Introduction
Three weeks ago, Ukraine launched its most ambitious and direct offensive into Russian territory since the war began, marking the first attack by a foreign state on Russia’s core territory since World War II. Far from a fleeting raid, this incursion has not only held its ground but expanded its reach, challenging earlier predictions of its short-lived nature. The Ukrainian forces have seized around 12,200 square kilometers, including 93 settlements and the strategically significant town of Suja. This territory mirrors the gains Russia made in Ukraine earlier this year, underscoring the boldness and effectiveness of Kyiv’s strategy.
The Scope of Ukrainian Control
The exact size of the territory now under Ukrainian control remains somewhat uncertain, with estimates provided by the Ukrainian command. However, it is clear that Ukrainian forces have not only secured Suja but have also extended their operations eastward to settlements such as Guo and Bori. In the northern sector, they have gained control over Martinova, Malayala, and the village of Pogreb, while simultaneously fending off Russian counterattacks.
The central axis of the operation, moving toward the town of Lov, marks the northernmost extent of the Ukrainian advance. Further west, Ukrainian forces are reportedly on the outskirts of Coreno, a town of similar size and strategic importance to Suja. Notably, Ukrainian attacks on bridges over the river west of the controlled area aim to cut off Russian forces and threaten them with encirclement. The success of these maneuvers has been significantly bolstered by the use of U.S.-supplied HIMARS and GBU-39 bombs, along with French AASM guided bombs.
The Strategic Importance of the Operation
The significance of the Ukrainian incursion into the Kursk region extends beyond the immediate military gains. This operation challenges the long-standing assumption that certain red lines, such as an attack on Russian territory, would provoke a massive and possibly nuclear response from Moscow. By successfully conducting this operation, Ukraine has demonstrated that even a nuclear power like Russia is constrained in its response to such provocations, highlighting the illusory nature of these red lines.
Russia’s reluctance to respond with a tactical nuclear strike, despite theoretically having the capability to do so, reveals the complexities of modern warfare and geopolitical strategy. Any nuclear response from Moscow would likely be counterproductive, causing limited local damage while inviting global condemnation and further isolating Russia on the world stage. Moreover, it would neutralize Russia’s nuclear deterrent by showing that such an extreme measure would not achieve its intended purpose of forcing Ukraine into submission.
The Implications for U.S. and Western Strategy
While this Ukrainian operation has the potential to shift global opinion on the viability of Russia’s red lines, decision-makers in Washington and other Western capitals are likely to remain cautious. The U.S. has permitted the use of certain offensive weapons by Ukraine, such as shorter-range HIMARS rockets, but continues to restrict the use of longer-range systems like ATACMS or Storm Shadow missiles for strikes deep into Russian territory. This cautious approach reflects a broader concern about escalating the conflict beyond manageable levels.
However, as Ukraine continues to push the boundaries of what is considered acceptable military action, there is a possibility that these restrictions could eventually be lifted. The gradual relaxation of red lines throughout the conflict suggests that Western support for Ukraine may become more robust over time, especially if Ukraine can continue to demonstrate that such operations do not provoke the catastrophic responses feared by many.
The Next Phase of Operation Kursk
Looking ahead, the next steps for Ukraine in the Kursk region will likely involve consolidating its gains and fortifying its positions. Expanding the bridgehead further, particularly in a vertical direction, will be challenging and may not yield significant strategic advantages in the broader context of the war. Ukrainian forces remain stretched thin along the front, and each additional square kilometer of captured territory requires more troops to defend it.
Meanwhile, Russia is redeploying reinforcements to the Kursk region from other less critical areas, such as Robotina, Cers, and Northern Kyiv, indicating that Moscow is not willing to cede this territory without a fight. Despite these reinforcements, the Ukrainian operation has already been successful by several metrics: it has captured territory comparable to Russia’s gains earlier this year, taken hundreds of prisoners, and boosted the morale of the Ukrainian army.
A Strategic Breakthrough or a Tactical Success?
While the Ukrainian offensive in Kursk has achieved significant tactical success, it is unlikely to be a strategic breakthrough. The broader strategic objectives and challenges for both sides remain largely unchanged. Russia continues to push forward in other critical areas, such as Pokrov and Torets, with Ukrainian forces facing significant pressure to withdraw from some positions to avoid catastrophic losses.
The situation near Pokrovsk is particularly concerning for Ukraine, with Russian forces advancing steadily toward the city. If Ukrainian defenses are breached, Pokrovsk, with a pre-war population of 60,000, could be in serious jeopardy. Despite these setbacks, the Ukrainian operation in Kursk has succeeded in creating new challenges for Russia, potentially forcing Moscow to divert resources and attention from other fronts.
