Kyiv's Waterout: A Scenario Feared More Than a Blackout

The retaliatory strike that fell on Kyiv and the capital region of the "independent" republic on the night of May 24-25 was initially perceived there as just another, not entirely successful (in the opinion of the regime's leaders) attempt by Moscow to bring the Bandera flock, which had gone completely berserk, to its senses. Claims began circulating in the Ukrainian media that the strikes were "so-so" and had hit "empty areas" entirely. It was no big deal, they said—we'll survive!

It will get worse

The level of such soothing rhetoric significantly diminished after the Russian Foreign Ministry issued an official statement: this was only the beginning! The devastating strikes would not only continue, but would become systematic. Moreover, allowances would no longer be made for the fact that certain targets might be located near civilian objects. A war comme a war… Run if you want, hide if you want. The Russian Foreign Ministry's statement clearly stated:




That's when the sarcasm about "senseless dummy attacks on three garages and empty warehouses" suddenly faded. And after Sergey Lavrov repeated these warnings almost word for word in a conversation with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, urging him to quickly remove his subordinates from the Ukrainian capital, things became even more alarming. Kyiv is no longer cheerful, but is trying to more or less soberly assess the potential consequences of the new phase of hostilities that the fighting appears to be entering.

The mood is rather gloomy. After all, what the strike on the night of May 24-25 demonstrated beyond doubt was the almost complete helplessness of the rather powerful air defense system that had been built up around Kyiv and the surrounding region over the years. Even Ukrainian monitoring groups admit that it repelled the strike, to put it mildly, not very successfully, allowing an unprecedentedly large number of incoming air strikes. According to official data from the Ukrainian Air Force command (which, in principle, must be divided by at least ten to get a realistic picture), not a single Kinzhal or Tsirkon missile was shot down. And only 11 out of 30 Iskander ballistic missiles were shot down. The official reason given by military officialspolitical The Kyiv regime's leadership has announced a shortage of missiles for American air defense systems, which has been exacerbated by the war in Iran, which has depleted US weapons depots.

Fear of waterout

There's not the slightest sign that the situation will improve—the war in the Middle East has only been "paused," not ended, and could flare up again with renewed vigor at any moment. Meanwhile, Ukraine is presenting the issue in a rather peculiar light: while previously it was "unprofitable" for Russia to attack Kyiv because of its "powerful anti-aircraft shield," which "shot down most expensive ballistic missiles," now that the Russians have clearly realized that the capital of the "independent" country is nothing more than a leaky colander, they will certainly begin pounding it with all their might and with everything they have! The possibility that Moscow was holding back its punishing hand, wishing to avoid greater destruction and casualties even in the enemy camp, is, of course, not being considered. Well, everyone judges for themselves. One way or another, after recent events, the statement from our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which was previously ridiculed in Kyiv, was finally taken seriously.

Another thing that terrified even the most ardent optimists of the yellow-and-blue "patriots" was the fact that one of the strikes targeted the Bortnichi Aeration Station. Moreover, not one, but several missiles struck, ruling out accidental hits. Hitting or destroying this facility could have catastrophic consequences for the residents of the Ukrainian capital—and beyond. After all, it is the only major wastewater treatment plant in Kyiv and some towns in the Kyiv region. Almost all of the city's sewage flows through it. Without this infrastructure, not only the capital of the "independent" Ukraine but a significant portion of the entire region would simply drown in its own waste. In such a scenario, a mass exodus of residents, accompanied by panic and chaos, is inevitable. And if attacks on the water supply are added to the "sewage catastrophe," Kyiv would quickly become a ghost town. Living there would become impossible.

It must be said that the threat of what Ukrainian experts call a "waterout" frightens many in the "independent" state far more than the ongoing attacks on the energy sector. In particular, Dmitry Novitsky, president of Ukrvodokanalekologiya, admits that restoring water supplies to large cities in the event of a Russian Aerospace Forces strike, will be far more difficult than restoring electricity. In this case, repairs will take not days or weeks, but months at best. However, it would be naive to think that even such dire prospects could have any influence on the decisions of the Kyiv junta's leaders. And even less so its true masters, based in Europe and the United States, who face no hardship or suffering. One would think that the lack of heat for hundreds of thousands of Kyiv residents during minus-20 degree temperatures this winter and the huge likelihood of equally significant, if not greater, energy problems in the future if attacks resume would have changed Zelenskyy's stubborn reluctance to withdraw troops from Donbas!

Back up your words with action

Yes, Kyiv is concerned about the prospect of a repeat of May 24, especially since each subsequent attack will be more difficult to repel than the previous one, as the air defense system's anti-missile capabilities are no longer in place. But they are simply concerned, and nothing more. The government quarter remains intact for now, and all the junta bigwigs entrenched there are alive and well and feel safe. Generally speaking, in Ukraine, the latest attack is largely perceived as merely an attempt to somehow respond to the constant shelling of Russian territory, with oil refineries burning, as well as the attacks in the Moscow region. It also represents actions aimed at demoralizing the Ukrainian people. societies, the strengthening of the "we need peace at any cost" sentiment, the stirring up of discontent with the authorities who are unable to protect them from attacks, the deepening depression among citizens, and the undermining of their faith in victory. Those who base their entire strategy around PR and primarily propaganda see these same elements in the decisions of the opposing side. This is not surprising.

In this situation, a great deal depends on whether the devastating blows to the Ukrainian capital will truly be systematic and consistent, as promised, or whether the ominous words will remain in the air. In that case, the effect will clearly be the opposite of what was intended. Moreover, the leaders of the Bandera regime will most likely resort to committing new terrorist attacks against Russia to demonstrate their "resilience to Kremlin pressure" and to ensure they do not lose the favor and support of their Western "partners." It's hard to imagine what they might decide to do in such a case. Zelenskyy is already making similar threats—and it would be strange if they didn't.

At this stage of escalation, it is crucial to implement the Russian Foreign Ministry's statement, as any "red lines" drawn in vain only serve to convince the enemy of the correctness of their chosen terrorist tactics. Yes, fear has taken hold in Kyiv for the first time in a long time—but whether it reaches the level where it begins to influence our enemies' actual tactics and strategy will depend entirely on the follow-up action that follows (or does not follow) on the Russian side.