© Sergei Malgavko/TASS

Top stories from the Russian press on Thursday, November 10th, prepared by TASS

Izvestia: Why Russia drew back its troops behind Dnieper

On Wednesday, the Russian Defense Ministry made a tough decision to move troops away from Kherson and the area of the Kherson Region to the left bank of the Dnieper and assume a defensive position along the river. Over 115,000 civilians have already been relocated from the river’s right bank. Commander of Russia’s Integrated Group of Forces in Ukraine Sergey Surovikin told Russia’s defense chief Sergey Shoigu about the difficulty supplying troops behind the Dnieper amid the Kiev regime’s continued shelling of bridges and river crossing sites.

A stronghold on the right bank that cannot be properly supported is a huge risk, military expert Vladislav Shurygin explains. "Having accumulated enough reserves, Ukraine could have staged a cauldron and a massacre there soon. It has already been using high-precision systems at its disposal to hit bridges and sites for crossing over to the Kherson Region’s territories on the right bank. Under these circumstances, we could no longer supply or support the army without sustaining heavy losses, so the commanders saw no point in fighting for our stronghold on the right bank [of the Dnieper]," he told Izvestia.

According to another military expert, Dmitry Boltenkov, Russia had no continuous front on the right bank, with its frontline spanning more than 150 kilometers in the open steppe. And even an insignificant Ukrainian success in any of the three major offensives could allow Ukrainian forces to make it to the Dnieper fast amid a shortage of Russian troops, and the Russian military group could risk being surrounded and smashed, he said.

The key task facing the Russian troops being withdrawn will now be to defend the left bank, but these forces could also be redeployed elsewhere as well, military expert Alexey Leonkov told Izvestia. "The units which were there to protect Kherson will likely require restoration and regeneration, for those guys have been doing their best to defend the positions while being undersupplied. This is why the decision was made to cede the area so as not to lose any personnel," Leonkov said.

Nezavisimaya Gazeta: Western special services bring Moscow and Tehran closer together

This week, Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev visited Iran for the first time in the past few years to hold consultations on both bilateral issues and the situation around Ukraine. His trip came amid intensifying claims that Russia has been using Iranian-made weapons in its special military operation. Moscow has rejected these claims but thinks it necessary to show off high-quality relations with Tehran, while not everyone in the Islamic Republic unambiguously supports strengthening ties with the Russian Federation.

Russian International Affairs Council expert Nikita Smagin told Nezavisimaya Gazeta that public opinion inside the Islamic Republic differed radically from the official Iranian position. "Most Iranians disapproved of the decision to launch the military operation in Ukraine, and Russia’s approval ratings plummeted, polls showed," the analyst said. "Negative sentiments intensified, and minor anti-Russian protests were held across Iran."

Meanwhile, the reaction on the part of the country’s authorities was different, Smagin added. According to him, "Top officials first made a moderate assessment of the situation, and then Iran accurately voiced its support of Russian actions and even demonstrated its intention to ramp up military and technical cooperation against this backdrop."

Smagin suspects that the Iranian elite may be divided on the issue, with government officials seeking to somehow use the Ukrainian crisis for their purposes. However, there are alternatives as to how to use this window of opportunity, and of course, there is room for discussions and various approaches, the expert concluded.

Izvestia: How midterms may affect Congress leadership

If the Republicans win the House of Representatives in the midterms, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will be replaced by Kevin McCarthy, the Republican minority leader of the lower chamber, experts told Izvestia.

In this case, the Republicans could launch impeachment charges against incumbent President Joe Biden and support his predecessor Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential race. However, it’s too early to speak about any clear Republican control of either the House or the Senate, since the official vote count has yet to be announced. And the current balance of power will be somewhat tweaked once mail-in votes have been processed, and Georgia may hold a Senate runoff in December.

In an interview with Izvestia, President of the American University in Moscow Eduard Lozansky said the Republicans would likely retake control of the House. NBC News also predicted that the GOP might win 220 seats, while the remaining 215 seats would be taken by the Democrats. In a red-wave win for the Republicans, the House will get a new speaker instead of Pelosi, and if the Republicans officially score more than half of all seats, McCarthy will be the one, Alexander Domrin, a Doctor of Law, told Izvestia. According to the expert, the appointment will take place on January 3.

However, Lozansky said, the new speaker would hardly usher in any radical changes either in the domestic or foreign policy. "The president retains the right of veto, and two-thirds of Congress are needed to nullify that, but neither of the houses will have as many seats, and even the House could have an advantage of 10-15 seats at maximum," he acknowledged.

And yet, the expert said, the impeachment procedure could be initiated against Biden for which a simple majority of votes will be needed, but things could come to a halt after that, since two-thirds of the Senate is required to disqualify the president. And McCarthy could play a role in the next presidential election. With Trump expected to announce his intention to run for the presidency in 2024 soon, a House majority would open up great opportunities for him, for now there will be a review of Biden’s policy over the past two years, Lozansky said. "The speaker has a very powerful role, and McCarthy entirely supports Trump, so he will be sailing Trump’s ship. Backing by such an important official as the House speaker will be key," he concluded.

Rossiyskaya Gazeta: Biden’s ‘green’ plans frighten Europe

A serious economic conflict, and clearly a "green" one, is brewing between the European Union and the United States. The two regions differ over the so-called Inflation Reduction Act that was signed by Joe Biden in August. Under it, some $400 billion will be earmarked for developing renewable energy projects and fighting climate change.

Though the Europeans do share the "green" ideals, the problem is, they think, that the inflation act is based on the "Buy American" principle. And only those companies who manufacture their products in the US - or in neighboring Canada and Mexico - will get tax subsidies that will be covered by the bulk of the envisaged funds. As a result, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said, European industries, already hit by a huge energy price gap with the US, may end up losing the competition entirely to the Americans.

The car industry is what worries the EU the most. Under the new law, US consumers who buy electric vehicles made in the US, Canada or Mexico will get a $7,500 tax credit. European carmakers will have either to cut their presence in the US market or transfer their production to the United States. And they will obviously opt for the latter option.

Moreover, the inflation act also envisages tax subsidies for US producers of energy equipment, hydrogen and green fuels - effectively, for the entire renewable energy industry. Norway’s Recharge reported that the EU had already sent a letter to the US asking Washington to either remove the corresponding provisions from the act or to make exceptions for European companies.

But Washington will hardly make any concessions: the act has already been passed by Congress and the Biden administration will not benefit politically from making any amendments to it now, Politico writes.

Vedomosti: Unblocking foreign shares causes no trading frenzy in Russia

The November 7 decision to partially unblock foreign securities on the SPB Exchange has not prompted investors to increase trading in stocks, several brokers told Vedomosti. In general, the volumes of trading in unblocked shares were as normal, with no major fluctuations or extra volatility reported, Finam Client Service Head Dmitry Lesnov told Vedomosti. And BCS’s Igor Pimonov said he could witness half of all investors selling their unblocked assets, while the other half decided to keep them.

The Investments Chamber broker expected more activity from its clients, Director General Alexey Sedushkin said. According to him, clients are downbeat not about the assets themselves but about infrastructure risks that have materialized repeatedly, so investors are unwilling to open any new positions in foreign securities fearing that additional sanctions may be imposed or that their assets could be blocked by senior foreign depositories.

Investors are currently shying away from foreign securities amid the sanctions and a global drop in shares, and the sentiment will likely persist in the foreseeable future, Finam’s head of equities research Natalia Malykh said. Meanwhile, the unblocking of foreign assets could spur an interest in Russian shares among investors and attract more liquidity into this asset class after foreign asset sales, she predicts.