bovegas Commentary: Ukraine’s surprise attack on Russia is a bold move - and a huge gamble
Updated:2024-10-08 04:34 Views:104BIRMINGHAM: Since a surprise attack in Russia’s Kursk region on Aug 6bovegas, Ukraine has taken control of as much as 1,000 sq km of Russian territory. It has destroyed a lot of equipment, taken prisoners and inflicted heavy casualties on Russian forces.
This is an operation of many firsts - and a huge gamble for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
It is the first significant offensive Ukraine has launched since the much-anticipated but ultimately unsuccessful counter-offensive a year ago. It is the first time that regular Ukrainian troops have mounted a major operation inside the Russian Federation.
If one does not count the Sino-Soviet border conflict of 1969, it is also the first time foreign troops have entered Russia since the German invasion of 1941.
After a long period of gradual, if costly, advances along the 1,000km-long front line inside Ukraine, it is the first major military challenge the Kremlin has encountered since the Ukrainian summer offensive of 2022.
As such, and especially if it is not swiftly contained, it is also the first major challenge to the authority of Russian President Vladimir Putin, since the abortive insurgency by Yevgeny Prigozhin and his Wagner group in June 2023.
BARGAINING WITH RUSSIAN LAND IN FUTURE PEACE TALKSBut it is also the first operation in which it is not clear what the Ukrainian objectives are.
Mr Zelenskyy is reported to have likened his country’s successes to a growing “exchange fund” - most likely in terms of territory and prisoners of war. The latter may benefit Ukraine’s ability to recruit and retain soldiers. After all, not abandoning captured soldiers and bringing them home is important for the government’s legitimacy.
However, territory - especially Russian territory - is critical for Ukraine’s position in any future negotiations with Russia.
This will matter especially if Donald Trump wins the United States presidential election in November and puts forward a “land for peace” deal. If Ukraine has Russian land to bargain with, it can make fewer territorial concessions regarding Russian-occupied Ukrainian land.
This is a plausible calculation in the abstract, but it requires Ukraine to hold on to territory that it has seized. Russia may, at present, not be in a position to recapture all this territory, but it is a long time to the US election in November and even longer to the presidential inauguration in January 2025.
Not only will Ukraine need to be able to sustain its troops in Russia - supply them with ammunition, food and fuel and rotate them on a regular basis - it will also have to be able to resist the inevitable Russian pushback on land and in the air.
This will likely prove challenging given Russia’s continued air superiority. Worsening weather conditions over the coming months, too, will not improve Ukraine’s ability to hold large swaths of territory across the border.
From that perspective, the timing of the Ukrainian incursion appears to be a huge gamble.
Related:
Commentary: Ukraine peace summit failed to meet ‘historic’ expectations 
Commentary: New US stance on targeting Russia gives Ukraine a fighting chance in the war EMBARRASSING VLADIMIR PUTIN, MAKING MILITARY GAINSBut there are also other likely short-term benefits from Ukraine’s cross-border operation.
On the one hand are the psychological gains - the embarrassment to Mr Putin, given the Russian military has struggled to contain the Kursk incursion and over 120,000 people have been evacuated. There is also the obvious morale boost that Ukraine’s armed forces and general public have received from these military successes.
This at least offsets the psychological impact of continuing if slow advances that Russian troops keep achieving especially in the Donetsk region. Having been on the backfoot in the war since late last year is likely one of the factors that has caused Ukrainian public opinion to shift towards accepting territorial concessions as part of a possible peace agreement.
On the other hand are the military gains.
Moscow will eventually need to move more significant numbers of troops to confront Kyiv’s forces in the Kursk region. These are likely to come from the frontlines inside Ukraine, relieving some of the pressure that Ukrainian defenders are currently facing in the east and south of the country.
If Ukraine can sustain its military operation inside Russia for some time to come, Mr Putin may be forced to reconsider a wider mobilisation - something he has so far resisted because it would be deeply unpopular with key constituencies on whose support he and his regime depend.
The offensive also creates a buffer zone on the Russian side of the border, which, in turn, offers greater protection to Ukrainians and Ukrainian infrastructure. Controlling the Kursk region denies Russia the ability to strike targets in Ukraine’s Sumy oblast, which has been particularly hard hit by Russian attacks of late.
Related:
Commentary: As Putin’s hostility towards the West grows, so does Russia’s reliance on China 
Commentary: What can we expect from six more years of Vladimir Putin as Russia's president? COMPLICATIONS TO WESTERN MILITARY AID?So far, Ukraine’s Western partners have been careful to restrict the use of their weapons by Kyiv to operations that were aimed at defending the country and liberating territory illegally occupied by Russia. With some reluctance, striking Russian military bases and supply routes directly used by the Kremlin for its aggression against Ukraine was also deemed an appropriate use of Western-supplied arms and ammunitions.
Ukraine’s incursion into the Kursk region is an entirely new ballgame in this respect.
The United Kingdom has already stated that, with exception of its long-range Storm Shadow missiles, Kyiv is permitted to use all British equipment in its operation inside Russia. The United States has not raised any objections yet, and neither has Germany.
This means that three of Ukraine’s most important suppliers of military aid have lifted some of the restrictions that they had imposed on Kyiv for fear of Russian escalation. This, too, is a gamble, given that Mr Putin continues to blame the West for the war and has promised a “worthy response” to this recent incursion.
The ultimate outcome of Ukraine’s cross-border operation in Russia’s Kursk province may not be known for some time. It is difficult to imagine right now that it will be a gamechanger in the war, but it could tilt the playing field in future negotiations more in Kyiv’s favour.
Even if this were not to materialise, for all the short-term benefits that it has already brought, Ukraine’s surprise Kursk offensive is unlikely to be remembered as a complete failure.
Stefan Wolff is Professor of International Security at the University of Birmingham and Head of the Department of Political Science and International Studies.bovegas