In early August 2024, Kyiv launched a dramatic incursion into Russia’s Kursk region, a move that has been widely interpreted as a bold attempt to reframe the ongoing narrative of the Ukraine conflict. While this surprise offensive marks a significant moment in the war, it is unlikely to be the decisive factor that Ukraine hopes for. Instead, it may serve more as a temporary shift in the dynamics of a war that, after 900 days, continues to drag on with no clear resolution in sight.
The surprise attack in the Kursk region has resulted in the most significant loss of western Russian territory since the Second World War. Ukrainian forces claimed to have captured over 100 small-sized settlements, taken approximately 600 Russian military personnel prisoner, and seized over 1,000 square kilometers of territory. This offensive has forced tens of thousands of Russians from their homes, creating a ripple effect that has added to the challenges facing Moscow.
Strategically, Kyiv targeted this border area, which is about 200 kilometers northwest of the closest front line in Kharkiv and 350 kilometers from the main front, precisely because it was weakly defended. By doing so, Ukraine has managed to exploit a vulnerability in Russia’s defense, achieving a significant tactical victory. However, when put into perspective, the territorial gains made by Ukraine, while symbolically powerful, are modest compared to the vast swathes of Ukrainian territory still under Russian control.
The amount of land seized by Ukraine in this offensive is roughly equivalent to the territory Russia has occupied in Ukraine so far this year. Yet, it pales in comparison to the 100,000 square kilometers – about 20 percent of Ukraine’s total homeland – that Russia has claimed in recent years. This stark difference underscores the uphill battle that Kyiv faces in trying to reclaim its lost territories.
Ukraine’s daring move into the Kursk region adds to the mounting pressures on Moscow, which has already endured a troubled two-and-a-half-year campaign. Unverified estimates from the General Staff of the Ukrainian Armed Forces suggest that Russia has lost about 600,000 troops since the invasion began. Additionally, Ukraine asserts that Russia has also lost an astounding number of military assets, including 8,500 tanks, 16,500 armored fighting vehicles, 17,000 artillery systems, and 1,150 multiple-launch rocket systems. The losses extend to Russia’s air power, with claims of 360 aircraft, 330 helicopters, and almost 30 warships and boats being destroyed, as well as one submarine.
These staggering figures illustrate the extent to which the war has deviated from Moscow’s original expectations of a quick victory. Despite the high cost of the conflict, Russian forces remain on the offensive in Ukraine, and many military experts remain skeptical that Kyiv’s latest bold move will fundamentally change the course of the war.
While the Kursk offensive has undoubtedly changed the narrative of the war in the short term, it is unlikely to be a game-changer in the long run. Russia is estimated to have hundreds of thousands of troops on the front line, and diverting a few thousand to respond to Ukraine’s incursion in Kursk may not have a significant impact on the overall war effort. This raises questions about whether Ukraine will be able to hold onto the newly seized Russian territory in the long term, especially if it intends to use it as a bargaining chip in any future peace negotiations.
In this context, the most likely scenario remains a prolonged war of attrition, with no clear end in sight. The ongoing conflict is expected to continue at least until the November 2024 US presidential election, which could prove to be a pivotal moment for the future of the war.
The outcome of the 2024 US presidential election could have profound implications for the Ukraine conflict. If Kamala Harris were to win the presidency, it is likely that she would continue the Biden administration’s policy of avoiding escalation while providing military assistance to Ukraine in carefully measured amounts. This approach, aimed at preventing direct confrontation with Russia, would likely result in a more protracted conflict, with neither side achieving a decisive victory.
On the other hand, a Republican victory, particularly under a second Trump administration, could dramatically alter US policy toward Ukraine. Trump has made it clear that he intends to end the war quickly, although his pledge to do so in “24 hours” is widely regarded as unrealistic. His selection of Senator JD Vance as a running mate, a politician who has expressed indifference toward Ukraine’s fate, has only heightened concerns that a Trump administration might cut off support for Kyiv altogether.
The uncertainty surrounding what a Trump presidency would mean for Ukraine has prompted Kyiv and its allies to engage in extensive planning for various scenarios in 2025 and beyond. Even if Harris were to win, there is no guarantee that Ukraine would achieve all of its strategic objectives. If Republicans were to control one or more chambers of Congress, they could significantly hinder Harris’s ability to fully implement her policies.
Given the uncertainties surrounding the US presidential election and the ongoing conflict, some Western experts are considering the possibility of a Korea-style scenario. In this situation, Russia could retain control over approximately one-fifth of pre-war Ukraine, while the remainder of the country would move closer to the West in the years to come.
However, even this outcome might be unrealistic under a Trump presidency, particularly if he were to pursue a policy that favors a rapid disengagement from the conflict. Washington’s European allies are especially concerned about avoiding any result that could be perceived as a significant Russian victory, as this could embolden Moscow and its allies on the global stage.
To mitigate the risks associated with a potential Trump presidency, US allies, particularly in Europe, are working to provide Ukraine with more predictability in terms of financial and military support. For instance, the European Union has already moved forward with delivering around half of the previously promised €50 billion in aid to Ukraine over the next four years. This move is intended to help Kyiv manage its strained budget and maintain its war effort even in the face of potential US policy changes.
Ukraine’s offensive in the Kursk region represents a bold attempt to shift the narrative of the war, but it is unlikely to change the overall trajectory of the conflict. The most significant factor that could influence the war’s outcome is the result of the US presidential election in November 2024. With stark differences between the potential policies of a Harris or Trump administration, the future of the Ukraine conflict remains uncertain. As Kyiv and its allies prepare for all possible scenarios, the world watches closely, knowing that the decisions made in the coming months could have lasting implications for global stability.
