Kyiv’s allies are largely withholding judgement over the Ukrainian offensive into Russian territory amid uncertainty over the ultimate goal of an operation that has sought to redraw the map of the Kremlin’s two-and-a-half-year war.
Several NATO allies have backed Ukraine’s decision to send troops into the western Kursk region — the first occupation of Russian soil since World War II — and called the operation a legitimate form of self-defense against Moscow’s war of aggression.
However, some have voiced misgivings publicly and privately, citing the risk that the escalation in fighting could divert badly needed troops from a fragile front line and potentially sow division among Kyiv’s backers, Western officials said, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Italian Minister of Defense Guido Crosetto was the highest-level official in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization so far to openly criticize the move, which he called an escalation that would push a ceasefire “further and further away.”
However, the comments drew a swift rebuke from his boss, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, whose government said Italy’s pursuit of a truce did not alter Rome’s full support of Kyiv. She is now enforcing a strict muzzle on public statements on the conflict in an effort to prevent divisions in her governing coalition being exposed, people familiar with her thinking said.
A dominant factor is the lack of clarity over the objectives of an offensive that caught Ukraine’s allies by surprise this month.
One senior official said that if Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s aim is to secure a bargaining chip, the timing of the assault might not play to his advantage.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government has been reserved in its reaction. Deputy government spokesman Wolfgang Buechner avoided weighing in on the merits of the attack, noting that it was “prepared apparently in great secrecy and without feedback.”
An assessment from Berlin on the use of hardware for the incursion — which included German-made Marder infantry-fighting vehicles — would be part of an “intensive dialog” with allies, Buechner said on Monday last week.
So far, Ukraine has touted the maneuver as a tactical victory. Since its troops stormed across the border on Aug. 6, Ukraine’s military said it has seized more than 386m2 of territory and accepted the surrender of the largest single group of Russian soldiers since the war began in Feb. 2022.
Early reports show that some Russian units have been redirected from Ukraine to the Kursk area to help stymie the effort, US Department of Defense deputy Pentagon press secretary Sabrina Singh said.
The incursion is consistent with Washington’s policy on Ukraine’s use of US-supplied weapons, Singh said earlier.
The US was “still trying to learn more” about Ukraine’s objectives, she said on Thursday.
NATO allies consider it unlikely that Ukraine would be able to hold Russian territory, a Western official said. Beyond Kursk, Ukrainian forces have launched attacks on energy facilities well inside Russian territory, while Kyiv has also overseen raids into Russia’s Belgorod region, next to Kursk, although with Russian anti-Kremlin volunteers.
Some of Kyiv’s strongest backing came from eastern European NATO members. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said this week that the incursion did not change Warsaw’s support “one iota.”
“We support Ukraine in a war that is a defensive war and there is nothing to discuss here,” Tusk said, brushing off concerns over Kyiv’s use of Western weaponry inside Russia. “I am aware and we all know what the risks are.”
The offensive again raised the issue of Ukrainian allies imposing restrictions on the use of their weapons in Russia. Lithuanian Minister of Defense Laurynas Kasciunas called the Kursk operation a “good sign.”
“Another good sign would be permission to use long range capabilities and what you have for hitting the targets deeper in the enemy’s territory — and we will lobby for that,” Kasciunas said.
While the Baltic states and the UK have been among NATO members to push for allowing Kyiv to hit targets deep within Russia, others including the US and Germany have resisted such requests.
More broadly, the strike within Russia’s borders could change perceptions about Ukraine’s fighting force.
The sense that Ukraine was losing the war has now changed “in one breathtaking swoop,” said Donald Jensen, a senior advisor for Russia and Europe at the US Institute of Peace.
“We see that the Ukrainians are creative, they’re efficient, they’re well managed,” Jensen said. “They very skillfully picked out a weak place in the Russian deployment around the country and have exploited it.”
With assistance from Courtney McBride, Natalia Drozdiak, Alberto Nardelli, Michael Nienaber and Natalia Ojewska
With the Year of the Snake reaching its conclusion on Monday next week, now is an opportune moment to reflect on the past year — a year marked by institutional strain and national resilience. For Taiwan, the Year of the Snake was a composite of political friction, economic momentum, social unease and strategic consolidation. In the political sphere, it was defined less by legislative productivity and more by partisan confrontation. The mass recall movement sought to remove 31 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators following the passage of controversial bills that expanded legislative powers and imposed sweeping budget cuts. While the effort
There is a story in India about a boy called Prahlad who was an ardent worshipper of Lord Narayana, whom his father considered an enemy. His son’s devotion vexed the father to the extent that he asked his sister, Holika, who could not be burned by fire, to sit with the boy in her lap and burn him to death. Prahlad knew about this evil plan, but sat in his aunt’s lap anyway. His faith won, as he remained unscathed by the fire, while his aunt was devoured by the flames. In some small way, Prahlad reminds me of Taiwan
When Hong Kong’s High Court sentenced newspaper owner Jimmy Lai (黎智英) to 20 years in prison this week, officials declared that his “heinous crimes” had long poisoned society and that his punishment represented justice restored. In their telling, Lai is the mastermind of Hong Kong’s unrest — the architect of a vast conspiracy that manipulated an otherwise contented population into defiance. They imply that removing him would lead to the return of stability. It is a politically convenient narrative — and a profoundly false one. Lai did not radicalize Hong Kong. He belonged to the same generation that fled from the Chinese
Former Hong Kong media magnate Jimmy Lai (黎智英), who on Monday was sentenced to 20 years in jail for his role in the 2019 Hong Kong democracy movement and “colluding with foreign forces,” once called on members of the US government for support in his struggle against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Speaking to a forum at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in July 2019, Lai, speaking about the US having the moral authority over the CCP, said: “It’s like they are going to battle without any weapon, and you have the nuclear weapon. You can finish them in
RSS