Ukrainian crisis: "A movement of troops does not mean a withdrawal"

Russian soldiers train at the Kadamovskiy shooting range in the Rostov region, in southern Russia and not far from the Ukrainian border, on January 13, 2022. AP

Text by: Nicolas Feldmann Follow

3 mins

While Russia claims since Tuesday to have begun the withdrawal of part of its troops positioned around Ukraine, Westerners denounce lies.

On the contrary, the United States is even talking about sending 7,000 additional soldiers.

According to the American ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, Moscow is even heading towards “ 

 ”.

Advertising

Read more

Joseph Henrotin is editor-in-chief of

magazine and  research fellow at the Center for International Risk Analysis and Forecasting (CAPRI).

He analyzes this

.

RFI: What is happening at the moment at the borders of Ukraine?

Joseph Henrotin:

The Russian Ministry of Defense did indeed publish images of departing trains loaded with armored vehicles on Thursday.

Now the question is not whether they leave, but where do they go?

And there, the options are many.

Armored vehicles could, for example, pass through the bridge that connects Crimea to Russia and reach training areas from which they could carry out attacks in Ukraine.

These tanks could also return to their home base, a number of which are near Ukraine.

►Also read: Ukrainian crisis: Westerners and Kiev do not see Russian de-escalation

So there are troop movements, but that does not necessarily mean that there is a withdrawal.

Let us remember that in 2008, a week before the start of the war in Georgia, Russia announced a withdrawal of its forces from South Ossetia.

A week later, military operations began.

We can therefore doubt everything.

What means do Westerners have to contradict the Russian version of a partial troop withdrawal?

The Americans have a very wide range of intelligence.

There are, of course, satellite images, but also planes that carry out intelligence missions, intercept communications or study radar positions.

The Swedes and the British also showed great intelligence activity with active aircraft near the Baltic Sea or the Black Sea.

France also does intelligence, if only in the Mediterranean with French Navy ships likely to report fleet movements.

Who benefits from this lying poker game?

Both sides seek to influence public opinion, but the one who takes the initiative on the ground is Vladimir Putin.

It has approximately 175,000 troops positioned around Ukraine.

Of course, this is not enough to invade the entire territory of Ukraine, but he can consider other military options.

He could decide, for example, to secure the annexation of the separatist Republics or to invade the city of Mariupol on the Sea of ​​Azov.

Especially since out of these 175,000 soldiers, there is a large proportion of reservists, with little training, who could be very useful in securing a territory after an invasion.

Soldiers from Chechnya are also available.

These forces are relevant with regard to a scenario of taking over a territory.

Once again this Thursday, Joe Biden evokes the “

Joe Biden speaks loudly, but the United States has been very clear: even to go and save citizens who would be stranded in the American embassy in Kiev, they would not send troops.

This is an ambivalent signal sent to Russia.

The Americans are counting on economic sanctions, but it is clear that neither the threats of sanctions nor the sanctions put in place since 2014 have prevented Russian actions near Ukraine.

Ultimately, Joe Biden's freedom of action and maneuver therefore remains particularly limited from the moment he decides not to engage militarily in Ukraine.

Newsletter

Receive all the international news directly in your mailbox

I subscribe

Follow all the international news by downloading the RFI application

google-play-badge_EN

• Russia

• Ukraine