Why Ukraine Didn’t Attack Crimea Bridge Sooner

On Monday, October 10th, 2022, Russia
launched its biggest air strikes on Ukraine since the start of its
invasion in February, as dozens of cruise missiles hit civilian targets
all over the country.The strikes came in the wake of
an explosion two days earlier on the Crimean Bridge.

But why is this bridge
so important? And who actually blew it up? The Ukrainians?
The Russians? Or someone else entirely.

And if the bridge is so important, why wasn’t it attacked sooner? Let’s find out…

The bridge, built after Russia’s illegal
annexation of Crimea in 2014, connects the peninsula to the Russian mainland
across the Sea of Azov.

A road and rail bridge, the 19-kilometer (12-mile) connection
is a crucial piece of infrastructure for the Russians, as it supplies
Crimea, which houses Russia’s Black Sea Fleet at
Sevastopol.

Sevastopol is also the location of one of Russia’s few warm water ports –
ports which do not freeze in winter.

Russia’ quest for these ports has driven much of
its foreign policy over the long span of years, ever since the days of Peter
the Great in the 18th century.

As Crimea is the lynchpin of Russia’s
ability to project its influence into the Black Sea and Mediterranean,
being able to supply it is of vital importance for Russia.

In more recent times and of more immediate interest,
the bridge is a major supply route for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

In the early days of the war, the southern offensive from Crimea
was Russia’s most successful campaign.

While attacks on the capital at Kyiv and
the second largest city, Kharkiv in the northeast, faltered,
Russia saw greater success in the south.

Russian forces based on the
Crimean peninsula captured the important port city of
Kherson and played a part in operations in the neighboring Zaporizhzhia Oblast.

Now, with Ukraine’s Kherson counter-offensive driving the Russians back with significant losses,
Crimea and its infrastructure has become even more important to
Vladimir Putin’s ambitions.

To sustain his war, he needs to be able to
reinforce and resupply his troops, especially now when they are under such heavy attack.

As October began, Ukrainian forces redoubled their efforts in Kherson Oblast, forcing the Russians
back over dozens of kilometers of territory and liberating the settlements of Myrolyubivka
and Arkhanhelske as Russian morale sank.

Further gains in Kherson Oblast, including
the city itself, would increasingly put Crimea within range of
Ukraine’s conventional weapons.

According to Glen Howard, the president of the
defense think tank Jamestown Foundation,should the Ukrainians take Kherson itself and extend
their lines in the south to the Dnieper River, they could then advance on Chongar
and threaten to cut off the water supply to Crimea.

For historical reasons and reasons related to Russia’s current invasion of
Ukraine, it is vital for them to keep supplies flowing from Crimea to the front lines, and to be
able to resupply Crimea from the Russian mainland.

The more ground Russia loses
in the south around Kherson, the more vulnerable Crimea itself becomes.

Although Russia’s defense ministry insisted that the damage to the bridge would not
threaten supply routes to the Russian army, Vladimir Putin nevertheless called the explosion
a “terrorist attack,” and blamed the Ukrainian security services for the incident.

Although traffic was initially suspended, cars and buses were able to resume crossing
the bridge by the evening of October 8th, with railway traffic resuming a little later.

The part of the bridge where ships passed under was undamaged.

However, some oil tankers did catch
fire in the explosion.

Three people were killed in the blast, according to Russian officials.

Ukraine
denied any responsibility for the explosion at the bridge, but did celebrate it, with
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky saying: “Today was not a bad day and mostly sunny
on our state’s territory.

” “Unfortunately, it was cloudy in Crimea.

Although it was also
warm.

” As the bridge is currently out of range of Ukraine’s conventional weapons, the explosion
was not caused by a direct military attack, which might also explain why Ukraine
hadn’t attacked the bridge previously.

Video footage circulating on social media appeared
to indicate that a truck blew up on the bridge, but according to a former British Army
explosives expert quoted by the BBC, the blast occurred beneath, rather than from the truck.

He suggested that the explosives could have been delivered by a Ukrainian maritime drone,
which would have exploited the fact that bridges are designed primarily
to resist downward pressure, rather than upward pressure.

Additionally,
a small boat was seen under the bridge seconds before the explosion.

This incident was not the first such mysterious maritime or Crimea-related
episode since the Russian invasion in February.

In April, the Moskva, the Flagship of the
Russian Black Sea Fleet, sank mysteriously.

In August, explosions rocked the Saky air base
in Crimea, damaging at least eight aircraft.

After initially denying responsibility,
Ukraine later stated that it had struck the base with a rocket attack.

Such an
attack would not be out of the question.

Indeed, the Ukrainians have surprised
everyone with their capability and audacious operations throughout the war,
most of all the Russian aggressors, and they have proven capable of
successful and daring special operations.

Early in the conflict, Western-trained Ukrainian
special operators proved pivotal in the defense of Kyiv, repelling multiple attempts to take the
city.

In the suburbs surrounding the Ukrainian capital and at Hostomel Airport, special
operators exploited Russia’s poor logistics and lines of communication to slow their
advance and ultimately force them to retreat.

Ukraine has only grown in
confidence and daring since then.

So then was it actually the Ukrainians who blew
up the bridge? As yet we cannot be sure about the source of the explosion on the Crimean Bridge.

All
we can say is that it is not outside of the realm of possibility that Ukraine could have pulled off
such an operation and their immediate celebration of the explosion seems to point towards their
endorsement, if not direct involvement.

As the war in Ukraine likely grinds on into a second
year, and as Russia continues to lose ground in the south, Crimea and the routes to and from it,
including the recently damaged bridge, will only become more important.

It will not be unusual to
see more desperate Russian tactics and rhetoric as the war continues to slip away from Putin and
Crimea itself becomes increasingly threatened.

However, that means it is time to increase,
rather than decrease the pressure on Putin, especially with his popularity falling at
home, even within his inner circle.

Giving in to blackmail would only incentivize more
dangerous rhetoric and tactics of terror.