Table of Contents
German tanks are streaking across the plains of Kursk Russia toward entrenched Russian defensive lines. No, this is not the summer of 1943 when thousands of Panzer tanks launched the largest battle in the history of warfare but August 06, 2024, when a much smaller Ukrainian force launched the first attack on Russian soil since World War II.
Just as the German invasion of Kursk in World War II stalled and ultimately failed due to fierce Soviet resistance, so will the Ukrainian action in Kursk Russia.
Ideally, most Westerners would love to see this succeed and restore the liberal democratic order. We must not be naive though to the facts on the ground in this war. This intrepid yet doomed Kursk Russian offensive will likely not be the turning point Ukraine was hoping for. The Battle of Kursk during World War II was a turning point towards Soviet victory and if anything this invasion may expedite a Russian victory.
No Relief for Fighting Forces in the East Due to Kursk Russia Invasion
The number one reason why this offensive action is a failure was that it failed to achieve its main objective. The idea was to relieve pressure on the Donbass region by forcing Russia to relocate its forces to Kursk. This was a grave miscalculation by the Ukrainian military/political command. Not only did Putin not relocate his military forces in the days and weeks after the invasion of Kursk, but he also increased the pace of his attacks in the Donbass region.
The relief that they were hoping for failed to materialize.
Instead, Putin sent mostly his national guard to Kursk, Russia, along with less experienced units to deal with the Ukrainian threat. Most of the elite Russian troops remained in place and continued to make gains in the Donbass over the weeks ahead. Vital logistics centers such as Pokrovsk are facing imminent collapse in the coming month. All due to the miscalculation of the Ukrainian high command. If these logistic centers fall, it could mean disaster for the whole Eastern front. Just recently, affter two years of defense, the key hilltop fortress of Vuhledar has already fallen with the Ukrainians losing a vital defensive bulwark.
Elite Troops Being Wasted
This leads to the second reason this Kursk Russia offensive was a mistake. Ukraine sent some of its best-trained troops and most advanced armor to Kursk, Russia, and for what goal? These troops could have been used to defend Vuhledar, Pokrovsk, or other places along the eastern front.
Instead, they are wasting their time babysitting Russian Babushkas in tiny inconsequential Russian towns.
We know that the 80th Brigade, forces from the 116th mechanized brigade, and the 61st mechanized brigade have participated, as well as many others. These are some of the best-equipped brigades in the Ukrainian army with the most advanced weapons. Meanwhile they are using forced conscripts to defend key areas in the Donbass. Reports suggest that many of these conscripts are turning and running at the sound of Russian artillery, refusing to engage the enemy, or will not report to their positions, as this CNN article notes.
In most militaries, the average age of troops is in their twenties to rarely their early forties. Ukrainian soldiers are well into their fifties and even up to sixty.
The experienced troops fighting in Kursk could have been used to reinforce positions in the East. We saw Ukraine suffer from similar ineptitude during its failed 2023 summer offensive. Even after pleading from the United States, rather than gathering multiple units for one strong thrust to break through Russian lines, they were spread over the entire front.
In that case they put their most experienced troops along the Donbass frontline while using their inexperienced troops for the major offensive. This caused American commanders to ask their Ukrainian colleagues why none of the forces we trained in combined arms maneuvers were actually taking part in combined arms maneuvers. Here we see them consistently making poor use of their best-trained and most experienced troops.
Ukraine Stretches the Frontline
Even if we disregard which troops went where and what units fought who, it’s generally a bad idea for the smaller, less equipped army to stretch the frontline. Ukraine is facing severe manpower shortages. Look at the pictures of the troops in Ukraine in comparison to troops in other conflicts in the world with professional militaries.
In comparison, the Ukrainian forces look old enough to be our grandparents. In most militaries, the average age of troops is in their twenties to rarely their early forties. Ukrainian soldiers are well into their fifties and even up to sixty. According to Le Monde, the average age is over forty in their military.
Is this the type of force that should be stretching their front line?
They are having trouble filling the frontline with men as it is so who had the bright idea to make that frontline even longer. It seems that they intend to hold the Russian territory indefinitely. This means they must keep a large well-trained force stationed there to fend off Russian attacks. These forces could be better served defending vital Ukrainian territory that has not yet fallen and inflicting maximum pain on advancing Russians.
In Kursk the script is flipped, as Russia has all the advantages in Kursk Russia of inflicting maximum pain on the Ukrainian invaders at their own pace.
Weapons Shortages
In addition to a shortage of manpower Ukraine also has a shortage of weapons and armor. In offensive actions, the attacker will nearly always lose more than the defenders.
Ukraine has lost some of its best weapons systems in Kursk. Russian drones have destroyed a challenger tank, STRV 122 tanks, and Leopard 2A6s. These tanks are some of the best in the world and are not easily replaceable. The Germans can barely supply their own armored brigades. They are not in a hurry to supply more Leopards in particular the 2A6s which are the cream of the crop. You might be thinking didn’t the Germans supply a lot of Leopards? You are right but those were mostly 2A4s and older not the advanced 2A6s.
Wasting precious limited armor in a futile invasion of Kursk Russia just for a morale boost is a foolhardy gamble. There is no guarantee that many more aid packages will be forthcoming and Ukrainian leaders need to look towards the future with an eye on conservation.
Armor is expensive with tanks costing millions of dollars to produce. Europe is in dire fiscal straits as it is, there’s a growing war fatigue, and an American election is coming up, the better plan would have been to use the armor to shore up their Eastern defensive lines or depending on future aid conserve it for a future counterattack.
Russian Political Picture
Lastly, they misread the political picture in Russia and thought this would hurt Putin’s image, which is built on strength and security. This circles back to our first point in that they gambled Putin would rush troops to deal with the Kursk invasion since it would be a major dent to his strongman image.
However, he cunningly knew his cement on power was vice-tight and rather than panic, decided to play the long game. He knows he can deal with the Ukraine problem in Kursk Russia when the time is right, but a small incursion into the Russian countryside capturing some settlements is not likely to rile the people to revolt.
If a major city had been the objective and was captured, like Kursk itself, that might be a different story. As long as he could blunt the attack he could eventually deal with it on his own time. Ukrainian leadership overestimated the panic that would set in and while it did provide a morale boost for Ukraine for a little while, morale boosts don’t win wars.
This is evidenced by the growing number of Ukrainians willing to trade some land for peace even after this invasion. While we cannot get inside the mind of Ukrainian leadership to say for sure, it’s possible this was ordered to boost their standing among the public. Or possibly as a showpiece to the world in the hopes it would entice countries to keep the aid flowing by showing some hope. However, neither of those reasons make it a smart strategic decision.
Other commentators have suggested that this invasion creates a moral question mark for this conflict as now Ukraine is the aggressor. I disagree with that assessment as I do not think anyone is losing sleep over the moral question of a small invasion of Russia.
My disagreements are more of a practical nature in that the Ukrainian leadership misjudged the situation. People are holding onto 2022 when Ukraine did what no one thought it could do and Russia sleepwalked into one disaster after another. This is 2024 now, and the Russian army has adapted and transformed into a much more coherent fighting force. Putin has reorganized from his early setbacks and is gaining ground everyday. Misjudgments often lead to a major turning of the tide in war and while I doubt this will have the same strategic effect of the Soviets beating back the Germans at Kursk in 1943 it will only make Ukraine achieving its end goals much more difficult.
Do you have another perspective and think this invasion was a good idea? Could it turn the tide of the war or help in future negotiations? Let us know in the comments below and if you liked this article check out Trump won’t fail on Ukraine Peace Deal
