Home An Act of Sabotage Assessing the Damage Concluding Thoughts

In the morning hours of June 6th, 2023, an explosion rocked the Nova Kakhovka Dam in Kherson, Ukraine.

The dam, located along the Dnipro river, was a crucial regulator of water depth and its destruction unleashed a torrent of flooding on the downstream city of Kherson. Over 40,000 people were impacted by the flooding, which also resulted in 58 casualties, massive internal displacement, and lasting ecological devastation.

Although both Russia and Ukraine were quick to blame the opposing side, most experts agree that Moscow intentionally destroyed the dam to change the topography of the battlefield ahead of the expected Ukrainian counter-offensive [1].

An Act of Sabotage

A map of Kherson, Ukraine | Sourced from maps.princeton.edu

A satellite image shows the Nova Khakovka Dam in Kherson region prior to the explosion. [Maxar Technologies/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo]

In the weeks leading up to the explosion, Ukrainian forces had begun retaking land initially seized by Russian forces in February of 2022 at a much more rapid pace.

The explosion was first detected at around 3:00 am by a Norwegian seismic monitoring station, which registered the explosion at a magnitude 2 level.

Minutes after the explosion, water began rushing through the dam, flooding both Ukrainian and Russian-controlled territory to the south. However, the rising water levels also created a natural barrier to any Ukrainian force trying to cross the Dnipro below the dam, giving Russia a tactical advantage and motivation for the sabotage [2].

Assessing the Damage

The collapse of the Nova Kakhovka dam wrecked havoc on the civilians, infrastructure, and the natural environment around the Dnipro River. Describing the catastrophe, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky labeled the explosion as an “environmental bomb of mass destruction.”

The floods washed out towns, cities, and agricultural areas. Mines from nearby battlefields were washed into the floodwaters, creating a new hazard for evacuating civilians. Industrial-grade chemicals and oil from nearby power plants have also leaked into the water, causing extensive ecological damage. 150 metric tons of oil have thus far leaked into the Dnipro; even just one liter of oil can contaminate 1 million liters of water [3].

The map below demonstrates the extent to which the floodwater from the Dnipro river has reached the surrounding areas downstream of the dam.

Relative depth of floodwater from satellite imagery | Sourced from data.worldbank.org



Volunteers help to evacuate residents from a flooded area after the Nova Kakhovka dam was destroyed amid Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine, in Kherson, southern Ukraine, June 8, 2023. [Alina Smutko/REUTERS]

The evacuation of Kherson by the Ukrainian government and humanitarian organizations began almost immediately after the dam was destroyed. However, the evacuation was complicated by Russia’s continued occupation of Ukrainian territory.

Boats evacuating the citizens of Kherson on June 7th and 8th came under fire from Russian artillery, killing a number of civilians and humanitarian workers. People struggled to escape the floodwaters, as Russian forces had confiscated the vast majority of boats in November when they retreated across the left bank of the river [4].

Videos posted to social media the day of the attack demonstrate the challenging new reality faced by Ukrainian citizens south of the dam. Ukrainians took to social media to post videos of washed out roads, evacuation boats under fire, and stranded animals. You can engage with their stories, which are geolocated on the map below.



Click on points on the map to see geolocated videos of the flooding in Kherson posted to social media.

Concluding Thoughts

Larysa Musian, a hydrologist, calls in data about rising flood water in central Kherson [Ed Ram/The Guardian].

The Nova Kakhovka dam explosion took place only three months ago and the impacts of the destruction are still unfolding. However, three of the most significant consequences of the attack include:


  1. The human and enviornmental impacts for the citizens of Ukraine. 14 civilians died in the initial flooding, and another 46 have subsequently perished in the following months. President Zelensky has claimed that 50,000 hectares of forest have been flooded and nearly 20,000 animals and 10,000 birds are at risk of immediate death. Among experts, the event is considered one of the biggest industrial and ecological disasters in European history [5].

  2. Renewed focus on the crime of 'ecocide'. Ukrainian leaders have been vocal in labeling the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam as “ecocide”. Although the term is not yet recognized in international law, the dam destruction has revitalized an enduring campaign to bring more attention to this legal shortcoming and make “ecocide” a prosecutable crime in the International Criminal Court. Other examples of alleged “ecocide” include rampant deforestation by former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, which has been strongly criticized by Indigenous leaders and activists [6].

  3. A greater emphasis on deterring unconventional Russian attacks. The destruction of the dam brought greater attention to the challenges of responding to Russian tactics that fall outside the scope of “normal” warfare. Later in the month of June, US lawmakers explicitly warned Russia that any effort to sabotage the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant to create nuclear fallout damaging Ukraine would trigger the Alliance’s Article 5 mutual defense clause. This intentional attempt at deterrence was likely triggered by fears that Russia would look to replicate its strategy against the Nova Kakhovka dam against other vital pieces of infrastructure [7].