German media: Ukrainian troops' attack on Kursk is "creative but very risky"
2024-08-13
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
Reference News reported on August 12On August 10, the German weekly Der Spiegel published an exclusive interview with Gustav Gressel, an expert on Eastern Europe, security policy and military strategy at the European Council on Foreign Relations. The content of the interview is compiled as follows:
SPIEGEL: Did Ukraine win the war by attacking Kursk?
Gressel replied: Although the Ukrainian army has made great progress and occupied many places, it will be difficult to hold the occupied areas in the long run. The deeper the Ukrainian army goes into Russian territory, the more troops and weapon systems it will have to deploy.
Ukraine did not launch this offensive because it was stronger. The Ukrainian army has fewer men and less ammunition than the Russian army. The Russian army is still on the offensive in Donbass. Many of the Ukrainian brigades deployed there have been crippled and are waiting to be replaced by fresh troops, but these fresh troops are now sent to Kursk. Due to the lack of results, Ukraine has now decided to adopt a creative but risky strategy.
Q: Ukrainian President Zelensky said that Russia should feel the pressure of the war it launched against Ukraine. What kind of pressure?
A: The Ukrainian leadership wants to force Russia to negotiate, and for that they need bargaining chips, which they now hope to gain by quickly occupying Russian territory at a relatively low cost.
But I have little faith that Putin will overturn his preconditions for negotiations, which are designed to force Ukraine to capitulate, and return to the negotiating table. The offensive was certainly embarrassing for Russian propaganda, but it was tolerable. Kursk is on the periphery, where the Russian leadership cares little. They would rather suffer losses there than be forced to negotiate.
Q: Are you saying that Ukraine miscalculated?
A: If the Ukrainian army wants to hold on there for months, it will pay an unbearable military cost. The extension of the front line is first of all beneficial to Russia. It has more weapons, ammunition and troops, which can be deployed on a longer front. The advantage Ukraine gained by surprise attack may quickly turn into a disadvantage.
Q: How will the Ukrainian army’s progress in Kursk change the course of the war?
A: In the best-case scenario, the Russians are unable to hold off the Ukrainians. The Ukrainians expand their occupation zone to control a contiguous territory—including important strategic infrastructure such as the Kursk nuclear power plant. Eventually, a deal is reached where Russia and Ukraine would exchange land, such as Kursk for the occupied areas around Kharkiv, and some form of ceasefire would be reached.
In the worst case, Putin will send more troops to Kursk. The Russian army will first stop the Ukrainian offensive and then wear it down. By then, in Donbass, the Ukrainian brigades will be exhausted and can no longer hold the front. After the front there collapses, Ukraine will have to withdraw its troops from Kursk and reinforce eastern Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine will lose more territory. Russia will then rekindle its hope of winning the war.
Q: How will Western countries react to this situation?
A: Ukraine may be seen as an unreliable daredevil. Operation Kursk may mark the beginning of Ukraine's military end. (Compiled by Wang Qing)
