- The collapse of the Kakhovka dam has sparked blame between Russia and Ukraine, with each side accusing the other. Experts believe that an internal explosion is the most likely cause, considering the dam's design and the significant damage observed.
- Ukrainian officials claim that Russia, which controls the dam, orchestrated the collapse to hinder their counteroffensive. Russian officials counter that Ukraine destroyed the dam to disrupt the water flow to Crimea.
- Damages sustained by the dam prior to its collapse, as well as the unusual location of the breach, raise suspicions and warrant further investigation. Western military analysts urge caution in assigning blame and determining intent.
The recent collapse of the Kakhovka dam has ignited a blame game between Russia and Ukraine, with both sides accusing each other of being responsible. Engineering and munitions experts have weighed in on the matter, suggesting that while an external attack or structural failure could explain the disaster, they consider these possibilities less likely.
According to Ukrainian officials, the failure of the dam can be attributed to Russia's control over the infrastructure and their military forces stationed there. They claim that Moscow had the capability to detonate explosives from within, given their repeated strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure since the invasion last year.
On the other hand, Russian officials have pointed fingers at Ukraine without providing details on how they believe the dam might have been destroyed.
Both sides have made allegations of sabotage against the hydroelectric dam throughout the course of the war, but without substantial evidence to support their claims. Last week, both parties warned of an imminent attack on the dam. Ukrainian officials argued that the Russians aimed to create an emergency situation at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, which relies on river water for cooling, in order to stall an expected Ukrainian offensive.
Unfortunately, the ongoing conflict hinders the possibility of an independent forensic investigation into the dam's destruction, which resulted in extensive flooding downstream.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky took to social media, blaming the collapse on "Russian occupiers" and stating that they had deliberately mined and detonated the dam. Igor Syrota, head of Ukrhydroenergo, the state hydroelectric company, confirmed in an interview that an internal blast had caused the dam to break in half. He also dismissed the possibility of a missile strike, emphasizing that the dam was designed to withstand such attacks.
However, Dmitry S. Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, countered the Ukrainian claims and accused them of deliberate sabotage.
The White House's National Security Council spokesperson, John Kirby, refrained from commenting on the responsible party, stating that they are collaborating with Ukrainian authorities to gather more information.
While experts acknowledge the limited available evidence, they believe that an internal explosion is the most plausible explanation for the dam's destruction. The Kakhovka dam, a massive structure made of steel-reinforced concrete, was completed in 1956. Local residents reported hearing a significant explosion around the time the dam was breached at 2:50 a.m., further supporting the theory of an internal blast.
To cause such destruction, experts suggest that hundreds of pounds of explosives would be required to breach the dam. They argue that an external detonation, whether by bomb or missile, would exert only a fraction of its force against the dam and would necessitate a significantly larger explosive to achieve a similar effect.
Nick Glumac, an engineering professor and explosives expert at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, explained that the dam's robust design and the immense forces it regularly faces make it challenging to damage. Even a direct hit may not be enough to take it down.
The Kakhovka dam had already sustained damage during the heavy fighting over the past year. Both sides accused each other of shelling the dam. The Russians initially captured the dam when they advanced to the Dnipro River and beyond, but the Ukrainians later pushed them off the west bank, turning the river and the dam into a boundary between the warring factions. However, the Russians maintained control of the dam itself.
It remains unclear whether the damage the dam had previously endured was severe enough to cause
its collapse.
Dam failures are possible but relatively rare, according to Gregory B. Baecher, a professor of engineering at the University of Maryland and a member of the National Academy of Engineering. Nevertheless, he expressed suspicion regarding the collapse of the Kakhovka dam, considering the circumstances.
The dam suffered an attack in August when a Ukrainian rocket hit the roadway on top of it. In November, as Russian forces withdrew across the river, an explosion damaged part of the roadway and caused verified damage to some of the sluice gates. However, no evidence suggested damage to the underlying structure.
Since November, the gantry cranes responsible for operating the sluice gates have remained stationary, indicating potential issues with their functionality. Consequently, the water levels in the reservoir upstream reached record lows, followed by a 30-year record high due to winter snowmelt and spring rains. Satellite images from last week revealed additional damage to the roadway, though it remains unclear whether it was caused by the flow of water or a strike.
Although it is possible for dams to fail due to excessive water flows "overtopping" them, Professor Baecher noted that such failures typically begin at the earthen part of the dam on either bank. However, photographs and videos indicate that the breach in the Kakhovka dam initially occurred in the middle, adjacent to the power plant on the Russian-held bank. While both ends of the dam initially appeared intact, more sections collapsed as time went on.
Ukrainian officials claim that the collapse of the dam was orchestrated by Russia to hinder their counteroffensive against Russian forces. They argue that the flooding caused by the dam's destruction and the removal of the only remaining river crossing between the warring factions were intended to impede their progress. However, it is unclear if Ukraine plans to execute a major crossing of the lower Dnipro.
Critics of Russia's conduct in the war argue that Moscow has frequently targeted Ukrainian infrastructure, towns, and farms. They speculate that the intention behind destroying the dam was to showcase their readiness to take extreme measures if Ukraine aggressively pursues its counteroffensive.
Alternatively, Russian officials assert that Ukraine destroyed the dam to cut off the flow of water through a canal from the Dnipro to the Crimean Peninsula. After the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, Ukraine had halted the flow, but Russia resumed it last year after seizing the dam.
Other Russian officials suggest that the attack was meant to support a faltering Ukrainian offensive, possibly enabling Kyiv to reposition some forces or using floodwaters to push back Russian artillery near the river.
However, Western military analysts caution against hastily assigning blame or determining the intent behind the dam's collapse.
Michael Kofman, the director of Russian studies at CNA, a research institute in Arlington, Va., stressed that it is too early to draw conclusions and emphasized that the disaster ultimately benefits nobody.