Views: 7
Ukraine’s Kursk Incursion: Shifting Tactics in the Face of Russian Aggression
The Ukrainian offensive into the Kursk region surprised Poland as much as it did many other Western partners. Polish authorities refrained from commenting on the military rationale of the operation, focusing instead on Ukraine’s right to self-defense and its ability to use Western long-range equipment. The occupation of a portion of Russian territory can be considered a Ukrainian success and an exposure of Russia’s weaknesses, which Ukraine and the West should capitalize on.
Ukraine’s Kursk offensive, commencing on the 6th of August, faced challenging international and domestic discourse regarding Ukraine’s war situation. It was highlighted that Ukraine was experiencing territorial losses in the Donetsk region and struggling to match the capabilities of its opponent, with concerns that a possible Trump victory in the United States presidential election could force Ukraine to accept unfavorable terms to end the war.
Through the Kursk offensive, Ukraine demonstrated its ability to conduct effective tactical operations and its independence in making decisions and executing military actions. Additionally, Ukraine showcased its capacity to make decisions on the next steps in its military campaign. At the same time, Ukraine announced, among other things, the initiation of mass production of drones utilizing artificial intelligence and unveiled the Palianytsia missile. This reflects Ukraine’s awareness that it cannot solely rely on external assistance.
“It is very good that the Ukrainians continue to surprise, that Putin does not know where the next strike will come from or in what force. The Ukrainian operation on Russian soil is an informational, political, and psychological crisis for Russia,” commented Radosław Sikorski, the Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Ukraine’s Right to Self-Defense
Ukraine was hesitant to decide on conducting a military operation on Russian territory, despite having faced Russian aggression since the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the large-scale war escalation that began on February 24, 2022. From a practical and psychological perspective, such an operation would have been advantageous for Ukraine from the start, as it would have reduced the destruction on its territory by pushing at least part of the war theater beyond its borders, while also exerting psychological pressure on the Russian population, making them more aware of the costs of war.
In the early stages of the war, however, Ukraine was not prepared for such an operation, as it had to focus on defending its territory and securing military aid from partner countries, which was a difficult and slow process. Western countries, when making decisions on supplying new types of weapons to Ukraine, feared escalation, and viewed both Ukrainian strikes on Russian soil and a possible Ukrainian operation on Russian territory with concern. According to Russian military doctrine, such an attack could potentially provoke a nuclear response.
In Poland, the Kursk operation is seen as well within Ukraine’s right to self-defense and a natural consequence of Ukraine’s right to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of Russian aggression. This right naturally includes the ability to attack military targets on Russian soil and occupy territory in line with international humanitarian law.
How Long Will Long-Range Weapons Be Restricted?
The Kursk operation once again highlighted the necessity of using long-range weaponry. Polish authorities understand Ukraine’s diplomatic efforts in this area. The ability to strike military targets deep behind enemy lines is critical to disrupting Russian logistics and attack capabilities and is a vital factor in defeating Russia.
Poland itself, while supplying military equipment to Ukraine such as tanks, self-propelled howitzers, armored personnel carriers, and fighter jets has not imposed any restrictions on how this equipment is used, even on Russian territory. The Polish government has adopted the principle that once the equipment is handed over to Ukraine, Poland does not assert any rights to control its use. As a result, in the Kursk region, Polish-supplied PT-91 Twardy tanks, Rosomak armored vehicles, and Krab self-propelled howitzers are being used.
The restrictions imposed by Western countries on long-range weaponry are perceived in Poland as keeping Ukraine “on life support,” limiting its right to self-defense, and hindering its path to victory, according to both politicians and commentators. These limitations are also viewed as evidence of the reactive nature of Western actions and the inability to impose initiative on Russia. Russia interprets Western caution as proof of the West’s vulnerability to Vladimir Putin’s threats, which, notably, he has not acted upon, such as not using nuclear weapons, and a signal it can continue its destructive attacks on Ukraine with no major consequences.
NATIONAL INTEREST