The Russians were caught off guard at Kursk, and the Ukrainian army used new tactics to launch a major invasion.
They advanced deep into Russian territory, facing little or no resistance, or only inexperienced territorial forces. They did this with drones, but no other air power, mainly because they do not have air power (despite the iconic F-16s stationed in Romania).
Russia has declared a federal state of emergency in the Kursk region.
This was written on the morning of Friday, August 9th. The invasion began the previous week on Tuesday, August 6th. Russian forces are currently attacking Ukrainian forces, but the Russians have only just assembled enough troops and special forces to stop the Ukrainian advance.
This was also planned in advance by Ukraine and its NATO backers, with Ukrainian forces setting up positions wherever they could with the aim of holding onto the territory for as long as possible.
According to Telegram's Rybar report, the Ukrainian forces, consisting of the 82nd Independent Air Assault Brigade and the 80th Independent Air Assault Brigade, are leading the attack with support from the Ukrainian Army's 22nd Independent Mechanized Brigade and 61st Independent Mechanized Brigade.
Additionally, the 150th Motorized Rifle Brigade, 5th Airborne Brigade, 151st Territorial Defense Battalion and 24th Mountain Assault Brigade are also participating on a limited basis.
The Russian side remains quite disorganized: overall responsibility for Kursk and the northern region has shifted several times in recent months, resulting in confusion and underpreparedness.
Russia is reportedly forming new (as yet unnamed) units, including one it is calling “fire brigades” – well-trained and effective assault Spetsnaz-type forces.
Everyone knows that Ukrainian troops, despite the increased deployment of reserve forces, will be expelled from Russian territory sooner or later. But it will take time. And the phrase “sooner or later” has a special meaning in the context of the purpose of the invasion. We will return to this topic later.
There is a lot of criticism in Russia about the lack of preparation on the part of Russia. There is no doubt that the Russian military command was fully aware of Ukraine's preparations but did not take any measures to counter them, let alone prepare to counter an invasion.
Perhaps part of the reason for this is the Russian military's particular focus on achieving significant results in Donbas, which has led to a number of breakthroughs that have already been achieved or are on the verge of being achieved.
This hyper-centrism, and the realization that Ukraine needs all its forces to thwart a Russian invasion, has Russian military commanders not overly concerned about preparations at Kursk.
Chief of General Staff Valery Gerasimov is in a tough spot: he briefed the Russian Security Council on the situation at Kursk during two meetings chaired by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The reports released to the press were extremely optimistic and suggested the situation was under control. This was not the case, and still is not the case. We don't know what else Gerasimov said or how Putin responded, but there is some video footage of Putin frowning as Gerasimov spoke. It was clear that Putin did not believe a word of what Gerasimov was saying.
Tendra Spit Image: Google Maps
The Kursk attack was to be coordinated with two other attacks farther south in the Kherson region, which involved naval landings, the first on the Tendra Spit on 6 August, followed by another on the Kinburn Peninsula on the night of 8 August.
The attack made heavy use of drones, including Baba Yaga drones with six rotors and a 33-pound heavy warhead, and electronic warfare. Ukrainian forces lost four assault boats and two Baba Yaga drones; one was able to land, but the attacking force was eliminated. Both attacks were successfully repelled, and the diversionary tactics were unsuccessful.
Kinburn Peninsula
By the way, Russia has reported Ukrainian losses: Russia Today (RT), a government-run news site based on information from the Russian Defense Ministry, reported that Ukraine lost up to 945 soldiers and 102 armored vehicles, including 12 tanks and 17 armored personnel carriers.
The figure includes more than 280 soldiers and 27 armored vehicles destroyed in the past 24 hours near the border with Kursk Oblast. There is no information on Russian losses. Russia is attacking Ukrainian forces with its air power, including glide bombs with precision strike capabilities.
Operational Objectives
Why is Ukraine willing to sacrifice so many soldiers in an operation that will end “sooner or later”? Here's why:
First, Ukraine's ability to defend its territory in Donbas has been stymied as Russian forces continue their relentless offensive, chipping away at Ukrainian defenses even in the densely populated towns of concrete and steel high-rises that serve as bases for the Ukrainian military.
