The withdrawal from Kherson is also a struggle on Russia’s own information front, writes correspondent Heikki Heiskanen.
MOSCOW On Wednesday evening, the Russian defense minister and the commander of the Ukrainian war performed a stiff chamber play for the television cameras.
Minister Sergei Shoigu and the general Even Sergei Surovik read their turns from the prompter, not particularly fluently.
Whenever he spoke about the left or eastern bank of the Dnieper, Surovik stiffly showed a map with a stick, just in case someone in the audience had forgotten which side of the Dnieper the Russian troops were moving to.
The Russian leadership has now tried to sell the withdrawal from the city of Kherson to the citizens over time, so that the events would not become a shock like the retreat of the Kharkiv region.
The public priming was started in time and a general with a sufficiently cruel reputation was acquired as a salesman.
This was also necessary for staunch nationaliststo please circles that demand tougher warfare.
Apparently, Surovikin’s rigid delivery was considered an advantage in the Kremlin in this role. At least you couldn’t accuse him of being a PR guy.
Surovikin and Šoigu clearly did not get everyone insured. For example, a blogger Zastavny complained on their Telegram channel (you will switch to another service)that betrayal is etched in his heart forever.
Zastavny reflected on Surovikin’s announcement that the losses of Ukrainian forces in the direction of Kherson are seven times higher than those of Russia.
– That’s why we hand over Herson, everything is logical. BE LOGIC, Zastavny wrote sarcastically (you will switch to another service).
Herson’s loss is extremely bittersweet, so feeding it to citizens requires a lot of icing. Only very recently Vladimir Putin announced with fanfare that he would annex Kherson Oblast to Russia.
It is a bad place, especially for supporters of a steep line. Herson has been the only Ukrainian regional center that Russia has been able to occupy during the “special military operation” that started in February.
General Surovikin’s previous warning about “difficult solutions” therefore meant leaving Kherson this time rather than using a tactical nuclear weapon.
The sharpest tip of the media machinery was harnessed to praise the solution and no exaggeration was allowed. State media RT Margarita Simonyan compared Surovikin’s solution to the general Mikhail Kutuzov withdrawal from Moscow Napoleon’s in front of the troops in 1812.
The leader of Chechnya also joined the chorus Ramzan Kadyrov. He praised Surovikin’s responsibility. In the past, Kadyrov has loudly demanded even tougher measures in the war against Ukraine, and has not been afraid to bark at the generals.
Also another hawk, a businessman known as a background influencer of the Wagner war company Yevgeny Prigozhin praised Surovikin for acting manfully, even if Wagner’s soldiers were still ready to defend Kherson.
Even Surovik can now give his face to the back step. The hope is that this is not how they personify the president.
On the other hand, there is a danger that by distancing himself from the setbacks of the war, the president himself starts to seem detached from reality.
At the same time that Surovikin and Shoigu were preparing their own show, Vladimir Putin published an ukaas listing the traditional spiritual values that his Russia defends.
These traditional values in Russia have largely had to be copied again from the old model, as the Soviet era stands in between, which broke the traditions of imperial Russia.
Often, Putin’s rhetoric against liberal values seems rather to spring from the vocabulary of the American culture wars.
The big question behind the media show is, what withdrawal means in practice.
The war hawks have such a great need to defend Surovikin’s actions that the withdrawal from Kherson can be considered a blow to the policy they are pursuing.
A historian closely follows war events on his Telegram account Nikolai Mitrokhin gave a blunt judgment about what happened (you move to another service): Ukraine will no longer allow Russian troops to cross the Dnieper.
Mitrohin states that the supporters of the war dreamed for months about the decisive situation of launching a movement and bombing the civilian infrastructure.
– Both were carried out at the end of September-October – and they did not help to prevent yet another crushing defeat, Mitrohin writes (you switch to another service).
You can discuss the topic until Saturday at 23:00.
More on the topic:
“Eternal Herson” returns to Ukraine – Russia is giving up its greatest military achievement
Russian Defense Minister: Russia withdraws its troops from Kherson – Ukraine is suspicious
Propaganda stunt or massive evacuation? Kherson’s pro-Russian leadership is emptying the city of residents