Maps are fun things. All by themselves they can tell a person much about an area—not just aspects of terrain but also the state of key infrastructures connecting various communities within a region. Looking at a map of southeastern Ukraine, one begins to see that the retreat from Kherson was potentially a much larger defeat than Russia cares to admit. Following Russia’s historical defensive doctrines of relying on geographic depth to keep adversaries far off, Kherson is vital to defending Putin’s “land bridge” to Crimea, and
The defense of this land bridge would seem to give Ukraine some strong negotiating points, if this was a regular conflict. It has been said since Putin took Crimea he needed a land bridge and a fresh water source guarantee, perhaps he will now be able to get them?
People have said since 2014 Crimea was Russian, which is in contrast to the geology we see here.
I suppose it is a valid point, if you only consider the last half/quarter dozen centuries?
The defense of this land bridge would seem to give Ukraine some strong negotiating points, if this was a regular conflict. It has been said since Putin took Crimea he needed a land bridge and a fresh water source guarantee, perhaps he will now be able to get them?
People have said since 2014 Crimea was Russian, which is in contrast to the geology we see here.
I suppose it is a valid point, if you only consider the last half/quarter dozen centuries?