Russia’s restrained progression into Ukraine’s region of Kharkiv during the week was able to exploit certain shortcomings and delays that require swift attention from both Kyiv and its western supporters to thwart any further advances of the Kremlin forces in the forthcoming months.
On the 10th of May, Moscow deployed between 5,000 and 10,000 soldiers across the border to the northern part of Kharkiv region, capturing a number of barren or sparsely populated villages and advancing up to 10 kilometres in certain areas over several ensuing days.
Vovchansk, a town near the frontier and approximately 5 kilometres away, is where the bulk of the conflict is occurring. Ukraine alleges to have stalled the invasion force at the town’s northern fringes. Vovchansk was initially taken by Russia in its sweeping assault on Ukraine in 2022 but later liberated, along with other areas of Kharkiv, six months afterwards.
There were primarily three interconnected areas of vulnerability in Ukraine that Russia exploited for its success in Kharkiv: insufficient fortified defenses near the border, a deficit of ammunition and weapons, and an understaffed military force.
Ukraine’s efforts in constructing trenches, durable bunkers, anti-tank positions, along with other defensive systems across susceptible sectors of its 1,000-kilometre frontier, extending from Kharkiv in the northeast through Donetsk and Luhansk regions to southeast provinces of Zaporizhia and Kherson, have yet to yield sufficient results.
Despite a number of fortified lines now established, in Kharkiv these couldn’t be constructed near the frontier due to the risk of Russian cross-border artillery attacks targeting the engineering teams.
The US, along with other western countries, limits Ukraine to the use of weapons it supplies on its occupied territory only, thereby preventing Kyiv from targeting the enemy artillery stationed just beyond the Russian border or the approximately 30,000 troops Russia has amassed near Kharkiv in the recent weeks.
A six-month embargo on military aid to Kyiv, instituted by allies of ex-president Donald Trump’s Republican Party, left Ukraine in dire need of artillery shells and air defence ammunition, granting Russia more operational flexibility in border regions, utilising airforce and so-called glide bombs, each capable of weighing up to 1.5 tonnes and covering a 50 km distance, to decimate Ukrainian positions and settlements.
Although Washington has increased its flow of weapons to Kyiv, attempts to convince allied nations to offer up their idle advanced air-defence systems, such as the American-made Patriots, have not proved fruitful. These systems would be vital life preservers in the ongoing crisis in Ukraine.
The timeline for Ukraine to receive F-16 fighter jets from its partners remains unclear, and even when they arrive, they will only somewhat reduce Russia’s air superiority. Furthermore, more air defence systems are needed to guard the bases that the aircraft will operate from.
Meanwhile, Russia continues to increase its military production at a pace the West is unsuccessfully trying to match. Russia is also supplemented by weapons from North Korea and Iran, plus a considerable supply of “dual-use” items from China, which alleviate the effects of Western sanctions on Russia’s armed forces.
Russia’s army is still expanding, based on a populace of 140 million, a lot of whom are willing to risk war to escape worsening poverty. Current estimates suggest that Russia has assembled an invasion force of over 500,000 soldiers, and it’s alleged that monthly enlistments are around 30,000.
On the other hand, Ukraine is having difficulty enlisting new troops, as the much-needed reforms to the mobilization process are sluggishly enforced, obliging many soldiers to continue fighting after two years on the frontlines.
Following Ukraine’s failed counteroffensive last summer due to the significant challenges presented by Russian minefields and frontline fortifications in occupied territory, analysts predict a challenging year ahead. Ukraine will strive to replenish their own troops while combating an increasingly larger adversary.
The recent incursion in Kharkiv demonstrates Russia’s strategy: increasing pressure on Ukraine by enlarging the frontline and forcing challenging decisions about the placement of troops and resources. Moscow is keen to identify any weaknesses in Ukraine’s defences hoping to exploit them before reinforcements from Kyiv, in the form of newly mobilised troops and arms, can buttress the frontlines.
The immediate objectives of Russia within the Kharkiv region seem to involve constructing a protective zone to guard its own border area of Belgorod against potential Ukrainian assaults, and to exhaust and destabilise Ukraine’s protective infrastructures within the Donetsk region, which continues to be a paramount interest for the Kremlin. The anticipation is that reports of renewed combat will deter Ukrainians from enlisting in the military.
Jack Watling from the Royal United Services Institute think tank put forth this week that the future scenario in Ukraine is grim. Nonetheless, if Ukraine’s allies promptly step in to replenish the country’s ammunitions supplies, facilitate a robust training programme, and direct the necessary resources towards industrial investments, then the likelihood of Russian’s summer operations being subdued is high, and the much-needed respite for Ukraine to regain its footing would be feasible.