The Economist - USA (2022-05-21)

The Economist May 21st 2022 Europe 49

is  off­limits.  Russia  has  laid  mines,  too.
About  80  foreign  ships  are  now  stuck  in
Ukrainian waters; some have been sunk.
“Mining  is  easy;  de­mining  is  compli­
cated,” notes a Western diplomat. Ukraine
lacks  the  capacity  to  clear  the  necessary
sea­lanes.  Moreover,  says  another  dip­
lomat, “If things are de­mined for the pur­
poses  of  letting  the  wheat  out,  but  then
Russians are allowed to sneak in and attack
Odessa,  that’s  a  problem.”  As  the  Russian
advance  falters,  however,  President  Volo­
dymyr Zelensky has told visiting American
congressmen  that  arming  Ukraine  with
more  anti­ship  missiles  could  allow  de­
mining to start.
Protecting  convoys  might  require  a
substantial nato naval presence. This rais­
es questions related to the Montreux Con­
vention  of  1936,  which  regulates  shipping
in the Turkish straits. Turkey has invoked
Article  19,  in  effect  barring  passage  to  the
navies  of  belligerent  states—a  move  that
affects  Russia  more  than  others.  Turkey
has informally told other countries not to
deploy  warships  in  the  Black  Sea.  It  could
take such measures formally under Article
21 if it felt “threatened with imminent dan­
ger of war”.
The convention anyhow limits war ves­
sels from non­littoral states, and how long
they can stay in the Black Sea. A nato oper­
ation would thus require the frequent rota­
tion of ships. Turkey is a nato member and
faces no such limits. But its dealings with
Russia are ambiguous: it has sold Ukraine
the  much­celebrated  Bayraktar  tb­2  com­
bat drone, but has also declined to impose
sanctions  on  Russia  and  has  allowed  oli­
garchs’ superyachts to shelter in its waters.
The debate over convoys has echoes of
the earlier one over imposing a no­fly zone
over western Ukraine: are nato allies rea­
dy to risk a direct fight with Russia? Presi­
dent  Joe  Biden  said  no  to  a  no­fly  zone.
That  would  risk  “World  War  III”,  he  said.
Without  American  backing,  it  is  hard  to
imagine others confronting Russia.
The  faint  hope  is  that  international
pressure,  particularly  from  non­Western
countries,  may  persuade  Russia  to  relent.
Some in the un think—or hope—that Vlad­
imir  Putin,  its  president,  will  not  want  to
be accused of causing global hunger. Antó­
nio Guterres, the un secretary­general, has
suggested a deal whereby Russia would al­
low  food  shipments  out  of  Odessa  in  ex­
change for easing of sanctions on fertiliser
exports from Belarus and Russia.
Many officials think Mr Putin is, if any­
thing, even more determined to crush Uk­
raine  economically  given  his  failure  to
conquer  it  militarily.  Western  diplomats
say  reopening  Ukrainian  ports  is  not  a
practical  option  for  at  least  six  months.  A
Ukrainian  one  is  blunter:  “There  is  no
point in escorting merchant ships if nobo­
dy is prepared to shoot back at Russia. The

onlyanswerisforustodefeatRussia.”

America, which currently holds the

presidencyoftheunSecurityCouncil,is

pushingforactiononimprovingfoodse­

curitygenerally.Theeffortisintendedin

parttoprovetofence­sittingcountriesthat

thewarinUkraine,andtheeconomicdis­

ruptionitiscausing,shouldbeblamedon

Russia,nottheWest.

Westerncountriesmayyetputforward

a motioncallingforthereopeningofOdes­

sa,ifonlytoforceRussiatouseitsveto.

