Ukraine: perceptions of war

By Richard North - March 6, 2022

Some of the most striking images to emerge from the German invasion of Northern Europe in May/June 1940 were those of refugees seeking to escape the terrors of war.

However, it is fair to say that those images did not define the perception of that campaign. The contemporary media and the politicians kept the public abreast of the military movements and the ebb and flow of the fighting, as the world struggled to understand the new way of making war, characterised by the term blitzkrieg, or “lightning war”.

I could say that much the same applied to the Korean War, to Vietnam and most certainly to the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 – the so-called “Six-Day War”. In that latter event, to my certain recollection, the newspapers were full of pictures of the military action, and quite detailed explanations of the Israeli tactics and equipment.

Both the first Gulf War and the invasion phase of the second got similar treatment. And while all the conflicts (and others) generated refugees – no more so than the Six-Day War – I cannot recall any of them being defined by the refugee crises that evolved.

To that extent, this current war between Putin’s Russia and Ukraine is different – certainly in the way it is being treated by the bulk of the western media – and especially by the broadcasters. It seems to be being treated primarily as a refugee crisis, the details of which absorb by far the larger proportion of the “news” output. The military conduct of the war seems to have become a series of “noises off”, dispensed with in an almost cavalier manner.

No more so has this been the case than in yesterday’s coverage of the events at Irpin, the town on the western outskirts of Kiev where the blown bridge has marked the limit of the Russian advance down the west of the Dnieper since the second day of the war.

After a series of running battles along the E373 road axis from Irpin to Hostomel, taking in the town of Bucha, the invaders’ response to having been pushed steadily back has been to subject Irpin – a dense settlement with over 60 thousand inhabitants in normal times – to an intense bombardment which has lasted several days.

As a result – after the railway connection between Kiev and Irpin had been destroyed – through yesterday there was a concerted effort to evacuate the town, bringing its people back into Kiev where they can be sheltered and then evacuated. And this meant that a large number of people had to pick their way across the wreckage of the shattered bridge, on foot, while many sheltered under an intact span while awaiting their turns to cross.

This has provided the media with unrivalled copy and a superb photo-opportunity, dramatic pictures illustrating the front pages of at least three UK national Sunday papers, and used by many more media outlets.

No one, and certainly not I, would argue that this event was not news, or that it should not be reported. But what we have noted is that the area has been the subject of intense and almost continual ground fighting for over a week, as the Russians have sought to break through the blockage and enter Kiev.

What, therefore, puts the focus on the evacuation across the bridge into a league of its own is that the ground fighting has scarcely been reported in what is optimistically called the “mainstream media”, and then rarely drawing attention to the fact that the downed bridge was the primary reason for the famed “40-mile convoy” failing to reach its objective.

But what makes the media focus even more bizarre is that, while the good citizens of Irpin were assembling to cross the wreckage of the bridge, the Russian ground assets were seen to be entering the town, comprising a number of BMD-2s, and trucks (including a fuel truck) led by what appeared to be a T-72 tank (pictured).

One might have thought that such an event might have triggered some media interest but the only publicity I can find to date is in a local (Ukrainian) media platform. This, without offering any detail, told of “heavy battles taking place” in Irpin. Doubtless, as before though, the fighting wasn’t just limited to the Irpin area, as we also saw a report of a destroyed Russian BMD-2 near Bucha, just up the road.

If we go further up the E373, about 20 km from Irpin, we’re in bandit country – ostensibly under Russian control, yet that hasn’t stopped the bombardment of the town of Borodyanka. (pop. 13,000), to the extent that the regional chief reports it as “almost completely destroyed”, with no running water or electricity.

Of late, much has been written of the Russian bombardment of civilian areas, and the scale of destruction, but mostly expressed in emotive terms, with the accent on the human suffering. This is entirely understandable but it should perhaps also be noted that attacking civilian buildings – many of them of an entirely residential character, with no military role – could be seen as a major misstep by the Russians.

Again, one can draw on the broader historical perspective, this time in September 1940, during the height of the so-called Battle of Britain when RAF airfields were under heavy attack from the Luftwaffe, threatening the ability of fighter squadrons to fight the enemy.

Then, on 8 September, after the direct authorisation from Hitler, the Luftwaffe turned its attention to London, the start of the Blitz, with the bombing of the docklands and the East End. The diversion of resources was said to have spared RAF fighter command, allowing to repair and regroup, ready to continue the battle.

By the same measure, if the Russians are expending what are thought to be limited resources on civilian areas, these are not being used against the military. Terrible though the consequence for the victims are, the expenditure relieves the pressure on the Ukrainian military.

As to the damage caused, pace Monte Cassino in 1944, when the monastery was heavily bombed by the Allies, German troops were able to occupy the rubble which created formidable defensive positions, far more so then the intact building. To an extent, the Russians are creating the conditions for successful Ukrainian resistance.

Contrary to received opinion, what this barbarism is unlikely to do is bombard cities into submission. Beyond the short-term “shock and awe” stage, such attacks on civilian populations tend to strengthen resolve.

On this basis, I sometimes wonder whether some of the “talking heads” commenting on the war have really thought through what they are saying. A classic example recently was the BBC’s Frank Gardner who was asked to explain why the Ukrainians do not attack the “40-mile convoy”.

Gardner’s view was that Ukraine “may be running out of armed drones and its small, outnumbered air force may be wary of being shot down by Russian air defence batteries”. He also cited Ben Barry from the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), who suggested that the Ukrainians “may well be safeguarding what resources they do have in readiness to counter-attack” when the Russians get closer to Kiev.

For those of us who have followed this saga more closely, such explanations do not pass muster. The Ukrainians have been attacking the convoy, with aircraft, artillery and with special forces. They have flooded part of the road to make access more difficult and have been fighting continuous battles over the blown bridge to prevent the convoy reaching its objective.

What is more worrying, perhaps, is Zelensky’s continued demands for Nato to impose a no-fly area over Ukraine. He certainly isn’t thinking straight, as the enforcement would require direct engagement between Russian and Nato forces.

That simply isn’t going to happen and it’s in no one’s interest that it should. It would also deprive the Ukraine forces of further degrading Russian air assets, an activity which has been quite successful recently.

His insistence, however, may reflect the pressure he is under. The Ukrainian president must be very tired by now, and he is carrying a very heavy burden. But still, with measurable successes partially to compensate for the losses, his forces may yet fight the Russians to a standstill.

And very shortly, things seem set to get worse for everybody. The weather forecast has it that temperatures are to drop to -20 degrees in eastern Ukraine, with deep snowfalls. We were set for a new cold war, but I don’t think this was quite what was expected.