People have been puzzling over Ukraine’s objectives in the Kursk operation. Politically, I can think of at least 7:
- catch Russia off guard and bring the war to Russians in a way they haven’t experienced before
- make Putin look stupid and hopefully generate discontent
- catch Russia off guard and bring the war to Russians in a way they haven’t experienced before
- make Putin look stupid and hopefully generate discontent
- boost morale in Ukraine
- kill morale in Russia
- seize control of the information sphere
- show the west that Russia can be attacked without it resulting in WW3 (🤞)
- reassure western supporters that Ukraine can win this war
- kill morale in Russia
- seize control of the information sphere
- show the west that Russia can be attacked without it resulting in WW3 (🤞)
- reassure western supporters that Ukraine can win this war
- put an end to the recently increased talk about when would be a good time to start negotiating by mixing up the front line
- tactically, to force Russia to move troops in a way that opens possibilities for Ukraine elsewhere
(Ok that was already 9 but one more:)
- tactically, to force Russia to move troops in a way that opens possibilities for Ukraine elsewhere
(Ok that was already 9 but one more:)
Finally, and most importantly: the Kursk operation potentially changes the whole tradeoff Russia has assumed the war is about. In the eventuality that Ukraine manages to hold this territory for a longer period of time, Russia might have to trade Ukrainian territory for its own.
It’s the question of “Kursk for Crimea/ other Ukrainian region” that must be keeping Putin awake at night right now.
Even if that never becomes an object of negotiation, it’s bad enough that Ukraine made it necessary to consider that eventuality and strategise accordingly.
Even if that never becomes an object of negotiation, it’s bad enough that Ukraine made it necessary to consider that eventuality and strategise accordingly.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
