"No one was preparing the Russian Federation for such failures." Which means for Russia and Putin personally likely to blow the Armed Forces on an important military target in Crimea
While the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine was ironically reminded that "the presence of occupation troops in the territory of Ukrainian Crimea is incompatible with the high tourist season", the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation continues to insist that the explosions at the Saki airfield near the resort Novofedorivka were provoked by "Detonation of several aircraft.
Commenting on the consequences of a probable blow to the Saky airfield, from where Russian aircraft regularly flew to the attacks of Ukraine, the speaker of the Armed Forces of the Armed Forces Yuriy Ignat said: “According to the explosion we observed in the video materials, it is clear that the composition of their ammunition was affected Detonation, so the composition was struck. The affected aircraft Su-34, Su-24, possibly helicopters.
" The world media and experts analyze the importance of the importance of the Armed Forces of the Armed Forces for an important purpose in the Crimea and tell why, for Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, recognizing such a blow would be a serious humiliation in the war against Ukraine, and for his army becomes a new serious problem.
*** Reuters writes at least 12 explosions at Saki Air Base near Novofedorivka, and reminds that eight years after the annexation of the Crimea of the Russian Federation used it as one of the starting sites for a full -scale invasion of Ukraine. So far, neither bombardment nor artillery shellings have been seen on the peninsula, from which many regions of Ukraine suffer, reminiscent of AR.
"Moscow could blame Kyiv at the intersection of red lines if Ukraine has recognized that it had attacked the territory that Russia considers its own," the agency suggests. However, the AR states, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation decided to "categorically insist" on its version of "detonation of several aviation ammunition".
While the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine has chosen the tone of "obvious hints", which resembles the reaction of the Ukrainian side to earlier "unexplicable explosions in Russia", the agency writes. The Telegraph writes that "Crimea explosions," seem to be an unprecedented Ukrainian attack.
" The newspaper analyzes the "ironic" comments of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine and considers the "slightly veiled confirmation" of the role of Ukraine the words of the head of the head of the VP Mikhail Podolyak, who stated: "The future of the Crimea Peninsula is to be the pearl of the Black For terrorists. Everything is just beginning". The publication is commented by Phillips O'Brayen, a professor of strategic research of St.
Endry University, who called Ukraine's actions "extremely important". “Having shown that they [Ukrainian forces] can strike in the Crimea, they are even more“ stretching ”Russia's defense capability. Now the Russians will have to protect a huge area outside the front line, ”O'Branin explains. And Lawrence Friedman, an Honorary Professor of Military Research of the Royal College of London, added: "No one was preparing the people of Russia for this kind of failure.
" The Telegraph also describes "surreal" scenes of panic on the Crimean beaches and draws attention to the fact that Russian propaganda TV channels did not show these personnel. Meanwhile, another British analyst James Rashton, who is currently in Ukraine, called a blow on the air base in the Crimea a "turning point". "Most of the territory they [the Russians] have previously considered safe, even from Himars and M270, is now not protected," he emphasizes.
The AR AG notes that if the explosions at the Air Force were the actions of the Ukrainian forces, then it would be "the first significant blow to the Russian military object on the Crimean peninsula. " The author compares the official version of Moscow about the incident with a reaction in Ukraine: “The Ministry of Defense of Russia has denied the fact of shelling of the Saky base and stated that ammunition had exploded there.
However, Ukrainian social networks were rumored from the rumors that the impact was inflicted by Ukrainian long -range missiles. " AR calls the "sarcastic" statements of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine about the impossibility of "establishing the cause of the ignition", and "mysterious" - comments by Alexei Arestovich that the attack in Crimea could be done either by local Ukrainian guerrillas, or the Armed Forces with the help of a long -range weapon of Ukrainian production.
Earlier, when Russia reported numerous fires and explosions at ammunition depots in its territory near the border with Ukraine, the Ukrainian side was mostly silent about these incidents, reminiscent of AR. AFP states that the Russian authorities "diminish the likelihood that the key military air base was amazed by Ukrainian fire.
" The American Institute for the Study of War in its new summary explains such rhetoric of the Russian Defense Ministry in that the recognition of the Armed Forces would confirm the inefficiency of Russian air defense systems in Crimea - for similar reasons of the Russian Federation, it has not recognized the impact on the Cruiser of Moscow. However, the version of the Russian Federation about the explosions near Novofedorivka is similar to the truth, according to ISW experts.
"The simultaneity of explosions at two different objects probably excludes the official Russian version of a random fire, but does not exclude either diversion or a long -range missile blow," the statement said. ISW analysts say that Ukraine could modify its Neptune missiles for land use (as Russians with anti -ship and anti -aircraft missiles did), but there is no evidence that confirm this hypothesis.
The New York Times, with reference to a high -ranking Ukrainian official, writes that it was the Ukrainian forces who hit the air base in the Crimea, although officially Ukraine has "not confirmed and denied it in public. " The source of the publication did not disclose what type of weapons caused the explosions, saying that "the device was used exclusively Ukrainian production" was used. " According to the NYT interlocutor, the forces of guerrilla resistance participated in the attack.
However, whether they had an attack, or only helped the Armed Forces to hit the base, the NYT source has not been opened. The publication notes that a blow to the key Russian air base in the Kremlin's occupied Crimea "sowed confusion among local officials about its cause and the fact whether the Ukrainian military can threaten the targets on the peninsula.
