In the news
On 17 March, the BBC reported on an interview with five soldiers who had fought in Kursk and returned over heavy fire and constant Russian drone attacks. One of the soldiers stated that on receiving the order they retreated in an organised way. He added that Russia had accumulated a mass number of troops including North Korean soldiers. Another soldier indicated that: “Logistics no longer work – organised deliveries of weapons, ammunition, food and water are no longer possible…from a military point of view, the Kursk direction has exhausted itself. There is no point in keeping it any more.”

On 15 March, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy accused Russia’s President Vladimir Putin of attempting to encircle Ukraine’s troops to strengthen its position as the ceasefire talks take place. He said: “There are Ukrainian troops in Kursk region…Their encirclement is Putin’s lie.”

On 13 March, Russia’s Defense Ministry claimed to regain Suzha town, one of the populated centers of the Kursk region which was captured by Ukrainian troops in 2024. On the same day, in response to US President Donald Trump's statement on the Kursk offensive, Russia said: “If they lay down their arms and surrender, [we] will guarantee them their lives and dignified treatment in accordance with international law and Russian legal norms.”

Issues at large
First, significance of the Kursk region. The offensive into Kursk was symbolic for Ukraine to showcase its ability to launch war inside Russian territory cutting through the Russian military dominance narrative. It also aimed at showcasing the West, Ukrainian troop’s offensive capability to strike despite the battlefield pressure within. The objective was to attack by surprise the larger expectation was to keep it as a bargaining chip in the negotiation against Donbas. However, the strategic importance of Kursk cannot be ignored either. Its 100-kilometer proximity from the Ukrainian border serves as a key logistical hub for Russia’s railway and highway lines. Being a critical route for Russia to carry out its operations in northeastern Ukraine into Kharkiv and Sumy and left without guard became an advantage for Ukraine to invade.

Second, Ukraine’s objectives in Kursk. Ukraine's counteroffensive challenged Russia’s security by extending the war beyond Ukraine’s borders, forcing it to divert resources to defend its territory. This pushed Russia to immediately divert its troops from Donbas to some extent (Exact troop number unknown) but by early 2025 with help from the North Korean troops, the Ukrainian troop’s advance was halted. Its primary objective to divert Russian forces from eastern Ukraine and to launch missiles further into Russia was executed fairly however, it has not been able to succeed. This has left Ukraine in a tough place to yield to Russia’s pressure on the ground and table. 

Third, the turnaround. Ukraine which initially captured 1000 square kilometers now struggles to continue its presence. This comes as it faces major strategic, logistical and tactical disadvantages. Starting from Russia which has managed to boost its military strength by fortifying, and deploying defensive lines with “minefields, anti-tank obstacles, and layered artillery positions,” costing heavily on Ukraine’s troops. Another factor that led to the weakening of Ukraine’s position is the persistent shortage of artillery shells, slowed delivery of air defence missiles and lack of intelligence support from the West’s delivery while Russia ramped up its defence. Lastly, Russia's air superiority and the hostile terrain in Kursk with open fields turned disadvantageous for Ukraine to hold ground.
 
In perspective
Kursk is no longer an advantage for Ukraine. On the ground, the Kursk operation which was symbolic to showcase Ukraine’s ability and strategy to launch deeper into Russia is no longer possible for Ukraine. Russia’s adaptability to maneuver its forces and benefit from North Korean troops has seized Ukraine’s position. Instead of having Kursk as one of the bargaining chips, Ukraine will be now forced into negotiations as per Russia’s terms. Considering the mediation efforts of Trump not showing immediate progress while the vulnerable position on the ground and pressure at the table grows for Ukraine.