-
Ukraine took huge risks last year by attacking Russia and seizing territory.
-
It has both positive and negative impacts on both countries.
-
But it could be rewarded if it still holds enough territory when Trump pushes for talks.
Ukraine’s risky gamble to seize Russian territory may ultimately pay off, if not for reasons other than timing.
In a desperate move, Ukrainian troops advanced into Russia’s Kursk region in August. They chose to use precious manpower and weapons to boldly divert Russian resources, establish a buffer zone, seize the opportunity, and seize land and prisoners that could be exchanged in future negotiations. The move into Kursk is a shocking development in the war in Ukraine, where the front lines have been at a standstill for months.
But the surprise invasion had mixed results. While war experts said the decision was justified given the morale and momentum gains and the disruption to Russia’s war plans, the move did not significantly ease pressure on Ukraine’s front lines, where Ukrainians had struggled to maintain the situation. Lots to catch.
Despite the setbacks, the timing of this may make it worth it. Currently, Ukraine is trying to negotiate an end to the war and take control of Russian territory.
Colonel Hamish Debreton-Gordon, a defense expert and former commander of Britain’s Joint Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Forces, said whoever holds territory in Kursk “will have a seat at the table in any ceasefire negotiations”. Insider.
new topics for negotiation
Tim Willacy-Willsey, a conflict resolution expert at King’s College London and a former British diplomat, said this month that the Kursk operation was “pretty well thought out” for Ukraine because it was “trying to seize something that could lead to bargaining territory”.
Now, Trump’s re-election has sparked new talk of a negotiated solution to the war.
Trump has repeatedly stated that he will end the war through negotiations. This week, he said he would put more economic pressure on Russia to push for a deal.
Ukrainian President Zelensky also expressed his increasing willingness to participate in negotiations.
Zelensky said in November that parts of Ukraine still under his control could be brought “under the NATO umbrella” as part of an agreement to still treat Ukraine’s borders as internationally recognized borders. He said Ukraine could then “diplomatically” negotiate the return of territory still under Russian control.
Debreton-Gordon said Zelensky’s comments reinforced that “Kursk is absolutely key”.
The “Victory Plan” unveiled by Zelensky in October also called on Ukraine to continue its work in Kursk, hinting at its value. Debreton-Gordon said this suggested Zelensky may view Kursk as a “key bargaining chip”.
Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told BI that given that Trump is “almost certainly” going to push for negotiations, “it’s good to have that bargaining chip.” Additionally, he said the negotiations are likely to be slower than Doing so earlier under Kamala Harris’s presidency makes it more likely that Ukraine will retain much of Kursk’s territory.
“This could have very good results” for Ukraine, he said.
Kursk is of great significance to Russians as it was a key battle and turning point in World War II. Control of Kursk gives Ukraine, often at a disadvantage, something it can leverage in negotiations.
Russia may want to fight for Kursk
However, there is no guarantee it will enter negotiations. A spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin said last month that Russia believed “there is no reason for negotiations yet”. Putin has said he does not want to slow down or take his foot off the gas pedal.
George Barros, a conflict expert at the Institute for War Studies, told BI that Kursk “certainly could” play a role in the negotiations, but he doubted that Russian President Vladimir Putin would rather fight for Kursk than Willing to negotiate.
He said it would be “a huge shame for Putin” to negotiate for his own territory.
Russia has not pushed hard on the Kursk issue. “It’s clear to me that Kursk is not the primary target,” Barros said. If that were changed, it could have a significant impact.
There are limits to what Russia can do. Focusing on Kursk could mean withdrawing more troops from Ukraine — something Ukraine hopes will reduce pressure on its military. This could open the door for Ukraine to regain more territory. It’s hard to know.
Negotiations may still have a long way to go
Even if talks occur, they likely won’t happen immediately, and Ukraine would need to hold a sizable stake to use Kursk as a bargaining chip.
Ukraine has lost most of the territory it holds, although war experts say it may be willing to give up some of it to strategically defend other areas. Some experts remain optimistic about the current situation in Ukraine. For example, Debreton-Gordon said, “Ukraine still holds a lot of money.”
Ukraine also launched a new offensive in Kursk this month. Kan Kasapoglu, a political and military expert at the Hudson Institute, recently wrote that the move “could give Kyiv diplomatic leverage.”
But in order for the gamble to pay off in time for Ukraine, Ukraine still needs to hold its ground if talks do materialize — which Trump advisers say could take months. This may be a difficult task, but the possibility of negotiations being openly discussed makes the Kursk all the more important.
Read the original article on Business Insider
