Ukraine’s Risky Offensive Into Russia

• Ukraine recently commenced a daring attack into Russia’s Kursk region

• While Russia claims to have stopped the advance, Ukraine managed to take nearly 400 square miles of Russian territory.

• Ukraine may not be able to retain the territory, though it could be used as a powerful negotiating chip

The story

Until recently, the Russo-Ukrainian War had come to a near standstill. Enemy lines were relatively frozen, with Russia occupying just under 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory, though the larger country was slowly making small gains.

But recently, Ukraine conducted a surprise attack into Russia’s Kursk region, which borders on Ukraine’s northeast. As of this writing, Ukraine claims to occupy 390 square miles of Russian territory — which includes 74 towns — and has captured hundreds of Russian soldiers.

Ukraine’s bold attack seemed to catch Russia completely by surprise as, weeks later, Russia has barely managed to regroup and has failed to stop Ukraine from continuing its slow advance. Days ago, Ukraine took a major town, and Russia was forced to build trenches in response.

Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said that the incursion is an attempt to protect Ukrainian border communities. But there is likely more to his reasoning; Ukraine’s government may hope to use conquered territory to force Russia to give up Ukraine territory it currently holds.

Based on reporting from The New York Times, one analyst argued that America may have advised Ukraine to attack Russia, but there is no confirmation that Ukraine sought permission or told allies. The attack represents a major step forward for the Ukrainian army in its fight to fend off Russia and, while an impressive accomplishment, it leaves many wondering how long the occupation can last.

The reactions

The West portrays this as an unabashed Ukraine win. Liberal foreign policy commentator Anne Applebaum said it could indicate that Putin might lose the war entirely. This view is echoed by many on the left, and even in the Western foreign policy establishment.

NATO’s top military commander, American General Christopher G. Cavoli, said that the Ukrainians’ incursion “appears to be going quite well.” He elaborated, “They found an area of weakness in the Russians’ position, and they exploited it quickly and … very skillfully.”

The White House has fully supported Ukraine’s move, arguing that the attack could be terminated if Russia were to leave Ukraine and end the war.

Russia reacted with predictable fury. Former President Dmitry Medvedev wrote that Russian forces should “destroy” Ukraine, and should take the war to places in the country which have been mostly untouched. President Vladimir Putin said there would be a “worthy” response and became angry when a regional governor began listing the towns Ukraine has taken.

The potential for backlash

In the short term, the incursion is a remarkable success for the Ukrainian resistance. Russia clearly did not expect an attack, and has had to relocate fighters from other regions to Kursk.

Ukraine is using the victory as a powerful piece of propaganda — a David-and-Goliath moment. This win came at a crucial moment, as morale in the Ukrainian army was waning amid troop and weapons shortages.

However, Kursk is not the entire battlefield. Ukraine has shown no real evidence of taking back land currently occupied by Russia within Ukraine, and Russia has been slowly but surely advancing.

In the past week, Russia has all but taken control of New York (named after the American city), a crucial Ukraine settlement. By moving forces into Kursk, Ukraine managed to distract Russia in the short term, but with such a scarcity of troops, men were diverted from potentially more important locations. Thus, any incursion into Kursk is not likely to last.

Ukraine did surprise Russia, but Russia has better resources — including a large population and significantly more money. In a war of attrition, Russia can slowly take back its territory while taking more Ukraine territory, even if it takes considerable time. Ukraine does not have that option.

Along the same vein, it is unlikely that Russia will come to the negotiating table while its territory is under Ukraine occupation. Ukrainians may deem that unfair, since they’re expected to negotiate while Russia controls their land. But Ukraine’s long-term refusal to negotiate may result in Russia seizing even more territory.

Why it matters

Ukraine’s advancement into Russia revealed that, after over two years of war, Russia hasn’t rectified significant deficiencies within its armed forces, which the initial full-scale invasion revealed. Despite its vastly smaller military, Ukraine successfully exploited weaknesses in Russia’s defense.

This moment also reveals that Ukraine could be getting desperate. Having failed to shift the war’s momentum within its own territory (occupied or free), it is now trying to do so within Russia. While Russians may be shocked at the attack, the long-term consequences for Ukraine may overshadow any short-term gains.

Time will tell if this is a brilliant tactical maneuver - or a flailing last gasp.