It is tempting to see the loss of the Russian cruiser Moskva as the symbol of a larger shipwreck: that of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
First, this event has operational implications, especially since the Russian Black Sea Fleet cannot be reinforced by the Northern Fleet across the Dardanelles and Bosphorus Straits, which Turkey has closed since the Kremlin-launched “special military operation” began. But it has a political significance above all: the loss of the Russian main ship off the Ukrainian coast seems to illustrate the gradual reversal of the military, media and strategic balance of power between Ukraine and Russia.
On a military level, a ratio of the weak to the strong
Whether the result of a Ukrainian attack (as Kyiv claims) or an accidental fire (as Moscow claims), the disappearance of the cruiser Moskva, the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet, highlights several aspects that are essential elements of the ongoing military confrontation.
This 12,000+ ton ship, admitted to active service in 1983 and originally christened Slava (Glory), is a legacy of the USSR designed by Soviet engineers in the 1970s to commemorate the Second Cold War, the Brezhnev -era to lead. at a time when Soviet forces were stationed on every continent. Retired from service for a decade, from 1990 to 2000, he contributed to the renewal of the Russian armies enshrined in the grand modernization plan launched by Vladimir Putin in 2009.
Its demise is the symbol of the limits of this modernization of the armed forces, which has been carried out in all dimensions (air, land, sea, cyber) for more than a decade to reaffirm the power of Russia in the distance (in Syria since 2015) too near the border (Caucasus, Baltic Sea, Black Sea, North Atlantic). In other words, the combination of Soviet military heritage and Putin’s modernization of the armed forces is insufficient to achieve a decisive, clear, and undeniable military victory.
Since the invasion began in February, despite Ukraine’s heavy civilian and military casualties, the destruction of several cities and much infrastructure, and the perceived superiority of Russian forces, Moscow has failed to achieve its stated goal: to change the Ukrainian government and give the country status impose strict neutrality.
For Ukraine, which claims to have sunk the ship in a brilliant act, this episode represents a whole symbol of hope at the military level: long criticized, recently reformed, and until recently benefiting from limited Western support, say the Ukrainian army is taking revenge on the Russian army’s supposed invincibility and a building that paralyzed its actions at sea: failure of an invasion on at least four axes, supported by a first-class air force and experienced in external operations.
In addition, the disappearance of the Moscow River directly affects the maritime dimension of the Russian invasion. If Mariupol to the east and Odessa to the west are strategic targets for Russia, it is because Moscow’s capture of these cities would represent a strategic conclusion to its annexation of Crimea. In fact, it would allow him to turn the Black Sea into the “Russian Lake” it was during Soviet times and take a shoreline from Ukraine. But such a conquest largely depends on the ability of Russian ships to support the attack on land from the sea …
There’s an important leap from sinking a 40-year-old cruiser to defeating Russia, but this episode underscores the obvious: At the military level, Ukraine manages to create a weak-to-strong ratio that deprives Russia of the power to win been looking for it for almost two months.
A generational conflict in the media space
The fate of the Moscow River was quickly becoming the subject of a conflict far removed from Black Sea and naval operations. For several hours he has embodied the confrontation of stories.
On the one hand, Russia downplays the event as it tries to tone down its international isolation, downplays the number of its soldiers killed in Ukraine, and denies war crimes charges.
Moscow’s war communications have been tried and tested: they set the standard at the start of the Russian operation in Syria. It is also aided by the dominance of ubiquitous “troll factories” on social networks and propagated by traditional media increasingly controlled by the government in the name of Holy Union, the war effort and loyalty to the country.
In the case of the loss of the Moskva, however, official Russian communications are illustrated by their archaism: drawing its matrix from the official propaganda of the USSR, steeped in the cult of the Russian President’s television personality, and repeating themes so classic that they seem to have been rehashed appear and have difficulty mobilizing. Structured entirely by the “power vertical” which, as in Soviet times, leaves the leader alone at the pinnacle of power and control, it hammers in the fact that Russia is the subject of a Western media conspiracy to intentionally distort reality, as in the “simple” accidental fire on the Moskva. In short, 20th-century communications equipped with 21st-century technologies… just like the Moskva modernized with 2000s-era equipment.
Ukraine’s media strategy breaks with the 20th century. This observation applies to President Zelenskyy’s communications in general, and in particular to the episode of the loss of the Moskva – a ship that had already been mocked by Ukraine at the beginning of the war, when the Ukrainian sailors threatened the Snake Island and forced this huge cruiser to surrender asked, had answered him unkindly.
Speaking directly to public opinion and political leaders around the world, often in their own language, highlighting individuals, resistance fighters or victims of the Russian invasion and pointing out any cracks in the Russian military system, the Ukrainian President and Ukrainian public communications agencies, who have mastered the grammar of contemporary media .
to also read:
Why Volodymyr Zelenskyy is winning the communications war
Abandoning the monopolization of the narrative, giving the official communication the appearance of an almost spontaneous reality TV, current Ukrainian communication is obviously shaped by Zelenskyy’s previous career, but also by the experiences since the 2014 crisis. Public authorities and companies are waging viral counterattacks on Russian propaganda via social media. In short, in the media arena, as in Ukrainian cities, the Ukrainian government wages guerrilla warfare that favors movement, evasive maneuvers, and light equipment such as anti-ship and anti-tank missiles… and homemade videos of the President of Ukraine.
In the conflict between Ukraine and Russia over the leadership of the narrative, the asymmetry of the means and the heterogeneity of the strategies are striking in the case of the Moskva. On the one hand stilted state propaganda based on systematic denial. On the other hand, a new generation of communicators, reactive and agile.
Unlikely victory, impossible negotiations
The loss of the cruiser Moskva also underscores the political and diplomatic balance of power between a Russia struggling for victory and a permanently weakened Ukraine. Indeed, this ship had enabled Russia’s Black Sea Fleet to demonstrate its military superiority. Thanks to its firepower, Russia had established a blockade of Ukraine’s shores, hampering both the economic life of the country’s southern regions and the enforcement of Ukrainian sovereignty in its own territorial waters.
Today, the loss of this ship is not a “game changer”: it does not consecrate either the defeat of Russia or the victory of Ukraine. Nor does he rush into truce talks, let alone prepare peace negotiations. Like many episodes of the war, this event has no way out. That is the tragedy of this war: symbolic successes are possible, ultimate victories seem impossible. As a result, hostilities appear to be continuing at the cost of numerous lives, particularly among Ukrainian civilians.