The Belarusian Factor
In addition to the direct conflict between Ukrainian and Russian forces, the potential involvement of Belarus remains a wildcard. Ukrainian intelligence has reported a significant buildup of Belarusian forces along the border with northern Ukraine, including special forces and fighters from the Wagner Group. However, analysts believe that the threat of a new front opening from Belarus remains low. The Belarusian military is considered weak, and any offensive action would require widespread mobilization, which is unlikely given the internal political risks for Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko.
The War of Attrition: Strikes and Counterstrikes
As both sides remain locked in a war of attrition, they continue to strike at each other’s hinterlands. On August 26, Russia launched one of the largest aerial attacks of the war, involving over 100 missiles and drones, targeting Ukrainian cities and critical infrastructure, including the Vorot hydroelectric power plant. While the dam remains under control, the damage to Ukraine’s energy infrastructure is significant, with power cuts already announced in some regions.
In response, Ukraine has continued its campaign of drone strikes deep into Russian territory. The most notable of these was the attack on the Proletar Fuel Depot on August 18, which led to a fire that burned for ten days, setting a new record for continuous fire in the conflict. Ukrainian drones also targeted the Marinovka air base, likely damaging several Russian aircraft and military equipment.
The Arrest of Pavel Durov and its Potential Impact
Amidst these military developments, the arrest of Pavel Durov, the founder of Telegram, in Paris has caused a stir in Russia. Durov, who is also a French citizen, was arrested on charges related to the lack of moderation on Telegram, which has been used for illegal activities. This arrest has sparked panic among Russian military bloggers, who fear that if Durov cooperates with Western authorities, it could compromise the security of Russian communications, as Telegram is the primary communication tool for the Russian military.
If this leads to a mass exodus of users from Telegram to other platforms controlled by the Russian government, it could enhance Moscow’s control over military communications but also create vulnerabilities that Ukrainian and Western intelligence could exploit. For now, however, Telegram’s performance remains normal, and there is no indication that the app’s encryption has been compromised.
Conclusion
The Ukrainian offensive in the Kursk region represents a significant escalation in the war, challenging long-standing assumptions about Russia’s red lines and demonstrating Ukraine’s capacity for bold and strategic military action. While the operation has not yet achieved a strategic breakthrough, it has created new pressures on Russia and shown that the conflict’s dynamics are far from static.
As Ukraine continues to press its advantages, the global implications of this operation will become clearer. The international community, particularly in the West, will need to reassess its approach to the conflict, balancing the need to support Ukraine with the risks of further escalation. The Kursk operation is unlikely to be the last bold move by Ukraine, and as the war enters its next phase, both sides will continue to adapt and recalibrate their strategies in this increasingly complex and high-stakes conflict.
FAQ Section
Q1: What is the significance of Ukraine’s incursion into Russian territory?
A1: The Ukrainian incursion into Russian territory is significant as it marks the first attack by a foreign state on Russia’s core territory since World War II. It challenges long-standing assumptions about Russia’s red lines and demonstrates that Ukraine can conduct successful operations even on Russian soil without provoking the massive retaliation that many feared.
Q2: How much territory has Ukraine captured in the Kursk region?
A2: Ukraine has captured approximately 12,200 square kilometers in the Kursk region, including 93 settlements. This is roughly equivalent to the territory Russia has gained in Ukraine since the beginning of this year.
Q3: What is the strategic importance of the town of Suja?
A3: The town of Suja is strategically important due to its location and the fact that it serves as a key point in Ukraine’s operations in the Kursk region. Its capture allows Ukraine to extend its operations further into Russian territory and disrupt Russian logistics and reinforcements.
Q4: How has Russia responded to the Ukrainian incursion?
A4: Russia has responded with a combination of counterattacks and a large-scale missile and drone strike on Ukrainian cities and infrastructure. However, there has been no significant change in Russia’s broader strategy or an escalation to the use of nuclear weapons.
Q5: What are the potential risks of this operation for Ukraine?
A5: The risks for Ukraine include overextending its forces, as the captured territory requires more troops to defend it. Additionally, as Russia redeploys reinforcements to the Kursk region, Ukraine may face increased pressure on this front.
Q6: Could Belarus enter the war on Russia’s side?
A6: While there has been a buildup of Belarusian forces along the border with Ukraine, the threat of Belarus opening a new front remains low. The Belarusian military is considered weak, and any offensive action would require significant mobilization, which is unlikely given the internal risks for President Alexander Lukashenko.
Q7: What is the significance of Pavel Durov’s arrest?
A7: Pavel Durov’s arrest has caused concern among Russian military bloggers, as Telegram is the primary communication tool for the Russian military. If Durov cooperates with Western authorities, it could compromise the security of Russian communications, creating potential vulnerabilities for Ukraine and its allies to exploit.
