‘Vulnerable Russians, recovery times difficult to predict’
“The attack on the Kerch bridge has a political, strategic and psychological effect: it gives the clear idea that the Ukrainians can also attack in Russia because it is true that the passage of Crimea to Russia has never been recognized, but it is It is also true that for the Russians, since 2014, it has been their territory. For the Russians, the bridge therefore has a strong psychological value of national unity, a link between Crimea and the Motherland, moreover the attack has a military effect because the main route of power of the Russian forces comes from Crimea “. This was stated to Adnkronos by General Antonio Li Gobbi, former commander of the Engineers and Inspector of the Engineers, who participated in UN missions in Syria and Israel and NATO in Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan and was Director of Operations at the State NATO international major in Brussels, commenting on the attack on the Kerch bridge and the response with the Russian raids.
“After the attack, the Russians, who felt safe, have the feeling that they are no longer so because other infrastructures such as the port of Sevastopol could be hit”, continues General Li Gobbi, adding that now Moscow has “the problem of restoring the only land connection route: the bridge was inaugurated by Putin, the attack gives the feeling of vulnerability of the entire supply chain of Russian logistics “.
“The times to restore it are difficult to say, but they could also be reduced, perhaps temporary solutions could be adopted – observes the former commander of the Engineers – It is strange what the Russians report, namely that the explosion was caused by a truck which set fire to 5 wagons of a passing train loaded with fuel: this means that it has been planned or that a chance has increased its effects “. The raid by the Russians in the last few hours is “the response of someone who feels really hit. An ‘angry’ response to show their own public opinion a reaction; it will be necessary to see the decisions of the Security Council: heads will probably fall, which whether or not they are responsible is irrelevant because in regimes of that type the aim is to find the scapegoat “.
Regarding the risk of this escalation increasing the danger of Russia’s use of a nuclear weapon, Li Gobbi notes that such a decision “would only be made if the Russians really felt in the corner and this is a risk when confronted. an autarchic and dictatorial government. Putin, in case of defeat, risks not only his job but also his life “. The use of nuclear weapons would be “the move of despair – he concludes – when Hitler found himself in the bunker he committed suicide, but if he had had the nuclear weapon are we sure he would not have used it?”.