A year ago, Ukrainian troops invaded Russia – was the Kursk offensive worth it?

10 comments

1. [removed]

2. it was a gamble to get the west to double down, but it didn’t work, unfortunately

3. One other factor to consider: by taking the war to Russia itself, more Russians might have been made aware of what was going on and the senseless waste and horror of it all.

4. Hard to say decisively. 

   It definitely changed the geopolitics in Ukraine, Russia & the west. It also held down a lot of Russian troops and forced Russian losses in the counteroffensive. 

   But also… it exposed a lot of the west’s “reluctance to win” issues… and Ukraine failed (and wasn’t allowed) to turn Kursk into a military crisis. 

   Trump then turned off Intel support and the front collapsed. He basically gave Kursk to Russia as a good faith gesture.

   So… mixed bag. It did prove that Ukraine can be dangerous. That may yet matter. 

5. Almost certainly wasn’t but there’s little other good choices available to Ukraine. It was a desperate ploy to try get a more favourable settlement in any future territory exchange.

   What do people expect. It’s always been 3/1 advantage in terms of manpower and resources

6. Ukraine had been taking punches for a while and it has been a very long war. It might had been good to show that you can still strike back. It raises morale at home and forces Russia to put resources to defence. Counter attacks are integral part of effective defence.

   It didn’t come without costs obviously.

7. They were quite successful in forcing the redistribution of Russian soldiers and boosting morale for their own.

   They also exposed one of Putin’s red lines as a paper tiger.

8. Hitting Russia anywhere behind the front lines is worth it for Ukraine. It forced Russia to move assets to reinforce Kursk, reducing pressure all along the line. And the collateral damage was on Russian territory instead of Ukraine’s for a change. “Hit them where they aren’t” is always great strategy when making an incursion. It was a huge boost to Ukrainian morale, and as a show of force it garnered more military support from allies. And it undermined Putin’s propaganda machine that Russia is impregnable.

9. Not worth it. Many of these units were top tier and had heavy losses.

10. Great, difficult, question.

    It ultimately was an impossible decision, but in war you need to take risks and it raised morale, waning international interest, brought home to some of Russia it wasn’t an SMO. Likely got some special forces deep behind lines.

    It spent a lot of good units, and that’s difficult to swallow. But there again, just basic numbers were so badly against them, something novel probably had to be done.

    I don’t believe anyone can say for sure whether this was the right or wrong move. But it was a move.

    Being passively abused is not a strategy. There might have been better strategies, but here I am in my arm chair.

Comments are closed.