The scout called “suicide bombers” saboteurs who swung at the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant

Two versions of the landing of Ukrainians on the Kakhovka reservoir put forward

The sabotage groups that tried to seize the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant early Thursday morning have already been called by some military experts a “suicide squad”. The calculation of the saboteurs was on surprise, however, the Russian armed forces were prepared for the attack and were able to repel the blow. Three of them were taken prisoner. Military intelligence officer, Colonel Rustem Klupov told MK what goals the Ukrainian landing was pursuing and why the attack was a failure.

Photo: Global Look Press

According to official data from the Russian military department, two sabotage groups of about 60 people landed early in the morning on seven boats on the coast of the Kakhovka reservoir, three kilometers northeast of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant and attempted to seize the power plant. The Ministry of Defense also clarified that “measures were taken to destroy the enemy, including with the use of army aviation.” A little later it became known that 47 saboteurs were killed, three were taken prisoner, two were in serious condition. A group of 12 people was blocked from three sides and cut off from water and boats.

According to the military expert of “MK” Rustem Klupov, there are two versions of the attack by sabotage groups:

– First option. These acts of sabotage were aimed at disrupting the arrival of the IAEA delegation. The whole calculation was on surprise.

The sabotage groups were supposed to instantly sneak in, seize the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant and proclaim that it belongs to Ukraine or something like that. This is a purely populist move. The main task is to attract the attention of the world community. In the event of the capture of the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant, the whole world would have to shudder and say something like “we forbid Russia to conduct military operations on the territory of the nuclear power plant and we do not allow the possibility of an assault.” If it worked out, then they would be covered in chocolate. But everything went wrong. Namely, it went wrong that they were opened in a timely manner, blocked and are now methodically liquidated. Those who do not surrender will remain on this shore.

According to the military expert, according to the second version, the unsuccessful sortie of saboteurs is part of the counteroffensive:

– There is another version. The sabotage groups are the forward detachment of the crossing of the Dnieper River near Ugledar as part of the general counteroffensive led by Ukraine. The appearance of saboteurs was supposed to be a distraction. How likely this version is, today will show. It all depends on what forces are and what they are doing on the other side of the Dnieper.

If there is a mechanized or infantry air assault brigade or even more, then perhaps these 60 people are really the first group that landed in order to capture the bridgehead. Then the alignment is completely different.

According to the expert, additional ground forces should have come out to land on the Kakhovka reservoir:

– The fact is that any landing force that we land in the course of an offensive or defensive operation has certain tasks of capturing some military or strategically important facility. Therefore, any landing that we land, sooner or later, the main forces must approach. If this is a company, then it will live no more than 12 hours on its own, especially on such a patch of land. If it does not come out with auxiliary ground forces, it is doomed.

Either these are forces from Kherson, which is a complete fantasy, or forces that broke through the defenses from Zaporozhye, or forces that crossed the Dnieper directly in the Ugledar direction. If this does not happen – and the chances of the Ukrainians here are close to zero – then the sabotage groups that landed are suicide bombers. It is premature to say anything more significant about the counteroffensive and, in particular, about these airborne units, because we do not yet see the full picture.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *