Why Ukraine’s Surprise Incursion on Russia Should Give Us Hope

Ukraine is not about to seize Moscow, but its armed forces surprised many with its assault deep into Russian soil, now reportedly extending their reach from an initial six miles to more than 20. The recent counter-offensive by Ukrainian forces into Russia’s bordering Kursk region not only signifies the resolve of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, military leaders, and soldiers but also evokes important events in military history worth remembering.

In just a mere 24 hours, Ukraine's forces defeated two major lines of fortifications in the Kursk region that took Russia over two-and-a-half years and over $170 million to construct. Leading Kremlin critic, financier William Browder called this triumph is a profound humiliation for Putin’s aura of invincibility weakening his image before the Russian people.

While Ukraine’s advances are only slight in a geographical sense, they are significant in other ways that are equally, if not more, essential to finding success on the battlefield. Parallel moments in history show the strategic and symbolic implications of this campaign.

Boosting Ukrainian morale

The French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte considered morale to be an underlying principle for military success, going as far as stating: “In war the moral is to the physical as three to one.” In World War II, the Battle of Iwo Jima served as a turning point in the war for the Pacific. While providing a strategic position, that hard-fought battle for the first Japanese home island catalyzed Allied troop and civilian morale.

The surprise attack by Ukraine could serve as a similar inspiration. Amid a concerted Russian offensive, an outmanned and exhausted Ukraine defied expectations and, for the moment, turned the tide. As with Iwo Jima, Ukraine’s quest is not to conquer new land, rather it is to stymie the enemy, reclaim their homeland, and ensure peace and prosperity for its people. The bold move by Zelenskyy and his military commander-in-chief, Col Gen Oleksandr Syrskyi, may be the impetus for Ukrainian soldiers to continue fighting elsewhere.

Forcing Russia to the defensive

In late 1776, General George Washington and his Continental Army had just suffered a series of defeats. Moreover, with an Army severely short of supplies, many were beginning to doubt their commander-in-chief and the prospects of success. Washington sensed the moment and decided to lead his troops through two pivotal battles, the Battles of Trenton and Princeton, in the middle of winter shifting the momentum to favor the revolutionaries and forcing the British to the defensive and to redeploy resources.

Like the Continental Army, Ukraine finds itself with both a limited number of supplies and troops. Success will only come in the form of carefully designed counterattacks that favor Ukraine’s smaller, nimbler forces, all while defending against unrelenting Russian pressure. The recent incursion may instigate Russia to divert resources from other regions, such as eastern Donetsk, where it has been conducting several offensives.

Opportunities for additional countermeasures by Ukrainian forces may present themselves as Russia redeploys troops, and potentially calls in conscripts, as well as resources from the eastern front and adjusts from an all-out offensive strategy to one that is more nuanced.Zelenskyy and Syrskyi must nowshow as Russia mounts its response, showing caution not to relinquish the invaluable manpower and equipment used for the original assault.

The confusion goes well beyond the battlefield for Russia. While Putin has been embarrassed on the world stage by Ukrainian advancements, leaders in the Kremlin have scrambled to recast the event as an act of terrorism, which further justifies Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Russia's National Counter-Terrorism Committee imposed a "counter-terrorism operation" regime across three regions on Friday in response to Ukraine's surprise cross-border incursion. Meanwhile, Russia's state Tass news agency has reported more than 76,000 people have been evacuated from the border area with new orders by Russian leadership to expedite additional evacuations. Such desperation will only continue to seed doubt among Russian soldiers and the public.

Solidifying international support and quieting doubters

Again, a look at the Continental Army of the Revolutionary War can tell us about the importance of financial and military support from foreign partners. In 1777, at the Battle of Saratoga, General Horatio Gates and his American soldiers defeated British forces just north of Albany to solidify their own advances, ultimately persuading the French to provide the revolutionaries with additional, and more significant, financial and military support. France’s aid was essential to America continuing their fresh offensive and the eventual success in Yorktown that ended the war for independence.

Perhaps the most consequential implication such an offensive provides, though, is the reassurance to international partners who have supported Ukraine up to this point in the war. As with France during the Revolutionary War, Ukrainian-allied investments have not been squandered. It is that same financial and military support that has enabled Ukraine to continue their resistance against Russian aggression and mount a swift and surprising incursion into Russian territory. The continued support will also likely dictate Ukrainian success in the current offensive and broader war. The recent act of resilience will provide additional fodder for those continuing to press for the continued support of Ukraine and will quiet those supporters-in-name but detractors-in-reality who have begun to call for appeasement with Russia.

So far, the free world has not wavered in its support for Ukraine against Russian aggression and Putin’s quest to rebuild the Russian empire. Zelenskyy’s bold actions in the last week have given the people of Ukraine and the world a renewed hope, like that of Washington traversing the Delaware or the US Marines raising the flag over Iwo Jima after a hard-fought victory.

In 1917, Russia’s Czar Nicholas II fled after several years of war, massive military losses and a collapse of morale at the front and at home; a general civilian strike and a military mutiny in Petrograd, the monarch’s authority collapsed. No one knows where Putin’s tipping point might be.

Correction: The original version of this story misstated the year that Czar Nicholas II fled Russia.