Why Ukraine's Invasion Strategy Poses a Difficult Political Problem for Moscow

We are starting to see that Ukraine's invasion of Russia is no half-hearted raid: it intends to cause some serious damage. Today, we look at why Ukraine might have chosen Kursk as the target, the dilemma the Kremlin now faces in choosing a response, and some diversions into the world of nuclear power plants.

0:00 Update on Kursk Offensive
1:49 Is Ukraine Aiming for a Nuclear Power Plant?
6:21 The Kremlin's Deployment Dilemma
13:00 What Made Kursk Special?
15:22 The Russian Military's Upcoming Challenges

The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.

[Gametheory]

4:30 Should be Fahrenheit, or 93 degrees Celsius. Obviously, 200C can boil things.

[thepax]

I personally don't think the "proganda" aspect can be fully ignored, regarding Ukraine's invasion.
Not only do their own soldiers need at least a tiny moral boost, but their dependance on western weapon makes signals of strenght necessary.
If their partners think that their support is meaningless, then they will stop giving it.

[scotsanders]

I think a key point that you're missing is that Ukraine has Western Equipment that is designed for maneuver warfare. And Russia has equipment designed for attritional warfare. By attacking in an area where Ukraine can use maneuver warfare they are actually using their equipment to the best of their capability. I also think you're undervaluing the political aspects of this. By showing that Ukraine can be aggressive it encourages countries to continue to give them more equipment. If Ukraine is just going to be in a grinding attritional war with a country 10x larger than them then they are just going to lose. They need to take advantage of the opportunities afforded to them to encourage people to continue to support them and give hope to their people.

[Emerott]

Gerasimov: Sir, we report that we are winning.
Putin: So, we are winning?
Gerasimov: No, Sir, we REPORT that we are winning.

[katerynavyshnevska]

I love that the incursion into Russia also changes the status quo with the allies: a classical example of how it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission. Feels like Pentagon had not much of a choice but to say 'yes, we are cool with this'.
And 'why now' is important too. The end of the summer offensive was looking super bleak for Ukraine. Russians would dig in come autumn, regroup and replenish the stocks, while Ukraine would be left facing winter, damaged infrastructure all over the country and low morale. Now no break for Russia either.

[malksc]

When Zelenskyy said trading land for peace was on the table, this is _exactly_ what I hoped he meant by it. Trading _Russian_ land back to stop the war is almost certainly acceptable to the population of Ukraine.

[richardwatts]

On the surface I would say it is trying to achieve 3 things:

1. Improve Ukraine's negotiating position: they will have potentially Russian territory to give up in exchange for their own land. Essentially trading lines on Russia's map for lines on Ukraine's map.
2. Propaganda and morale: Taking the fight to Russia and changing the perception on the war whilst at the same time bringing it back to relevance in the Western Media.
3. Increase the cost and damage to Russia for continuing to pursue the war. The Ukraine is bearing the majority of the cost of the war on their own soil, but this lets them bring the cost of this war home personally to the people on the other side of the border.

[pseudonym]

Create dilemma not problems. A problem has a solution. A dilemma only two equally bad options - Ryan Macbeth

[elysiumfields]

I had to laugh when I heard it reported on another channel that when russians in occupied Kursk asked Ukrainian soldiers what will happen, what should they expect or do, the answer he got was, "Learn Ukrainian, and prepare for the upcoming referendums." Makes me smile and my heart swim with joy.

[JustAnotherAccount]

Not a military expert by ANY stretch, but in my unprofessional opinion, they're doing one of three things:
- Making the war more real for the everyday Russian in the hopes of stirring up resentment towards the Kremlin
- Setting up a flank to get behind enemy lines and avoid all the minefields
- Diversionary tactic/probing tactic to see how the Russians respond and hoping another gap opens up

[lukass.]

I think you missed a lot this time, it's a catastrophy for Russia.

they cut a key supply line to Belgorod/Karkhiv offensive.

Russia not only have to pull forces together for a counter offensive, they now will have to keep more border control in Bryansk, Kursk and Belgorod until the war is over and a rapid response force (better equipped + with ammunition depots) nearby. easily 30 000 additional troops without the guys captured, wounded or KIA in the ongoing offense. the forces for the push-back need to be better trainned/equipped forces as well. you can't just throw conscripts with rusty AK47's in an offense in this terrain. Ukraine can pull back the good troops and leave conscripts for defence.

the additional cost in lost economic output from keeping Kursk under siege (no power, threatend logistics). Kursk is a center of heavy industry, chemical industry, oil and gas industry and has the biggest reserve of iron ore worldwide. it may be somewhat relevant for Russias ability to keep its heavy army, the petrochemie, nationwide mining operations and their all-important railway system as a whole going. it's also on Russia best soil, northern Russia is to cold and east Russia soil is meh. so quite important for agriculture, which is an extremely important economy for Russia.


the terrain has a lot of 100-150m hills and only the 3 streets through the valleys that Ukraine uses. once lost, it's really hard to regain. mines, ambushes against logistics, light infantry, hand mortar, machine guns and drones excell here. tanks, jets and heavy artillery have a really hard time. Stinger/FPV drones will kill the remaining helicopters. Russia will require plenty of drones for reconn, because of the hills and forrests - and will loose a lot against EW, because it's a narrow path where they will advancing. clearing the in between area from partisans with weapons depots will be a nightmare. this is Afghanistan like territory, it favors light units (=Ukraine) and is tough for heavy units (=Russia). completely unlike the heavily mined Surovikin line + the artillery dense Donbass. it's a perfect choice for insurgency and Russia is even worse in counter insurgency than the west. if you think about all the people fleeing and the little difference between Russians and Ukrainians, insurgents could "evacuate" deep into Russia. this is not like Afghans vs US-soldiers. Russia also can't make a hard stance against the local population like they did in Chechny etc - because the population is Russian and essential for keeping the war going. same for recruiting/arming local militias.

once deeper in the territory, it enables Ukraine to use deep strike capabilities against airbases, AWACS/radars, ammunition depots, fuel production/storage, railways far beyond the frontline, pressuring the Achhilles heels logistics, shell hunger and aircraft maintenance. medium range drones/missiles (=waaay cheaper, maybe $10k) now threatens previously save/only threatend by HIMARS areas and shift the balance between attack/reconn cost and interception cost.

[WanderingBrain]

Exchanging nuclear plants never made sense to me. The obvious reason for taking over the nuclear plant would be to simply shut it down safely and then make it inoperable. This would be a huge hit to the Russian economy, which is an important focus for Ukraine with the destruction of refineries.

[TurtleChad]

Ukraine did not invade Russia, they are doing a special military operation.

[awesomehpt]

Shoigu: the special military operation is going to plan
Putin: our Special military operation right?
Shoigu:….
Putin: right?

[NotUnymous]

Obvious reasons:
A) getting the devestation of (defensive) battle away from the homeland and tonthe aggressor
B) beeing able to employ modern, western tactics, away from trench warfare
C) hurting russian production
D) Getting the base for future negotiations
E) political pressure
F) help to "depressure" the homefront.
G) further demoralization if russian troops
H) capturing huge russian stockpiles
I) lifting moral of the own troops.
J) getting positive press and keep getting in the western minds


I seriously am astonished that so many western newsprogramms dont get it...

[islandmonusvi]

Columns of highly vulnerable Russia trucks filled with Recruits streaming toward Kursk on a handful of roads capable of handling the tonnage …meanwhile their every movement is tracked by satellites and drones…what could possibly go wrong…?

[Chuck_Hooks]

Votes are 102% in favor of Kursk joining Ukraine.

[anabelleharvey]

Ukraine cannot afford a frozen conflict. This ensures that they can keep a defensive posture and prevent Russia from recovering from their summer offensive.

[GeneralLizations]

This is a historical warfare 101 textbook case of creating dilemmas for your enemies.

[maxpower]

I am surprised he didn't talk about the possibility of taking a power plant for the sole purpose of shutting it down. A huge chunk of the Russian economy is powered by that plant.