Ukraine’s Russian incursion has failed to turn the military tide

The operation has achieved much, but it has not yet diverted Moscow’s forces from the frontlines in Donbas

Ukraine’s daring incursion into Russia’s Kursk region is approaching its one-month anniversary. In that short span, Ukraine captured 1,300 square kilometers of Russian territory and occupied Sudzha, a critical gas export hub for Russia’s Trans-Siberian pipeline. Ukraine has also established a military administration in Kursk and has enough armoured vehicles clustered in neighboring Sumy to reinforce its troop contingent.
It is quite the achievement. Facing poorly trained conscripts and largely evacuated towns, Ukraine exposed Russia’s alarming defensive weaknesses, the shallowness of its nuclear threats, and has no plans to leave Kursk anytime soon, thereby eroding the possibility of a ceasefire that freezes the front lines – something Russia could now not agree to.
But has Kyiv’s brazen gambit been a ‘success’? From the standpoint of morale, a resounding ‘yes’. From a military vantage point, not so much.
But first: morale. After last year’s failed counter-offensive, the Kursk incursion provided Ukrainian troops with a necessary confidence boost. The feel-good effect was magnified by the shock value of the Kursk incursion. Ukrainian forces transferred to Sumy initially thought that they were on a defensive mission. Seeing Russia’s defensive lines spectacularly collapse was a gratifying moment for Ukraine’s battle-weary forces and invoked memories of Russia’s catastrophic September 2022 capitulation in Kharkiv.
The Kursk offensive also rallied Ukrainian soldiers around their polarising commander Oleksandr Syrskyi. Despite being involved in Ukraine’s biggest military successes, Syrsyki was panned as a Soviet-style commander who had little regard for the lives of his forces and was indelibly linked to the morale-shattering defeat in Bakhmut. Syrsyki’s loyalty was also questioned by some of his fiercest critics, as his 82-year-old mother lives in Russia and has liked posts on social media supporting the Russian invasion. By masterminding the Kursk offensive, Syrskyi has proven himself to be a worthy successor to the visionary General Valery Zaluzhny and vindicated Zelensky’s support for fresh ideas in the army.
The Kursk incursion has been equally emboldening for Ukraine’s most fervent Western backers. Russia’s unwillingness to convert apocalyptic rhetoric into tactical nuclear strikes, the destruction of the Kyiv dam or the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant’s detonation has shattered “escalation risk” arguments against arming Ukraine. 
The plethora of Ukrainian long-range strikes on Russian economic infrastructure, such as the drone attack that closed the Moscow oil refinery, further weaken the fear factor around attacking Russian territory. Ukraine’s ability to hold Russian territory has also bolstered speculation about a land swap deal and quietened pressure on Kyiv to make unilateral territorial concessions.
And yet…this massive morale boost has not translated into an improvement in the situation on Ukraine’s frontlines. Russia has occupied Niu-York and Mezhove, which is located near Avdiivka, and is on the cusp of seizing the Donetsk logistical hub of Pokrovsk. 
President Putin has hailed Russia’s fast advance in eastern Ukraine and for once, his boasts have factual grounding. Russia’s seizure of 93 square miles of Ukrainian territory in August is markedly larger than the 21 square miles that it averaged during the first seven months of 2024. Aside from Ukraine’s 3rd Separate Assault Brigade’s reported 2km advance against Russia’s beleaguered positions in Kharkiv, Kyiv has few military successes to celebrate.
The Russian public’s apathy towards the situation in Kursk ensures that Russia is unlikely to divert forces from Donetsk to protect the homeland. Putin’s army of propagandists have normalised Ukraine’s occupation of territory in Kursk and the vague promise of Kyiv’s eventual defeat has appeased most Russians. The current turmoil in Ukraine’s political ranks, which has seen Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba resign and Strategic Industries Minister Alexander Karnyshin be dismissed, has curiously not extended to Russia.
The exposure of Russia’s limited escalation capacity has also not expedited approvals of sophisticated arms transfers to Ukraine. While the U.S. is expected to include the Air-to-Surface Standoff (JASSM) missile in an autumn weapons supply package, technical issues could force Ukraine to wait months to obtain them. Germany has not greenlit the export of the much-coveted Taurus cruise missile to Ukraine and the U.S. has waffled on approving the use of British Storm Shadow missiles against Russian targets. While the impending arrival of new HIMARS and additional ammunition is a welcome boost to Ukraine, game-changing technology is not coming with it.
So yes – Ukraine’s Kursk incursion has restored the feel-good factor after an arduous year of military setbacks and disappointments. But tangible military successes are still yet to transpire, if they ever will. 
Dr Samuel Ramani is an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute