WASHINGTON — Ukraine’s incursion into a sliver of Russia is likely to make it harder for Moscow to mount a major renewed offensive in Ukraine’s east and is the kind of surprise operation that could eventually impose real costs on the Kremlin, according to U.S. officials.
The Ukrainian strike, and its continued success, could ultimately have strategic significance, though U.S. officials caution that they will need to see how it plays out to draw firmer conclusions.
It could also help rebuild sagging morale among Ukraine’s troops and war-weary population, the officials said. The incursion, into the Kursk region of Russia, stands in stark contrast to Ukraine’s failed counteroffensive in southern Ukraine last summer. This offensive was developed in secret, devised to divert Russian troops away from the front lines in Ukraine and seize territory to use as a bargaining chip.
Advertisement Ukraine’s monthslong buildup to the counteroffensive played out in the open. The Ukrainians had sought to retake territory but stumbled when they failed to punch through dug-in Russian defenses, which Moscow reinforced as Ukraine trained for the drive. Ukraine also split its forces during that offensive, against American advice, rather than focusing them as they have this month.
But the incursion into Russia shows how Ukraine’s army has improved its mechanized warfare skills, techniques that it failed to master a year ago. Since then, Ukraine has been looking for ways to rebound. The operation itself will not drive Russia to the bargaining table, according to U.
S. officials. Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, has pledged not to negotiate while Ukraine occupies Russia, and American officials said he should be taken at his word.
But in public speeches, the CIA director, William J. Burns, has spoken about the need to puncture the hubris of Putin. Russia will not make any concessions, he has said, until Putin’s overconfidence is challenged and Ukraine shows strength on the battlefield.
Ukraine’s move into Kursk is one example of how it is taking the initiative, exposing Russian weakness and embarrassing Putin. American officials say Ukraine will have to build on the operation with other daring operations that can push back against Russia’s sense that its victory is inevitable. Whether that will include more cross-border incursions, secret sabotage missions or other yet-to-be-planned operations remains to be seen.
Advertisement On Thursday, NATO’s top military commander, Gen. Christopher G. Cavoli, said the incursion had succeeded so far.
“Suffice it to say that it appears to be going quite well,” he said during a talk at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. “They found an area of weakness in the Russians’ position, and they exploited it quickly and have exploited it very skillfully,” said Cavoli, a four-star U.S.
Army general who is a Russia specialist. His comments were the most expansive by an American official since Ukraine launched the attack last week. Biden administration officials have deferred most questions about the operation to Ukrainian officials.
Cavoli, who speaks regularly with his Ukrainian counterparts, said the operation had offered an important boost to Ukrainian morale after months of slow, grinding advances by Russia’s army in Ukraine’s east and south. “It has had a very good galvanizing effect on the population and on the military itself,” he said. On the flip side, Cavoli said the attack blindsided the Kremlin and forced Russia to scramble to mount a military response.
“It’s had a shocking effect on the Russians,” the general said. “They’re shocked by it. That won’t persist forever.
They’ll gather themselves together and react accordingly.” President Joe Biden told reporters Tuesday that Ukraine’s offensive inside Russia — the biggest foreign incursion into the country since World War II — has put the Kremlin in a bind. He acknowledged that U.
S. officials have been in touch with their Ukrainian counterparts during the operation. “It’s creating a real dilemma for Putin, and we’ve been in direct contact — constant contact — with the Ukrainians,” Biden said.
“That’s all I’m going to say about it while it’s active.” Advertisement Ukraine’s operation has also elicited giddy praise from Kyiv’s backers in Congress. Sens.
Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.
, who met privately with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv this week, urged increased military support for Ukraine. Asked about the incursion at a news conference, Graham said: “What do I think about Kursk? Bold, brilliant and beautiful. Keep it up.
” He added: “Putin started this. Kick his ass.” Senior officials at the White House, the Pentagon and the State Department were blindsided by news reports, starting early last Wednesday, about the Ukrainian incursion.
The Ukrainians did not tell the Americans about their plans in advance, possibly, U.S. officials said, because they feared the Americans would try to persuade them to call off the high-risk mission and because of Ukraine’s obsessive concern about leaks.
