Conflict Alerts # 660, 15 August 2024
Padmashree Anandhan In the news
On 14 August, after a week of incursion (6 August), Ukraine’s military announced its aim to create a buffer zone by constructing “dragon teeth” and barbed wire to barricade the entry of tanks and to evacuate civilians.
Deputy Prime Minister Iryna Vereshchuk said: “Our military forces plan to... open humanitarian corridors for the evacuation of civilians: both in the direction of Russia and of Ukraine.” The Ukrainian forces claim to have advanced 1000 square kilometres into Kursk oblast nearing the Sudzha town.
On 13 August, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed capturing 76 settlements and said: “Russia brought war to others, now it's coming home. Ukraine has always wanted only peace, and we will certainly ensure peace.” According to Kursk’s acting governor, Andrey Smirnov, more than 120,000 have been evacuated following intense fighting in Sudzhansky and Korneevsky districts of Kursk. Earlier, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin announced Russia’s goal would be to “drive back” the Ukrainian forces. Putin added: “…The West is fighting us with the hands of the Ukrainians.”
On 13 August, US President Joe Biden said that the incursion into Kursk had created “a real dilemma” for Putin and the White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre confirmed that no advance notice was given by Ukraine on the incursion and the US had "nothing to do with this."
On 12 August, Ukraine’s operation, Wolfgang Büchner, a German government spokesperson said: “Prepared with great secrecy and without consultation.”
Issues at large
First, the geographic and political significance of Kursk. Apart from the gas station, the Kursk Oblast is neither strategic nor holds military value. It became Ukraine’s target for two reasons. Bryansk, and Belgorod oblasts which have been subject to aerial and ground attacks which were defended well by Russia, thereby making Kursk the next probable target. Second, the presence of the Russian army’s “Sever” operational group, which has been fighting in Kharkiv in northern Ukraine since May. The Ukrainian forces efforts to pressure the “Sever” troops out of Kharkiv and Vovchansk in the north to create space for Ukraine’s brigades was a failure. Ukrainian intelligence identification of a vulnerable Kursk border helped to add pressure Sever troops fighting in the nearby Ukraine districts.
Second, Ukraine’s search for a battlefield victory. Since the November 2022 Kherson counteroffensive, Ukraine has not witnessed a breakthrough in re-capturing Russian-occupied areas. With help from Ukrainian intelligence, Kursk was identified as one of the regions with less Russian defence. According to the reports in Meduza, when Ukrainian forces breached the Kursk border, only “border cover regiments/light infantry units” were present to defend the Ukrainian forces. They were described as “non-mobilised conscripts” with no capacity or equipment to tackle armed troops. Thereby making Kursk an easy target to showcase win.
Third, Moscow’s response. Russian forces in the initial stage of incursion showed no strong defence to counter Ukrainian troops. Although, the response has been fast to redeploy troops and aerial weapons systems to defend. Historically, Russia can be perceived as a strategic player in war with the ability to turn the war scenario in due time. An example could be the battle for Bakhmut where once Russian forces were exhausted, it was able to push in the Wagner group to capture. Although it may face restrictions to deploy special paramilitary troops outside Russia, inside its territory it can use its reserve forces to counter back.
In perspective
First, the question of sustainability. Ukraine’s offensive into Kursk could be a tactical move. However, compared to the Russian resources, it is unlikely for Ukraine to hold ground for long. The larger challenge for Ukraine will be to sustain and the West allowing to use its defence systems inside Russia.
Second, Russia’s likely response; it may expand its reach with Belarus, Iran and China to strengthen its defence and can escalate the war inside Ukraine. The key question remains how sustainable would West’s weapons delivery be to sustain Ukraine.