Times’ are about to get a whole lot worse.
tom sharpe
AUTHOR
Reply to Carpe Jugulum
Wouldn’t a bunch of USVs be easier (and cheaper)?
Carpe Jugulum
Reply to tom sharpe
They may well be but I suspect the psychological effect of F16s bombing Crimea would be profound although I don’t see Ukraine using them unless they were confident they had dealt with the air defences.