About 1,000 soldiers are killed or wounded every day in Ukraine, morale in some brigades is thought to be near zero, and although Ukraine is doing its best to cover it up, the losses are seeping into society.
Much of the resistance to Ukraine's new bill stems from fears that new recruits will be thrown into combat as “meat” brigades and massacred. Most of Ukraine's frontline brigades are far from full strength and in many cases are missing experienced fighters.
Second, the Ukrainian leadership is under considerable pressure from the West to negotiate with Russia, a fact acknowledged by President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Zelensky continues to push for some kind of multilateral peace conference, including inviting Russia to the next one, but Moscow has made it clear it is not interested. Russia has also pressed Zelensky, arguing that he is no longer Ukraine's elected leader and therefore not eligible to negotiate.
Zelensky also knows he will face big problems if Donald Trump wins in November, after Trump said even before taking office that he would solve Ukraine's problems if he won.
Ukraine counters that as things stand it may be forced to give up a lot of territory and points out that it has little leverage as it stands: Ukraine cannot continue the war for much longer and has little hope of NATO intervening (though it very much would like to), so Ukraine is rightly afraid of being left alone.
The Kursk Offensive can therefore be seen as a gamble for Ukraine to gain an advantage in peace negotiations with Russia.
Kursk is an extremely sensitive area for Russia: the Battle of Kursk in World War II was a turning point for the Soviet Union and ultimately led to the defeat of the German Wehrmacht.
The battle was one of the costliest in WWII and is remembered today as the largest tank battle in history. Boris Sokolov puts Russian losses during the battle at 450,000 killed, 50,000 missing (captured), and 1.2 million wounded.
If Ukraine can hold onto Russian territory for a few months, it can be used as a bargaining chip with Russia, but there is more at play than that, and this should not be overlooked.
The strategy and tactics Ukraine is demonstrating at Kursk were developed jointly with NATO as a test case for the defense of Europe in the event of a Russian attack.
Why would this be the case? NATO’s current configuration puts it at a disadvantage when it comes to territorial defense: if fighting were to break out in Poland, Romania, or the Baltic states to the north, Russia would have a huge advantage in ground forces.
One way to counter this would be exactly the sort of operation Ukraine is currently testing in the Kursk region, and it is easy to imagine similar vectors being used in a broader European conflict, perhaps aiming to take out Kaliningrad or focusing on St. Petersburg or Moscow.
A Gazprom gas station near Suzha. Image: Russian media
There are other elements to the Ukrainian activity that may also play a role, such as the Suzhagas metering station. Located on the Russian-Ukrainian border a few kilometers from the Russian town of Suzha, this station handles all the gas that flows from Russia to Europe. The station is located about five miles inside the Russian-Ukrainian border.
Ukraine now claims control over the station, and there is speculation that Ukraine may decide to blow it up, which would force Europe into reliance on LNG exports from the U.S. Like the entire Kursk operation, the gas metering station is a bargaining chip if Ukraine can keep it; if it blows it up, it becomes an economic problem for Russia and Europe.
Kursk Nuclear Power Plant
Another possible target is the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant, which is much further inland than the Gasometer station, and an attack on this plant could lead to a Chernobyl-type disaster that would have a negative impact on Ukraine's political standing in Europe.
Still, Ukrainian media outlets have speculated about the fate of the nuclear plant, reporting that Russia has decided to tighten security around the facility.
The big question is whether Ukraine will succeed in Operation Kursk, which will depend largely on how quickly Russia responds and the ability of Ukrainian forces to consolidate and hold their ground.
The operation is military in nature, but the expected outcome is political. The stakes are high, to be sure, and it upends Russia's rigid, methodical approach to territorial conquest.
But premature failure risks a major backlash and outright defeat. It is unclear how quickly Ukraine will move to force negotiations with Russia, and it is also unclear whether Russia will take the bait.
Stephen Brien is a senior correspondent for Asia Times and previously served as staff director for the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Subcommittee on the Near East and as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Policy.
This article originally appeared on his Weapons and Strategy Substack and is republished with permission.
