The conflict in Ukraine has entered a new and unexpected phase, with fighting now centered in the southern territories of Russia’s Kursk region, bordering Ukraine. Since August 5th, Ukrainian forces have launched a surprise attack across the frontier, initially targeting the Sudzha district, located just 9 kilometers from the border, before advancing toward Lgov and Kurchatov, the latter hosting the Kursk nuclear power plant. The ongoing clashes in this southwestern region have led to the evacuation of over 122,000 residents, with about 10,000 currently housed in temporary shelters across 27 Russian regions. These evacuation figures are still provisional, as more than 500 people were relocated on August 20th alone. Kursk city, situated roughly 70 kilometers from the conflict zone, has been subjected to daily missile strikes, becoming the second regional capital, after Belgorod, to be directly affected by the war.
In light of the intensifying conflict, an anti-terrorism operation has been declared in the bordering regions of Belgorod, Bryansk, and Kursk, a measure reminiscent of the approach taken during the second Chechen war. This operation entails enhanced security measures, including increased surveillance of public buildings and infrastructure, citizen monitoring, and the possibility of forced relocations in case of danger. The operation is coordinated by the National Anti-Terrorism Committee, led by FSB Director Aleksandr Bortnikov. However, it does not formally extend control to the armed forces, which are now engaged on an unexpected new front.
The Ukrainian offensive has caught the Russian military off guard, particularly in areas where conscripts were stationed. General Valery Gerasimov’s statements during a briefing with Putin on August 7th, where he announced the destruction of the Ukrainian contingent, have since been criticized as overly optimistic and misleading. These remarks have drawn the ire of ultra-nationalist bloggers who support the war effort and maintain influential Telegram channels. The criticism has largely focused on the military leadership, sparing newly appointed Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, who replaced Sergei Shoigu. Belousov was seen as a sign of Putin’s intent to reform the Ministry of Defense, which has been mired in corruption scandals, including the recent arrest of former Deputy Minister Timur Ivanov.
Despite these leadership changes, the Ministry of Defense was unable to prevent the Ukrainian attack in the Kursk region. The vast length of Russia’s border poses significant challenges for maintaining a robust military presence. The extent of territory currently occupied by Ukrainian forces is difficult to ascertain, with conflicting reports from both sides. Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrsky claims that 1,263 square kilometers of land and 93 settlements have been captured, while the acting governor of Kursk, Alexey Smirnov, reported on August 12th that 28 villages had fallen to Ukrainian forces. The true scope of the situation can be partially inferred from Russian Ministry of Defense dispatches, which list ongoing battles near these areas, and from the postponement of local elections in several districts, including Lgov.
Forecasting the next developments in this new theater of war is challenging, with both sides approaching the situation cautiously, aware of the uncertainties that could impact overall stability. The opening of a new front within internationally recognized Russian borders introduces significant political implications. Key considerations include how the presence of Ukrainian troops on Russian soil might be leveraged in future negotiations and the potential effects on the stability of Putin’s regime. While both Kyiv and Moscow have officially denied ongoing negotiations, the positions of both sides remain unchanged, with Ukraine demanding the restoration of its 1991 borders and Russia insisting on the recognition of its annexation of four southeastern regions and Crimea.
International pressure for a resolution to the conflict, at least a temporary one, has been mounting since last spring, even among Western countries supporting Kyiv. The prospect of Donald Trump’s potential election victory in November has heightened concerns about a settlement that might overly favor the Kremlin. However, the Ukrainian offensive, intended to create a buffer zone, as stated by President Volodymyr Zelensky, has made negotiations from a position of weakness unlikely. Meanwhile, Moscow has shown no official interest in talks, as reiterated by President Putin during the August 7th meeting and echoed by government officials, including Dmitry Medvedev.
The Ukrainian military operation has left Moscow in a difficult position, requiring careful management of troop and equipment movements between different war fronts to avoid exposure to additional risks. A second wave of mobilization could increase social tensions and would take time to prepare new troops for frontline deployment. The presence of conscripts, some of whom have been captured by Ukrainian forces, has already sparked protests from families demanding their return. In response, Chechen special forces commander Apti Alaudinov bluntly questioned the purpose of these conscripts if they are not to defend the country when under attack.
The Russian authorities have maintained a cautious stance regarding the events in Kursk, which is reflected in the official propaganda. Unlike the nationalist bloggers, the government has avoided alarmist rhetoric, opting for carefully chosen language that downplays the situation. The displaced residents from the affected districts are referred to as temporarily relocated citizens rather than refugees, and the one-time financial aid of 10,000 rubles (approximately 98 euros) is intended to emphasize the extraordinary nature of the event, framing it as a temporary calamity rather than a war. Initially, state media and television programs did not refer to the situation in Kursk as an offensive but rather as an “incident,” “events,” or a “provocation.” They have since emphasized that Kyiv’s objectives—sowing panic and discord within Russian society—have not been achieved, keeping the narrative vague about what is happening in the region.
This approach aims to confuse rather than convince, aligning with a broader strategy of maintaining a sense of normalcy within Russian society, which has been deliberately depoliticized. Despite the war now taking place on Russian territory, daily life in much of the country, especially in major cities, continues with minimal attention to the conflict. The war has become part of the background, with the threat of a second mobilization looming but not imminent, and military service has become just another job, made attractive by the generous pay offered by the armed forces, often ten times the average salary in many Russian regions.
The delicate balance of Putin’s regime relies on a fragile authoritarianism, maintaining a semblance of normalcy while avoiding any disruptions that could destabilize the precarious status quo. As thousands of people are displaced by the ongoing conflict, the situation in the Kursk region is seen by some within the Russian administration as potentially becoming the “new normal.”
All images and all text in this blog were created by artificial intelligences