Ukraine's August Surprise - Earlier this week, it was reported that around a thousand Ukrainian soldiers crossed the border into Russia's Kursk region, seizing over 20 square kilometers of territory. Russian President Vladimir Putin called the move a "major provocation," while the Ukrainian government has largely declined to comment. The scale and depth of the invasion adds a significant new dimension to the ongoing conflict. Atlantic Council experts, Daniel Fried, former US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe, John E. Herbst, former US Ambassador to Ukraine, Konstantin Eggert, Deutsche Welle Russian Affairs Analyst and Shelby Magid, Deputy Director of the Eurasia Center , share their thoughts on thinking in Kyiv and what might come next.
The element of surprise
"In a war where battlefield transparency is supposed to be universal, the Ukrainians pulled off a surprise, demonstrating Russian intelligence failure and border weakness," Daniel commented. "Thus, the attack upends the Kremlin's narrative of inevitable Russian victory," which "Kremlin propaganda is using in Europe and the United States to push its case that Ukrainian resistance is futile and support for Ukraine is futile."
"Even if Ukrainian forces are pushed out of Kursk soon, this is a clear trump card for Ukraine," commented John. In recent weeks, Russia has advanced into eastern Ukraine, but this incursion may now "force the Kremlin to ease its current pressure on Ukrainian positions in the Donbass or north of Kharkiv". If Ukrainian forces establish defensible positions on Russian territory, then "Moscow will have to consider further adjustments to its forces in Ukraine" and "the cease fire" would be "less attractive to the Putin clique".
Shaken Russia and elevated Ukraine
As with Wagner group mercenary leader Yevgeny Prigozhin's short-lived rebellion in June 2023, Ukraine's invasion of Kursk exposed "the vacuum and ineffectiveness of Russia's modern system of governance, based on corruption and fear,", Konstantin argued. . "Even reports in Russian state media (which are generally optimistic) had to mention the evacuation of the population and hint at the intensity of the fighting," while "pro-Kremlin Telegram channels paint a picture of a major blow that caught the Russian military and civilian authorities by surprise." ;.
Dan notes that another risky and successful foray, crossing the "Delaware" by George Washington in December 1776, boosted troop morale and political support at a critical time in the American Revolutionary War. Like Washington's assault, Ukraine's invasion of Kursk revealed "cunning, audacity and tenacity against a superior enemy" and may have "strategic importance".
Ukrainians are closely following reports of the attack. "As a further sign of success and a boost to the morale of the exhausted Ukrainian troops and society, a video of dozens of Russian soldiers surrendering to Ukrainian forces is being circulated," Shelby said.
For the Ukrainians, this is an opportunity to "show the ruling class in Russia how vulnerable the country is," explains Konstantin, noting that the situation is even more urgent than the fact that the Kursk NPP is within range of Ukrainian forces. The invasion also "shows Kiev's determination to incorporate the political-psychological factor of war into purely military operations.
What's next
Although some Ukrainians characterized the attack as an attempt to "seize and hold Russian territory as a bargaining chip in possible negotiations, this seems pretentious," according to Dan. "Raids are one thing, a full-scale offensive is another." Shelby agrees, noting that "entering and taking land is different from holding it.
"Very likely" part of Ukraine's goal is to demonstrate its capability to its partners, John notes. Kiev has faced a months-long delay in receiving additional US aid and continues to be constrained by the reluctance of the US and Germany to provide more advanced weapons in large quantities and allow them to be used against strategic targets deeper inside Russia, he explained. The Kursk invasion, John argues, "should be a reminder to more timid Western leaders that Ukraine can win this war if we let them and let them win.
Can we take Ukraine's invasion of Russia as a moment of "crossing the Delaware" from Washington, writes Dan Fried.
Ukrainian forces on the defensive in eastern Ukraine launched a daring raid in Russia's Kursk region, capturing enemy soldiers and destroying equipment, surprising and humiliating the Kremlin. What strategic significance could this have?
Some raids have no effect on the course of a war. In the summer of 1864, with Union forces besieging Richmond and Petersburg, Confederate General Jubal Early mounted a large and spectacular invasion north into Maryland and then southeast into the District of Columbia. Early's troops halted just a few miles from the US Capitol. It's spectacular but inconsequential, however: the raid distracted the Union command for a few days, but it didn't change the outcome of the war.
Other raids have a strategic impact. In 1776, George Washington's forces were repulsed from New York and driven from New Jersey. Morale is low and political support for the American struggle for independence is waning. In a risky maneuver in December, Washington led a major raid across the Delaware River, surprised the enemy forces, and returned to Pennsylvania with prisoners and supplies. The attack revived morale and support for the war, demonstrated the tactical cunning, daring, and tenacity of the Continental Army against a superior enemy, and foreshadowed eventual victory.
Although it is too early to say for sure, the Kursk attack looks more like Washington crossing the Delaware than Early's attack on Washington; namely, it has strategic importance. In a war where battlefield transparency is supposed to be universal, the Ukrainians pulled off a surprise, demonstrating Russia's intelligence failure and weakness along its border. The attack thus upends the Kremlin's narrative of inevitable Russian victory, a narrative that Kremlin propaganda has been deploying in Europe and the United States to push its case that Ukrainian resistance is futile and support for Ukraine futile. The attack and the public alarm it caused in Russia could force the Kremlin to shift its forces from its current offensive in the Donbass region to defend its own territory. Surely the attack boosts the morale of the Ukrainians.
Politically, the attack undermines Russia's current demand, as a precondition for negotiations, that Ukraine withdraw from all of the four Ukrainian provinces that Russia partially occupies and claims, but does not fully control. The Russians effectively demanded Ukrainian capitulation as a condition for peace negotiations to begin. Even before the attack, demanding that Ukraine withdraw from its territory, which Russia tried but failed to conquer, seemed arrogant and excessive. This claim is now revealed as helpless in the face of Ukraine's ability not only to limit Russian attacks to marginal gains, but also to launch successful surprise attacks of its own, defending its own land while conquering Russia's.
It is too early to make definitive judgments about the still-ongoing attack, although some military analysts suggest that the attack is aimed at capturing and holding Russian territory as a bargaining chip in possible negotiations, that seems excessive: the attacks are one thing, a full-scale offensive is another. After all, Washington crossed the Delaware to attack the exposed Hessian mercenaries. He then retreated back across the Delaware to avoid a full-scale British attack. But in the end, Washington, with a lot of help from France, won the war.
The current attack on Ukraine does not mean that Ukraine will win its war, but it does suggest that Ukraine can win if it gets the right and timely help from its friends.