Kyiv and Moscow Both Claim Victories in Ukrainian Counter-Invasion

Both sides claim to have the upper hand in the Belgorod and Kursk regions after Kyiv-loyal forces staged a counter-invasion of Russian border areas this week, which is now in its fourth day.

War has come to the Russian mainland and the country will not be allowed to “live in peace” until it withdraws from Ukrainian territory, a top Kyiv official states as another announces Russian territory has become “an area of active combat actions”. Ukraine claims combat successes including the destruction of Russian military infrastructure inside Russia proper, but Moscow denies these claims out of hand, asserting its forces have prevented incursions and that all damage is down to a “massive” artillery attack by Ukraine.

As previously reported, three paramilitary units which Ukraine says are manned by Russian citizens opposed to the Vladimir Putin government launched cross-border strikes into Russia itself in the early hours of Tuesday morning. While similar attacks took place last year they were short-lived skirmishes, and the battles this week appear to be the largest of their kind in the war so far.

One of those anti-Putin Russian militias equipped by Ukraine, the Freedom of Russia Legion, said they have destroyed two of Russian army warehouses in the Kursk region and that they had advised local residents to evacuate from the impacted areas, or else stay indoors for their own safety. A spokesman for the group claimed thousands of civilian cars had attempted to make the journey, but Ukraine has stated Russian forces have been preventing would-be refugees from leaving, leading to claims they were using civilians as human shields.

Andriy Yusov, a spokesman for Ukraine’s defence intelligence agency asserted his organisation had intercepted communications from Russia “stating that the main transport hubs are cordoned off by law enforcement, roadblocks have been set up” and that residents were being threatened with fines, or even losing their jobs is they attempted to flee.

The senior spy also spoke on Thursday to hail what the claimed success of the attack on Russia by “Russian citizens who, having no other options, are defending their civil right with arms against the Putin regime”. He said, as a result: “Kursk and Belgorod regions are now an area of active combat actions. This is what we confirm”.

Ukraine’s Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Oleksii Danilov emphasised the counter-invasion was an act of revenge and that such actions would continue until Russia ended its war against Ukraine. He said: “I want to say that if Putin believed that the war would not come to Russia, he is deeply mistaken. It will come and it will come quite far… We will not let this monster live in peace until it gets out of our territory”.

Britain’s Daily Telegraph reported they had spoken to one anti-Putin militia leader, Denis Nikitin — who they described as a “notorious… white extremist” — who said the Russian resistance needs Western backers. He said, allegedly from a combat unit inside Russian territory: “If the West wants to win this war, they should help us … the only real opposition to Putin is us, Russian citizens who took up arms and are fighting … People in the West should ask themselves – do they want to actually stop Putin or do they want to just pretend they’re helping?”.

Moscow naturally disputed Ukraine’s assertions, saying instead that it had repelled attempts on the 12th, 14th, and 15th of March to breach their border and had inflicted huge casualties on attacking forces in doing so. Russian state media put the alleged losses into numbers, and said it had caused 1,500 Ukrainian casualties, including 550 dead in repelling the attacks. Further, it said it had destroyed “16 tanks, 19 armored fighting vehicles, including 11 US-made Bradley vehicles, and 15 motor vehicles”.

As previously reported, such claims in the Ukraine war are generally hard to substantiate and in many cases appear to be grossly exaggerated, but the opaque nature of the conflict makes accurate judgements difficult.

While border areas of Russia in the Kursk and Belgorod regions have very obviously taken some heavy damage this week, Russia insists this has been caused by “massive shelling” by Ukrainian artillery, not by an invasion. One of the targets, they say, is Belgorod city itself where shelling is said to have killed two and injured 25, including two children.

While the blowback conflict is subject — as ever — to conflicting reports on the state of fighting, both sides were able to agree on one thing, that Russia was deploying large amounts of landmines to the contested border to keep Kyiv-loyal forces out.

The fighting comes as voting opens in the national election to give President Vladimir Putin another six years in office. Western observers say the vote isn’t free or fair, but President Putin spoke out about his invasion of Ukraine triggering strikes against Russia itself, and said they would not succeed in turning the people against him. He said, per Russian state media: “These attacks, pointless from the military point of view and criminal from the humanitarian point of view, as has been said, are geared to hinder presidential election in Russia. I am convinced that our people will respond to this by being more consolidated.”

As reported on Wednesday, the Russian Legion, the Siberia Battalion and the Russian Volunteer Corps cited by Ukraine as “liberation forces” said they had captured border villages inside Russia and claimed “we are still in full control of the initiative – the Russian army is retreating. We will see how the situation develops further.” Previous such attacks, as seen last year, have been a source of concern for Western leaders not because of the allegedly extremist views of some of these anti-Putin militias, but because of the use of NATO-made and donated equipment they were using to launch the strikes.

That concern is a major component of the ongoing arguments inside the European Union about further deliveries of advanced cruise missiles to Kyiv, particularly the Taurus bunker-buster missile. While Western states have shown themselves to be overwhelmingly obliging when it comes to delivering weapons to repel Russia’s invasion of Ukrainian territory, they are more circumspect about those same weapons being used to launch strikes inside Russia, even if they help bring the war to an end faster. The Taurus, for instance, has sufficient range to strike Moscow itself, a clear matter of worry to Berlin.