Nielsen even suggested that Ukraine may have chosen the timing of the Kerch bridge strike to coincide with the renewal of the grain deal in order to get Putin to pull out of it in a pique of anger.
I like his work but I don't buy this particular theory.
Ukraine was always going to damage or destroy the bridge ASAP, the timing is more about the ability to achieve it.
We can say the threat of Russia pulling out of the grain deal wasn't enough to stop Ukraine from damaging the bridge, and IMO it probably wasn't even a consideration..
Hungry people need food, so I am sure they will find another way of transporting the grain.
I'm surprised that nearby countries like Poland feel threatened by imports of Ukrainian grain, their farmers seem to want to ensure that every grain imported is exported.
Sooner or later, I expect total destruction of all parts of the bridge. It is important for military, political and symbolic reasons. It would take a lot of Ukraine to stray from that objective.
There isn't much focus on the weapons the Ukrainians themselves are developing as the old saying goes "necessity is the mother of invention". I bet the marine drone designs are constantly being improved, the bridge and the fleet a big targets the Ukraine would love to hit.
If Ukraine takes back Crimea, and forces the Russian fleet to relocate, there is no threat to grain exports.
Most people think the war will end of Putin is ousted, however the West and Ukraine have little influence on that outcome aside from ensuring a Ukrainian military victory and keeping sanction as tight as possible..
I am also sure that ending the war ASAP and blaming Putin will be the first order of business for any replacement. The chances of an future wat depend on the nature of that replacement, No matter how nice and sensible any Russian replacement appears to be, we need to maintain suitable military deterrents. However, we do need to engage on trade and culture, demonstrating the benefits of being a constructive part of the global community.
