Vladimir Putin is not the only world leader who has been humiliated by Ukraine’s unexpected thrust into Kursk – the first major assault into Russian territory since the Second World War – though it has certainly achieved that. Despite his attempts to put on a brave face, the Russian president is undoubtedly rattled. On Monday, he was seen reprimanding senior officials over what they could and could not say about the incursion, no doubt concerned about the possibilities for regime destabilisation if it cannot be rapidly contained.
But this bold move also exposes the cowardice of Ukraine’s allies. Putin told his officials: “The West is fighting us with the hands of Ukrainians.” If so, they continue to be tied behind Kyiv’s back. If the Russian army manages to get its act together, it has the killing power to hurl Ukrainian forces back behind their own borders. Russian troops have been counter-attacking and will continue to do so with ever-greater ferocity. In the face of that, President Zelensky has appealed to his Western allies to allow long-range weapons to be used to defend his soldiers, for example to hit Russian airfields used to strike the advancing troops, as well as roads and railways to bring up reinforcements.
British Storm Shadow missiles could be a game-changer in this battle, but the Government appears unwilling to allow them to be used to their full potential. According to a No 10 spokesman: “There has been no change in the UK’s position... We are clear that equipment provided by the UK is intended for the defence of Ukraine.” What does Sir Keir Starmer think this attack into Russia is all about, other than the defence of Ukraine? How would the Second World War have worked out if the prime minister had not allowed British and American bombs to fall on German land?
Joe Biden is reportedly taking the same line as Starmer, refusing to permit much-needed ATACMS long-range missiles to support the Ukrainian offensive. This has been the wretched story throughout this war, with Western allies making policy not on the basis of Ukraine’s vital defensive needs but with an unfounded fear of Russian retaliation. Putin has been extremely effective in deterring Nato countries, with his threats of untold consequences, including nuclear attack. As each of his red lines has dissolved, however, whether over the provision to Ukraine of long-range missiles, tanks or combat planes, the next step from the West has always been grudging, half-hearted, inadequate and seized by fear.
Ukraine was able to launch its surprise attack on Russian soil because most of the border with its enemy was left largely unguarded. How could that be in a country at war with its neighbour? It was only possible because Putin knew his territory remained virtually invulnerable to attack because of Western restrictions on the use of Ukraine’s weaponry. The same goes for airfields, supply routes and logistics bases. The substantial forces that might be needed to defend them, including troops and air defence systems, were all available for the fight inside Ukraine.
Russia does not have infinite combat power at its disposal, but the assumption that its interior was safe, except from Ukraine’s limited home-made drone attack capability, allowed it to concentrate enough forces to repel Ukrainian advances and drive forward in the Donbas. The reality is that Western timidity has been defending Russian territory.
De-escalation has become the pusillanimous watchword of Western leaders, who fail to recognise that, when you’re facing a tyrant like Putin, escalation is often the only language he fears and understands. We can see the same thing in the Middle East, with Biden imploring Israel to de-escalate. His unconvincing “Don’t” will not stop Ayatollah Khamenei from pressing the button on Iran’s expected missile attack any more than American admonitions to Putin have inhibited his assaults on Ukraine.
Zelensky has taught the West a salutary lesson at Kursk. One thousand square kilometres of Russia’s holy-of-holies, its own sovereign territory, has been seized by Ukraine, however temporarily, and nuclear missiles are not raining down on Kyiv. The truth is that, if Ukraine had been allowed to escalate from the beginning, it could have brought the war closer to an end by now, on favourable terms to Kyiv. Time will tell whether it is too late for that, or whether this audacious attack might amount to a turning point.
