By Web Desk
TWA
______
The unexpected offensive of Ukraine, with crossing the Russian state border and transferring hostilities to the agressor’s soil, has triggered the change in current expectations. The Ukrainian operation in the Kursk region introduced a new military trend. Russia’s failure to defend its borderland and Ukraine’s seizure of tens of kilometers of Russian territory contrasts with the heavy pressure by the Russians on the Ukrainian defense line at the expense of the disposal of their personnel and armored vehicles, reported by Int’l media.
The Ukrainians demonstratively and surprisingly easily entered the Russian territory, captured about a hundred prisoners and dozen settlements, and gained control over the strategic object of the gas supply system towards Europe in the town of Sudzha. At the same time, some experts question the tactics of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) and the legitimacy of used means.
It is believed that the Ukrainians are trying to draw the Russian forces away from the directions where they are pressuring the Ukrainians, and to inflict maximum losses on them during regrouping. A video of destroyed by AFU Russian military convoy near the town of Rylsk and Zhovtnevoye village on the night of August 9 has already been circulated by world news agencies.
More questions arise about the resources Ukrainians used to capture Russian territories. One can hear warnings against Kyiv regarding the use of Western weapons inside Russia as the governments of the EU and US do not allow using these weapons outside Ukraine.
However, such statements can hardly be considered justified. After all, official representatives of Ukraine’s key international partners reached a consensus regarding the ownership of the transferred weapons and military equipment. In their opinion, weapons provided by NATO or individual countries automatically become Ukrainian after being transferred to Ukraine. Therefore, it is Ukraine who decides how and where to use it. Instead, its former owners lose the right to dictate how to use it or impose any restrictions after the transfer.
This opinion was confirmed by the representative of the US State Department, Matthew Miller, who stated that Ukraine’s actions in the Kursk region do not violate restrictions on the use of American weapons supplied to Kyiv. In a wider perspective, Ukraine’s allies in fact expressed cautious support for the AFU’s new tactics.
Deputy Pentagon Spokesperson Sabrina Singh said that the situation in the Kursk region does not threaten to escalate the war in Ukraine. «Ukraine’s advancement in the Kursk region is consistent with US policy. We will continue to support Ukraine with the capabilities and systems it needs. We do not feel that this leads to escalation in any way. Ukraine is doing what it needs to be successful on the battlefield», Singh said.
Peter Stano, European Commission’s Lead Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, commented on the AFU’s offensive saying that Ukraine, according to the international law, «has a right to defend itself, and this right to defend itself includes also hitting the enemy on his territory». «We think Ukraine is fighting a legitimate defensive war against an illegal aggression, and in the framework of this legitimate right to defend itself, Ukraine is entitled to hit the enemy wherever it finds necessary: on its territory, but also on the territory of the enemy», Stano added.
Ukraine agrees with these statements. «We do not consider these actions as escalation. Ukraine has launched an offensive in the Kursk region to strengthen its negotiating position», Mykhailo Podolyak, Adviser to the Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, said.
The Ukrainian offensive in the Kursk region is important to evaluate Russia’s real potential by Western military experts. The ease with which the Ukrainians captured more than 100 square kilometers of the Russian land and approached to its strategic energy facilities shows that the West has exaggerated expectations of Moscow’s military power.
The Ukrainian raid evoked certain associations with the campaign of Yevgeny Prigozhin, former leader of the Wagner private military company, a year ago. It is worth reminding that he and his mercenaries nearly reached Moscow almost from the Ukrainian border in two days without any resistance. In the same way, the Ukrainian team has carried out a combat mission in Russian borderland almost unimpeded.
One can conclude that Putin has concentrated the maximum available forces precisely on the Ukrainian front. By contrast, other Russian regions are defenseless against a potential and real military threat. Therefore, it can be stated that a NATO contingent, once assigned a combat mission inside Russia, would have achieved stunning results.
A version on Kremlin’s lack of combat-ready troops is proved by information that Russian intelligence warned general Gerasimov, commander of the integrated group of Russian forces in Ukraine, about the preparation of such an offensive. He ignored it, calling it a panic. However, it seems that Gerasimov simply lacks combat-ready reserves. Due to this, the border was guarded by poorly trained conscripts who surrendered en masse, as well as by Chechen fighters from the Akhmat unit, known in Russia as tik-tok warriors due to excessive posturing and love for PR. By the way, according to Putin, the latter were not present at the border.
Another aspect that drew experts’ attention is the difference in the ways of waging military operations by Russians and Ukrainians. From the first days of the war, Russian leadership was marked by brutal actions aimed at killing civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure. The Ukrainian cities of Mariupol, Avdiyivka and Bakhmut, obliterated by aerial bombs, indicate Russians’ readiness to destroy everything around them for the sake of their goal.
As it turned out, Putin uses the same tactics on his own territory, using chaotic bombings of populated areas in the Kursk region of the Russian Federation. As a consequence, the local social networks are full of complaints from civilians who suffer from inaction and unjustified brutality of their authorities. After all, many locals believe that most of the civilian casualties were inflicted by the Russian military shelling their own towns and villages. It is exactly the tactic of Gerasimov’s forces in Ukraine.
Instead, many noted the jewelry work of Ukrainian artillerymen. As can be seen in the mentioned video, they crushed enemy columns with artillery avoiding the destruction of civilian buildings. It is not surprising that there is still no documentary evidence of the AFU’s actions, which would testify to their violation of the rules and laws of war.
By the way, the American approval of the Ukrainian operation in Kursk region is evidenced by the US announcement of a new package of military aid for Ukraine worth $125 million. On the third day of AFU’s operation, Pentagon announced that the aid to Ukraine will include air defense equipment, missile and artillery systems and ammunition, anti-tank weapons, Stinger missiles, support equipment, services, training and transport.