" NYT emphasizes the importance of this event after eight years of annexation, for which the Russian Federation turned Crimea from a resort to a protected fleet and a fortified military base where they have not seen such attacks all this time.
"The Ukrainian attack on the forces of the Russian Federation on the Crimean Peninsula would mean a significant expansion of the offensive efforts of Ukraine, which were mostly reduced to the displacement of Russian troops from the territories occupied after February 24, when the invasion began," the newspaper wrote.
"However, for several weeks, Ukraine has been throwing away troops and causing deeper blows to the front line than earlier, which signaled the preparation of a large counter -offensive in the Kherson region and the use of weapons of greater range. " The author of the material also writes that the probable blow of the Armed Forces in the Crimea would also be a "shame" for Vladimir Putin, who often speaks of the illegally annexed Crimea as "sacred land".
The publication also draws attention to the fact that although the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation did not voice any assumptions about the possible involvement of the Armed Forces in the incident, the decision of the illegally appointed Kremlin "head" of Crimea Sergey Aksenov to raise the level of terrorist threat to yellow showed that pro -Russian officials were concerned. NYT draws parallels between explosions in the Crimea and the flooding of the cruiser of Moscow.
Then the Russian Federation also declared a fire on a ship that led to "ammunition detonation" and denied the Armed Forces strike, insisting that the ship had sunk "in a storm. " But this is not the only analogy. “Just like Moscow's flooding, which was once a symbol of Russia's domination in the Black Sea, a blow to a military facility in Crimea would have symbolically meaning both for Ukraine and Russia.
The peninsula became not only a starting ground for invasion of south of Ukraine, but also the center of Russian military operations in the region; the basis for Navy ships that block Ukrainian ports; And also the engineering base for the restoration of roads, railways and a critically important freshwater channel is everything to consolidate Russia's power in the occupied territories, ”NYT writes.
In this case, the Kremlin promotes Crimea as a patriotic rest, harbor for rich Russians, who are no longer happy abroad, and allegedly mecca for students. Putin, who has repeatedly visited the peninsula since 2014, turned the anniversary of annexation into an annual "celebration" event with speeches, concerts and "forests of Russian flags", reminds of the symbolism of Crimea in the eyes of the Kremlin by the American edition.
The Guardian emphasizes how the events of August 9 at one point changed the reality for the occupied Crimea and his Russian guests: “It was possible to see Russian tourists who were resting on the nearby beaches. This is one of the rare cases where the Peninsula, occupied by Russia since 2014, has suffered directly from hostilities.
” The publication notes the "Sardonic" tone of comments of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine on the need to comply with the rules of fire safety and "Prohibition of smoking in unspecified places". The British newspaper reminds that it was at the Air Base near Novofedorivka in 1945 that Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill landed on the way to the Yalta Conference in February 1945.
The object is too far (approximately 110 miles) from the front line so that it can be affected by ordinary Ukrainian landing missiles, but it is located in the possible area of reach of other systems of the long range of action, analyzes The Guardian causes of impact.
The newspaper also emphasizes that in the last day, "more and more rumors began to appear about Ukraine's missile potential after the United States first confirmed the supply of Kiev anti-radios, which are primarily intended for air defense (probably AGM-88 HARM). Usually, such rockets are launched from the aircraft up to 90 miles (about 144 km).
Recalling that the Armed Forces had already demonstrated the ability to make more deep blows in Russia's occupied territories with Himars, The Guardian lists several more versions that could hypothetically explain the blow to the airport near Novofedorivka. Among them are: The Washington Post emphasizes the position of the Ukrainian side after the explosions in the Crimea: “Representatives of the Ukrainian authorities [Mikhail Podolyak - approx. Ed.
] Warned that the explosions were "only the beginning" and promised to release the territory annexed by Moscow in 2014. " The anonymous source in US state structures reported that the Ukrainian forces "probably struck with the use of weapons not provided by the United States. " He also reported that the US is specifying the details of the operation in Ukraine. “The attack, if it was made by Ukraine, would mean a dramatic escalation after almost six months of war.
It would demonstrate the impressive ability of Ukrainian forces - or their allies - to strike on [the army of the army] far from the front line, in the depths of [occupied] territory where Russian tourists are so sure of their safety that they rest on the sandy beaches of the Black Sea Along with the base, ”wp writes.
The publication states that the official comments of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine have been called to "conquer Moscow" and "to crack the Russians" of Air Force correspondent Villa Vernon, emphasizing the importance of Ukraine Considering it as a "historically" Russian land, which Moscow allegedly "reappeared" in 2014. Although all these eight years, the vast majority of countries in the world continue to consider Crimea Ukrainian.
"So deep attack in the Crimean territory would be a serious humiliation for Putin," the BBC journalist states. It is also reminiscent of the threats from Moscow before Crimea - including the words of Dmitry Medvedev about the "Judgment Day" after the hypothetical attack of the peninsula. And although this is the first serious attack in the Crimea itself, the Ukrainian forces were close to it even earlier, Vnnon reminds.
In June 2022, the Armed Forces struck the Black Sea oil drill platforms in the Crimean waters. And at the end of July, the Russian authorities announced a blow from the headquarters of the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol - UAV was allegedly launched from the city. However, Ukraine then rejected its role in this blow.
“In fact, the enemy did not risk spending the Day of the Black Sea Federation, and in order not to disgrace again before the world, fearing the Armed Forces of Ukraine, invented the reason to cancel the events on the occasion of the so -called holiday.