Ukrainian media report attempted military manoeuvres near the Russian-Ukrainian border at the Kursk region, while military experts question the expediency of the operation.
Russia’s Defence Ministry reported that Ukrainian troops attacked the positions of units covering the “State Border of the Russian Federation” on Tuesday. The Ukrainians reportedly deployed up to three hundred soldiers from the 22nd Mechanised Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) after fire preparation, supported by 11 tanks and over 20 armoured fighting vehicles.
The operation took place in the areas of the settlements of Nikolayevo-Daryino and Oleshnya, the Kursk region, adjacent to the Russian-Ukrainian border. Troops covering the state border together with units of the border troops of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) repelled the attack, according to the statement.
Operational-tactical and attack aviation struck the clusters of AFU soldiers and equipment in the Sumy region. As a result of the shelling, sixteen units of AFU armoured vehicles were destroyed, according to the Defence Ministry.
In contrast to the efforts of the Ukrainian forces, the Russian grouping of troops in the Kharkiv region proved its combat capability and carried out tasks to pull back AFU units from Donbas (Luhansk and Donetsk regions). As a result, the Russian advance in the fiercely contested region accelerated.
Why AFU chose Kursk
The situation in the area of military operations on the border with Sumy and Kursk regions remains difficult. The Ukrainians are carrying out most of their strikes using drones of various types, but military equipment is actively moving into the border area.
The Kursk region is as much a frontline region of Russia as Belgorod. However, unlike the borders of the Belgorod region, the activity of military operations in the Kursk region is lower. Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (HUR) has allegedly staked on the weak border security in the area.
Critics argue that, apart from the expected media effect for further dissemination on social networks, the AFU is trying to demonstrate any offensive action. They blame the leadership for waging a sabotage war amid ineffective head-on confrontations. Ukrainian troops allegedly planned to infiltrate Russian territories, film footage, and spread it online.
The AFU used limited Stryker armoured personnel carriers to attack the Kursk region. Earlier, the Ukrainian Army received about 250 vehicles of this type, with a significant part of them already lost during battles in the Zaporizhzhia region, near Vovchansk, behind Chasiv Yar, and in other areas, according to Ukrainian media.
Russian media shared the following footage of Stryker APCs:
The Russian Defence Ministry also shared a video of FPV drone operators. After receiving target instructions, they hit the Hummer military vehicle together with its personnel.
Media effect
Such short-term sabotage operations are the most effective way to make a lot of fuss, get the necessary media effect, and come back with most of the units intact. Experts call another reason for the attack as an attempt by the AFU to pull back Russian troops from another section of the front, citing Chasiv Yar as an example.
However, Ukraine is severely limited in resources and time, key factors determining the success of the operation and losses. Ukrainian media report the destruction of a Buk-M1 missile system used to cover the breakthrough in the Kursk region. Sources also report abandoned Ukrainian armoured vehicles at the exit of the 38K-030 Rylsk-Korneevo-Sudzha Road in the Kursk region, about 5 km from the Russian border.
Military experts suggest that the AFU vehicles went onto an asphalt road, where they were discovered and shelled. The footage also confirms that Ukrainian troops are making breakthrough attempts not only in the direction of Sudzha, but also much further north. The following footage shows the striking of another Ukrainian vehicle:
All these media victories reveal the real state of affairs, experts say. They believe that the AFU’s sabotage operations on the Russian-Ukrainian border have no military expediency: they serve to create a media victory to demonstrate it to fatigued citizens against the backdrop of the dramatic situation in Donbas.
Lowering mobilisation age
Attempts to break through the border in the Kursk region are taking place against the backdrop of the increasing relevance of the mobilisation age. Ukrainian authorities are raising the issue of the need to lower the age of mobilisation to 18-25, according to Ukrainian MP Fedor Venislavsky.
They believe that the age of 18-25 is the most optimal and effective for citizens in terms of physical and psychological traits to fight actively.
Earlier, a parliamentary committee supported a bill that would completely ban the mobilisation of citizens under 25. However, today some young men can be drafted starting from the age of 18.
Ukraine’s media efforts also coincide with the advance of Russian troops in Niu-York (former Novhorodske), Pokrovsk, and Toretsk. Kyiv’s unnecessary losses come amid complaints of not having enough manpower.
It remains to be seen how the attempt to breach the Russian border will end and whether it will produce any impact for Ukraine. Against the backdrop of the successful gradual advance of Russian troops, such sabotage with the loss of precious equipment could play a decisive part in the Russian-Ukrainian confrontation.