The lack of warning to Ukraine’s foremost Western ally took on even greater meaning when it became clear that Ukraine was using American-supplied vehicles, arms and munitions to help carry out the bold ground operation into Russia. Unlike earlier over-and-back cross-border raids carried out by Ukrainian commandos, this operation has involved several thousand regular army forces equipped with mobile air defenses and electronic-warfare equipment to jam Russian radars — all signaling Ukraine’s intent to strike much deeper into Russia. But U.
S. intelligence agencies, as disclosures last year showed, have known about Ukraine’s ambition to attack across the border for more than a year. So even if the timing and location were a surprise, the strategic goal was not.
One intelligence report posted on an internet forum by an Air National Guard member included information about a meeting in which Zelenskyy prodded the military to consider a cross-border incursion. Zelenskyy, according to the report, wanted Ukrainian forces to “occupy unspecified Russian border cities.” Advertisement And indeed, recent policy shifts by the Biden administration made the operation possible.
Under pressure from his advisers and key allies, Biden in late May authorized Ukraine to conduct limited strikes inside Russia with American-made weapons, opening what was expected to be a new chapter in the war for Ukraine. Biden’s decision appeared to be the first time that a U.S.
president had allowed limited military responses on artillery, missile bases and command centers inside the borders of a nuclear-armed adversary. White House officials insisted, however, that the authorization extended only to what they characterized as acts of self-defense to cross-border threats, so that Ukraine could protect Kharkiv, its second-largest city, and the surrounding areas from Russian missiles, glide bombs and artillery shells from just over the border. The White House still barred Ukraine from using long-range precision American artillery to attack air bases and other targets deep inside Russia.
That U.S. policy came under immediate scrutiny after the Ukrainian incursion.
Pentagon and State Department officials have said the use of American-supplied weapons and munitions in the attack by Ukraine did not violate U.S. policy.
Ukrainian officials have told senior U.S. civilian and military leaders that the goal of the operation is create an operational dilemma for the Russians — to force Moscow to divert troops off the front lines in the Donetsk region of eastern Ukraine that have made slow but steady progress for weeks.
John F. Kirby, a White House spokesperson, said Thursday that Moscow had “redirected” some troops from Ukraine to Russia but that he did not know how many troops were involved or what role the redeployed troops would play. Advertisement U.
S. officials said Wednesday that Russia had withdrawn some infantry units from Ukraine and was sending them to Kursk to help defend against the Ukrainian offensive. They would not say how many troops Russia appeared to be moving or exactly where they were coming from.
But the officials said they had not yet seen the Kremlin divert armored battalions and other combat power that they believe Russia would need to repel the incursion. Still, Moscow has had to commit its existing reserves in Russia to the Kursk fight and will need to commit more forces if it is to drive out the Ukrainians. Those forces, American officials said, would have otherwise been used in the coming months for Russia’s slow, grinding offensives in eastern Ukraine.
It is doubtful Ukraine will have enough forces to capitalize on any Russian weakness in Donetsk. Ukraine has used a significant number of troops itself in Kursk and may not have adequate reserves. More important, U.
S. officials have counseled the Ukrainians against major offensives this year in the south or east, given the strength of Russian defenses. By attacking in Kursk, the Ukrainians have taken American advice: Rather than fight through entrenched positions, go where the enemy is not to secure the strategic ground.
How strategic the push proves to be will only be known in time. The Kursk operation also aims to seize and hold territory to increase Ukraine’s bargaining leverage, U.S.
officials say they have been told, perhaps to swap Russian territory for the land near Kharkiv that Russian forces took in the spring. U.S.
officials expressed surprise at how successful the Ukrainian operation has been so far, and how slow and disjointed the Russian response has been. One senior U.S.
official called the incursion a “Syrsky Special” — alluding to Gen. Oleksandr Syrsky, who took over as Ukraine’s top military commander in February. The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal American assessments, said it was the flashy kind of operation that Zelenskyy loves.
But U.S. officials also said that they continued to take a wait-and-see attitude.
One senior U.S. official called the operation a big gamble.
This article originally appeared in The New York Times ..