TheunGeneralAssembly,whichincludes

allmembers,requiresanycountrycasting

a vetotoexplainitselfbeforetheassembly

withintendays.Russiamaynotcare,says

RichardGowanoftheInternationalCrisis

Group, athink­tank.“Insome waysthe

greatestriskisthatRussiasaysyestore­

openingOdessabutthencreatesallman­

nerofproceduralobstacles.”n

Kramatorsk

Barvinkove Slovyansk

Izyum

Severodonetsk

Donetsk

Belgorod

Luhansk

Kharkiv

L u h a n s k

t s k

bas

Luhansk

Donetsk Areacontrolledby

Russian-backed

separatists

beforeFeb24th

Do

nba

UKRAINE s

RUSSIA

Mariupol

Siverskyi

Donets

75 km

ClaimedasRussian-controlled

AssessedRussianadvances*

AssessedasRussian-controlled

Claimed Ukrainian

counter-attacks

May 18th 222

*Russia operated

in or attacked, but

does not control

Sources: Institute for

the Study of War; AEI’s

Critical Threats Project

Ukraine

The relief of

Kharkiv

And the imminent fall of Mariupol

E

ighty yearsago  the  second  Battle  of

Kharkov  was  raging  in  what  was  then

the  western  Soviet  Union.  The  Red  Army

had heroically driven the Nazi Wehrmacht

back from the gates of Moscow. It gathered

in  a  bulge  west  of  Izyum,  a  town  to  the

south of Kharkov, as Ukraine’s second city

was  then  known.  The  subsequent  Soviet

offensive, launched on May 12th 1942, was a

disaster.  Soviet  armies  were  driven  back

and  encircled.  Over  170,000  Soviet  troops

were  killed.  Nikita  Khrushchev  later  fo­

cused  on  the  battle  when  denouncing  his

tyrannical  predecessor  as  Soviet  leader.

“This  is  Stalin’s  military  ‘genius’,”  he

sneered, citing the crude tactics of frontal

assault. “This is what it cost us.”

The  Russian  army  is  once  again  gath­

ered around Izyum. And once more it is in

retreat  from  Kharkiv,  as  the  city  is  now

called, after another underwhelming cam­

paign failed to take it. Ukrainian counter­

attacks  to  the  north  and  east  of  the  city

have forced the Russians back tens of kilo­

metres,  out  of  artillery  range  of  the  city

and,  in  places,  back  to  the  border.  It  has

been  over  a  month  since  Russia,  having

abandoned its assault on Kyiv, launched a

fresh offensive in the east. The idea was to

encircle Ukrainian troops in a large salient

stretching from Izyum in the north to the

city of Donetsk in the south, in part by driv­

ing south from Izyum.

There have been minor successes. Rus­

sia  has  now  taken  almost  all  of  Luhansk

province—it  held  only  the  southern  part

before  the  war—bar  a  salient  around  the

well­defended city of Severodonetsk. It has

also pushed south of Izyum, taking villages

towards  Barvinkove,  an  important  rail

junction,  and  the  industrial  cities  of  Slo­

vyansk  and  Kramatorsk.  Yet  progress  has

been slow—one or two kilometres a day—

and  casualties  heavy.  The  war  is  now

dominated  by  grinding  artillery  duels,

rather  than  swift  mechanised  offensives.

Much of Donetsk province is still in Ukrai­

nian hands, though its port city of Mariu­

pol has now fallen to the Russians, bar the

presence of a small number of fighters still

hunkering  down  in  the  Azovstal  steel

works in the east of the city. On May 16th,

an  initial  group  of  264  fighters  surren­

dered; others have since followed.

The  Russians’  generally  slow  progress

is no surprise. Conventional military theo­

ry  says  that  attackers  need  a  three­to­one

advantage over defenders to break through

defensive lines. Russia is far short of that.

Its  units  are  operating  below  their  full

strength, some severely so, despite efforts

to  coax  ex­servicemen  back  into  action

with big pay packets. Even if Russian forces

get as far as Severodonetsk, Slovyansk and

Kramatorsk, the heavy casualties from ur­

ban warfare are likely to sap their capacity

to fight yet further. 

Ukrainian  forces  are  grimly  confident.

Their warplanes are active over Donbas, in­

cluding Izyum itself, despite the proximity

to  Russian  air­defence  systems  over  the

border  to  the  east.  In  the  past  two  weeks,

Ukrainian drones and jets have also repeat­

edly  struck  Russian  helicopters,  landing

craft  and  surface­to­air  missiles  on  and

around Snake Island, a tiny outcrop in the

north­western corner of the Black Sea, near

Odessa.  And  while  Russia  is  struggling  to

replenish  its  forces,  Western  arms—in­

cluding  heavy  artillery—are  now  flowing