Could Ukraine’s Kursk offensive change the course of the war?
Ukraine’s attack into Kursk Oblast could be a gamechanger. A bold, audacious operation, planned with meticulous attention to detail and taking not only the Russians, but Ukraine’s Western backers, completely by surprise.
It has humiliated Putin, punctured the illusion of Russian invincibility and given Ukraine a potential hedge against an adverse change in US support following the US Presidential election in November. Zelensky now has Russian land and Russian prisoners as bargaining chips.
However, it is high risk. The grinding, attritional battle in Donetsk Oblast, in which Russian brute force, numerical and logistical superiority and willingness to accept an appalling level of casualties continues to force the Ukrainians back incrementally. To date, the Kursk incursion has not relieved the pressure Ukraine is facing in the east - indeed, most recent indications are that the intensity has increased in the Pokrovsk and Toretsk offensives. At some stage in the future, we should expect the Russians to get their act together and mount a concerted counterattack to recapture lost territory. Putin cannot accept a permanent loss of Russian sovereign territory. He has reportedly given a deadline of 1 October for the recovery of Kursk.
But for the moment, Ukraine has changed the narrative of the war. The attack into Kursk was not a raid but a proper invasion involving thousands rather than hundreds of men. The aim was not hit-and-run but to take territory and face Russia with a new operational challenge. It was well planned and executed and has continued to progress. Ukrainian forces have taken control of 450 square kilometres including 93 settlements. The border town of Sudzha is under firm Ukrainian control. Over 121,000 civilians have been evacuated from the Kursk region creating a significant refugee problem.
Where does it go from here?
Both sides are now undertaking two concurrent major campaigns that are consuming large quantities of manpower (especially for the Russians), munitions and supporting arms such as Electronic Warfare (EW), drones, logistics and air defence. While both might be able to surge their forces for short periods, it is unclear if the Ukrainians or Russians can sustain such an approach for months at a time. One side or the other will have to make a difficult choice about their priorities and significantly reduce their resourcing for one of their major campaigns.
To be a game-changer the Ukrainians will need to transform tactical victory in Kursk into an operational victory, perhaps by forcing the surrender of significant numbers of Russians cut off by Ukrainian destruction of bridges over the River Seim. Even then the Ukrainians would have to secure their gains against major Russian counterattacks for weeks, even months. However, if this forces Russia to devote increasing efforts to expelling the intruders at the expense of its operations in the Donbas, we may see a corresponding shift in Russia’s strategic calculations and the prevailing narratives surrounding the war. If this is to happen, there will need to be a mindset shift in the West and a doubling down of support to allow Ukraine to reinforce its success and inflict a decisive defeat on Russia.
Is such a change from the West likely? Given past form, no.
However, in war fortune favours the bold; and the Ukrainians are showing exemplary boldness.
