The Ukrainian invasion of Russia’s Kursk province is a remarkable event. It must be the first time a nuclear-armed power has ever had its territory violated by an enemy.
China had border clashes with the Soviet Union back in 1969 and with India more recently, but in neither case was either party really trying to seize territory, nor were they at war.
Since the start of its invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Moscow has sometimes muttered about nuclear weapons, without giving any sign of turning vague threats into concrete preparations.
But the longer the Kursk incursion continues, the more the risks of the question being revisited will grow.
The invasion may well be smart politically for the Ukrainian government. It boosts domestic morale and impresses the bellicose faction in Washington and elsewhere on whom the Ukrainian war effort depends.
It also surely embarrasses Vladimir Putin, much as the mercenary chef’s mutiny did a year ago. The government in Moscow is not going to collapse through shame for sure, as opposed to an oligarchic mutiny.
One cannot argue that Ukraine has no “right” to transgress the border under the circumstances. Neither Nato nor Russia set any great store by legalities anyway.
But it does not seem too sensible a move militarily. Whether rampaging into Russia achieves its aim of subtracting some of Putin’s army from the Donbass, it is certain that it is already diverting Ukrainian troops and munitions into a peripheral struggle.
When the war ends, it is control over the Donbass, where Russia’s army continues to advance steadily, if slowly, which will be the subject of negotiation, not possession of Kursk, which Ukraine does not claim and Russia could retrieve at its convenience.
Seizing a slice of a Russian territory which will certainly be surrendered eventually, however eye-catching, seems a poor substitute for a successful offensive securing regions that are actually disputed. That seems to be beyond Ukraine’s resources, which are more than stretched on the defensive in the Donbass already.
So all the Kursk operation achieves is to highlight once more the risks inherent in this war continuing and the imperative of a ceasefire followed by a negotiated settlement.
There are reports that a partial ceasefire was under consideration before the Kursk adventure. If true — and Russia denies the accounts — that would leave Volodymyr Zelensky, like Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel, resorting to provocation any time peace seems within reach.
It is impossible to believe that would be the Ukrainian president’s decision alone, given his dependent status. It is more likely the wire-pullers in Washington and London who are flirting with Armageddon. Our problem.
Source: Morning Star