According to some foreign newspapers, Odesa is like a World War 2 movie. Apparently, a curfew was declared due to a likely landing of Russian troops (fake news), while air-raid shelters are set to be reopened. In another assertion, the Government of Kyiv is supposedly planning to fund a local militia of volunteers to defend the territory.
Odesa’s Mayor Gennadiy Trukhanov (former artillery officer in the Red Army) has personally inspected some of these abandoned Soviet-era shelters. He said that some 85 of them can theoretically be reactivated, while the German Minister of Foreign Affairs Annalena Boerbock even offered to restore one protective bunker near to the city to help Ukraine in case of a Russian invasion.
In short, these are examples of the news that foreigners are now reading. A possible war offers a tasty menu for news outlets and is perhaps in need of some sense-checking.
Firstly, what is the use of obsolete air-raid shelters in a modern war perspective? Do they really think that the Russians are going to bomb Odesa? Who is going to seek protection in the few places available during the bombing? Perhaps members and employees of the Odesa City Council and their families?
Let’s keep a cool head and try to be objective. War in modern times is different from WW2. The enemy does not need to bomb cities unless they wish to destroy military infrastructure. For example, Milan was half destroyed by American bombs because they wanted to hit the railway station (indispensable for military logistics) and the factories of weapons located inside the city.
Odesa does not have such military targets. Moreover, today’s military technology allows for more precisely targeted bomb attacks. Air-raids shelters were needed when largely indiscriminate attacks affected large residential areas.
Some might say that the enemy could bomb cities to lower the morale of the population, as the Germans did with London and the British with Dresden. In fact, Odesa itself received a bombardment from the sea by the British fleet in 1854 during the Crimean war There were few casualties and an ammunition depot was blown up.
But for Russians, Odesa is an iconic city. It would be like bombing Venice. Therefore, such talk about air-raid shelters is bordering on ridiculous. If the government of Kyiv is going to give money to reopen some of them, why not use it to create a war itinerary for tourists.
Also, the idea of an amphibious troop landing is quite absurd. Why should they do that? A port blockade would be much easier and without bloodshed. The ports of Odesa region (seven in total) handle around 80% of Ukrainian exports, making such an action far more damaging on the Ukrainian economy. A blockade could be achieved by positioning warships at the entrance of ports to impede the transit of merchant ships.
From this point of view, the plan of training the local population to fight against the invaders is quite useless. One cannot shoot at a warship from the beach. It would require a fleet of friendly ships – the absence of which is noted. In the case of an amphibious landing, a local untrained militia would be of little military use and would likely only increase the number of casualties.
The idea of distributing weapons among citizens or creating local militias of volunteers is a worrying scenario. It risks turning Odesa into 1920s Chicago, with streets full of armed gangs. Not a very wise decision for the city candidate for Expo 2030.
If Kyiv wants to spend money for military tools, a better option might be to distribute gas masks. At least they don’t kill anyone and would not scare international news gazers.
