Renewed Ukrainian offensive in Kursk

While most of the fighting between Ukraine and Russia has occurred on the former’s land, significant military operations have also taken place in Russian territory.
In August last year, Ukraine surprised the world by launching a military offensive targeting Russia’s Kursk Oblast, a region located across the border from the sizable city of Sumy in northeastern Ukraine. Thousands of Ukrainian troops crossed into Kursk and caught Russian forces off guard. At the peak of their control, the Ukrainian forces held about 1,000 sq. km of Russian territory.
This week marks the six-month anniversary of the operation in Kursk. It is reported that Ukraine has launched another military operation there this week and has already made minor gains. The importance of the timing of such an operation cannot be overstated. As President Donald Trump settles into the White House and begins strategizing how he might bring Russia and Ukraine to the negotiating table, officials in Kyiv will undoubtedly want to approach any talks from a position of strength.
Many Western commentators were skeptical of Ukraine’s bold move into Kursk last year. The prevailing wisdom at the time suggested the troops and armored vehicles could have been better utilized along critical front lines inside Ukraine, where Russian forces continued to occupy Ukrainian territory.
However, the foray into Kursk proved to be a brilliant maneuver for several reasons. It came at a time when many of Ukraine’s Western supporters were questioning its ability to achieve success on the battlefield. Entering Russia and seizing control of territory there demonstrated to Kyiv’s partners that when properly equipped and trained, its forces could achieve significant military gains. This was a crucial morale booster at a time when doubts about Ukrainian military capabilities were growing.
The move into Kursk also forced Russia to divert soldiers, equipment, and resources that could have been deployed elsewhere along the front lines. This alleviated pressure on some of Ukraine’s most challenging defensive positions and gave its forces some much-needed breathing room.
Ukraine’s decision to enter Kursk also served as a strategic communications effort aimed at highlighting Russia’s hypocrisy regarding minority and language rights. Historically, the area that is now Kursk Oblast was heavily populated by ethnic Ukrainians, and Ukrainian was the dominant language. Although the demographic composition has shifted over the centuries, social media footage from the battlefield showed Ukrainian soldiers casually chatting in Ukrainian with Russian inhabitants of the region.
Given that Russia often justifies its military interventions by claiming to be protecting ethnic Russians outside its borders, the Ukrainian occupation of Kursk was a powerful way to expose the flaws in Moscow’s argument.
However, the most important reason for Ukraine’s decision to launch an operation inside Russia was strategic geopolitical diplomacy. In August, it was still unclear who would win the US presidential election in November but the political trends suggested Trump had a strong chance of victory. Given his insistence on the campaign trail that he would secure a negotiated settlement to end the war, Ukrainian leaders and military planners were probably concerned that Moscow would push for a ceasefire that froze the front lines in place as new borders. 

If Ukraine can expand its control inside Russian territory, it will fundamentally reshape the dynamics of any negotiations.

Luke Coffey

By holding territory inside of Russia, Kyiv ensured that these front lines could not simply be frozen in place. This would be unacceptable to Moscow because it could not allow Ukrainian forces to remain inside its borders.
In retrospect, the move into Kursk was a stroke of strategic genius by the Ukrainian leadership. The country’s control of Russian territory during any negotiations that take place will not only be critical but also historic. Since the days of Ivan the Terrible in the 1500s, Russia has been forced to negotiate peace while part of its own land was under foreign control on only four occasions, the most recent of which was more than a century ago. Had Ukraine failed to advance on Kursk and establish control over Russian land, it would have been in a much weaker position in any future negotiations.
That is not to say everything has gone smoothly for Ukraine. A major military operation in Kursk required trade-offs, including the diversion of resources from other critical front line areas. While Moscow was, as noted, forced to redeploy troops to defend Kursk it has also made minor, but tactically significant, advances elsewhere, particularly in Donetsk.
Additionally, Russia has managed to bring North Korea into the conflict. Reports indicate that about 10,000 North Korean troops have been deployed to support Russian forces in Kursk. Although casualty rates among both the Russian and North Korean troops have been high, they have managed to retake about 40 percent of the land Ukraine initially seized.
To a figure such as President Vladimir Putin, however, even a single square meter of Russian territory under foreign control is unacceptable. He gave his forces two deadlines to take back Kursk: initially he wanted it done by Oct. 1 and then he extended it to Feb. 1. Both dates have come and gone and the Ukrainians are still in control of territory there.
The timing of this week’s renewed Ukrainian offensive in Kursk is therefore critical. By putting additional pressure on Russian forces and attempting to capture even more territory, Ukraine is ensuring that it will begin any peace negotiations in the strongest possible position.
Trump has tasked his special envoy, Keith Kellogg, with securing a peace deal within 100 days. It has been reported that the Trump administration will outline more details of its peace plan during the Munich Security Conference next week. Therefore, the renewed military operations in Kursk could not have come at a better time for Kyiv.
The coming weeks will be pivotal. If Ukraine can expand its control inside Russian territory, it will fundamentally reshape the dynamics of any negotiations. If Russia successfully repels the Ukrainian forces, Moscow will have a stronger hand in any settlement.
What is certain, however, is that Ukraine’s ability to maintain a presence inside Russian borders will remain a crucial factor in the high-stakes diplomatic process expected to unfold in the months ahead.

• Luke Coffey is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.
X: @LukeDCoffey