Thanks to the fight on Russian territory, the Ukrainian troops gained an advantage that they had not had in the war so far. They don’t have to defend any of the cities in the Kursk Oblast because they are Russian, which gives them flexibility, explains Michael Bohnert, a warfare expert at the US think tank RAND Corporation.
Footage from late October shows Ukrainian M2A2 Bradley IFVs fighting in Russia’s Kursk Region | Video: Reuters
Previously, Ukraine fought with Russia only on its territory. The main effort was defense and this put the attacked country at a disadvantage. That changed in August this year, when Ukrainian forces invaded the southwestern Russian region around Kursk, taking about 1,295 square kilometers.
Experts on military conflicts agree that while fighting on one’s own territory brings advantages, defenses impede strategic progress. Therefore, the war in the Kursk region is now more beneficial for Ukraine.
“You just fight where it’s convenient, and you withdraw when it’s not convenient. And that’s a really effective way to fight,” Bohnert describes to Business Insider, noting that soldiers can do this without consequences, which is the case with the fighting in Ukraine it isn’t.
The settlements in the Kursk region are not Ukrainian, so Kiev troops can decide for themselves whether to fight or defend from the most advantageous positions where they can fortify themselves. “If they are in the minority, they simply move elsewhere,” adds the expert.
Russia is gradually recapturing some territories in the Kursk region. But it is not certain whether and how long he will be able to get them all. “For now, Russia is occupying the parts that are easy to get back. Elsewhere, it will be much more difficult. “It will be costly for them, because Ukraine can now choose when and where to defend themselves,” warns war expert William Alberque from the Stimson Center .
“It is now very easy for Ukraine to make some kind of combat retreat from territory that it could never legitimately hold,” he adds. The Ukrainians have already announced that the operations in the Kursk region have as their main goal the seizure of territory that they could exchange during negotiations.
But fighting in this area has other advantages for them. Matthew Savill, an expert on military strategy from the think tank Royal United Services Institute, commented on the situation for Business Insider in the past. The expert, who also worked as an intelligence analyst at Britain’s Ministry of Defence, said Ukraine’s motivation for holding onto the territory may be that “if they put up a strong defense, they can effectively bleed the Russians out.”
According to Alberqua, it is important for Ukraine to ask itself the question about the occupied Russian territory, where it can defend itself and which places are suitable for fighting the Russians. According to him, Ukraine could create “death zones” and “traps that would slow Russia down”. “They don’t have to defend the whole area,” he states.
While Russia occupies areas like Crimea and Donbas and says it intends to keep them, Ukraine does not have to worry about what will happen to Russian territory, which it will eventually give up as needed. According to experts, this allows her to approach the war differently. “It’s a huge operational advantage for commanders to not have to draw any lines in the sand,” says Alberque.
According to him, Ukrainian forces do not have to ”look at the terrain” in Russia, unlike their own territory. “(In Ukraine) they are not only looking at defensible positions, but also at the symbolism of inhabited places that belong to Ukraine, where Ukrainians live and which have deep roots in their history,” reflects the expert.
“Demoralization from the loss of a Ukrainian village is completely different from giving up the Russian one, which the Ukrainians don’t care about at all,” concludes Alberque.
Putin is playing a dangerous game. He likes to talk about it very much and it affects us too, Dorázin warns (full article with video here)
Spotlight Aktuálně.cz - Martin Dorazín | Video: Team Spotlight
Interview: The Changing Dynamics of Warfare in the Kursk Region
Interviewer: Sarah Thompson, Editor at Time.news
Expert: Michael Bohnert, Warfare Expert at RAND Corporation
Sarah Thompson: Welcome, Michael. It’s great to have you with us today. The recent developments in the Kursk region are quite fascinating. Can you give us an overview of how the Ukrainian troops have shifted the dynamics of this conflict?
Michael Bohnert: Absolutely, Sarah. The situation has transformed significantly since August when Ukrainian forces began operations in southwestern Russia, specifically in the Kursk region. Until then, the conflict was largely defensive for Ukraine, which inherently placed them at a disadvantage. Now, they are operating on foreign soil, which has provided them with strategic flexibility that they previously lacked.
Sarah Thompson: That’s an intriguing shift. How does fighting on enemy territory alter the strategies that both sides can employ?
Michael Bohnert: The primary advantage for Ukraine is that they no longer have to defend urban areas as they do within their own borders. In the Kursk region, the settlements are Russian, allowing Ukrainian troops the freedom to choose their battles based on convenience. They can engage when advantageous and retreat without the heavy consequences that accompany a defensive posture on their own soil. It essentially lets them fight on their terms.
Sarah Thompson: So, you’re saying that this newfound flexibility allows Ukrainian forces to dictate the pace and location of engagements?
Michael Bohnert: Exactly. They can fortify positions or withdraw to more favorable ones without the pressure of defending territories that have significant meaning to them. This method of engaging within a theater where they face less moral and political obligation can prove to be much more effective.
Sarah Thompson: Interesting. There have also been reports of Russia gradually recapturing territories in this area. How sustainable do you think this approach will be for them?
Michael Bohnert: While Russia is certainly regaining some of the territories, the broader context is crucial. They are currently reclaiming areas that are strategically easier, which allows them to report victories. However, pushing back into more contested regions will be costly for them. The Ukrainian forces can choose when to stand their ground or move, which essentially makes the cost-benefit analysis unfavorable for Russia over time.
Sarah Thompson: It sounds like Ukraine’s strategy may also involve holding onto this territory to use as leverage in future negotiations. Can you elaborate on that?
Michael Bohnert: Yes, Ukraine’s operations in Kursk may serve dual purposes. By establishing a strong defense and holding ground, they can bleed Russian resources and morale over time. In essence, the more the Russians commit to recapturing these areas, the heavier the toll may become. This dynamic could play a pivotal role should negotiations arise in the future, as the territory may become a bargaining chip.
Sarah Thompson: That’s a compelling perspective. From a military strategy viewpoint, what lessons can we draw from the current situation in Kursk as we look ahead?
Michael Bohnert: The key takeaway here is that the operational environment and the nature of engagements can significantly alter the course of a conflict. Ukraine’s flexible and adaptive strategies highlight the importance of choosing the battlefield wisely. It reflects a significant shift in how warfare is conducted, particularly in the modern age where territory and moral considerations heavily influence military tactics.
Sarah Thompson: Thank you, Michael. Your insights shed light on the complex nature of this conflict and the evolving strategies at play. We’ll keep a close watch on how this situation develops.
Michael Bohnert: Thank you, Sarah. It’s been a pleasure discussing these crucial dynamics with you.
—
Sarah Thompson signs off, with viewers encouraged to stay informed on the ongoing developments in the region.