Alexander Prokudin, head of the Kherson Regional Military Administration (RMA), explained in an interview with RBC-Ukraine the logic behind the public warnings about threats that regional authorities are issuing to the local population. In his words, frankness in assessing the situation is not an attempt to frighten residents, but a sign of respect for them as “partners in the fight for the region's survival.” “Our task is to warn people in advance, prepare, and together do everything possible to minimize the consequences,” Prokudin emphasized, adding that when authorities see a potential threat, their duty is not to pretend it does not exist.

The Scale of Destruction and the Limits of Protection

In his address, Prokudin cited figures characterizing the current state of affairs on the front: according to his data, around 80 settlements in Ukraine are being “wiped off the face of the earth” by Russian forces, while another roughly 200 are constantly under shelling. The head of the RMA separately warned against the illusion of absolute safety: “Even the most modern protection cannot guarantee that a Russian glide bomb will not hit the object it is supposed to shield.” Thus, the warning about a threat to the energy infrastructure, in his words, does not mean that the lights will necessarily go out in the coming days, nor does it indicate inaction by the responsible services.

“This Is Not Treason”: A Response to the “Survival” Narrative from Kherson

Prokudin directly addressed those who doubt the expediency of evacuation and urged them not to fall for provocations: “Do not listen to those who try to portray such decisions as some kind of ‘treason’ or a desire to ‘get rid of’ people from Kherson.” As an argument, he referred to families in Kozatske, Veseloye, Bilozerka, Antonivka and other settlements who have already lost loved ones. “If they had the chance to make the choice again, they would choose life,” the head of the RMA declared, summing up: “You and I are one team. We do not need panic. We need maturity, mutual help, trust and shared responsibility. We will hold on. But the most important thing is that we must hold on alive.”

Support Mechanisms for the Evacuated: Bezgin's Visit and New Accommodation Formats

Last week, Vitaly Bezgin, Minister for Communities, Territories and Internally Displaced Persons, visited Kherson Oblast. During the visit, practical support for residents leaving the risk zone was discussed. The option of resettling the evacuated in sanatoriums and other accommodation facilities in safe regions, where comfortable living conditions will be provided for the time being, is being considered. In parallel, measures to assist with employment and enrolling children in schools and kindergartens are being worked out. The possibility of additional financial support for those for whom moving and renting housing in another city would become a serious financial burden is also being discussed separately.

Context: Strikes on the Power Plant and the Winter Scenario

Prokudin's calls for evacuation are not one-off. Earlier, the head of the Kherson RMA had already warned that this coming winter the city would not be able to count on the thermal power plant (TPP) operating in normal mode. This statement came after Russian forces struck the Kherson TPP with four guided aerial bombs: the facility suffered critical damage, and all remaining heat-generating equipment at the station was destroyed. This incident became one of the key triggers for expanding the mandatory evacuation zone, as reported by Korrespondent, Glavred and ZN.ua.

Contradictory Data

Publications by different outlets note a difference in wording: RBC-Ukraine presents Prokudin's words as a “call” and a “warning,” while Korrespondent, Glavred and ZN.ua use the term “mandatory evacuation” and point to the expansion of its zone. This is less a contradiction than a reflection of two levels of administrative pressure: the public rhetoric of the head of the RMA remains persuasive and appeals to the conscious choice of residents, while regulatory acts may provide for a mandatory character of relocation for certain districts. The exact list of settlements falling under the mandatory regime is not detailed in the provided materials, which leaves room for clarification by the regional administration.