Ukraine's push into Kursk: what exactly does it mean?

Ukraine stunned Russia- and the world- with its surprise thrust into Kursk close to the Northern part of Ukraine. The people of Ukraine exult in the fact that Ukraine has captured over 1000 sq kms of Russian territory in a matter of few days when it took more than a year for Russia to capture similar ground in Ukraine and at a much bigger cost in human lives.

Several interpretations of the move have been made. One, President Zelensky wants to use captured Russian territory as a bargaining chip in any future peace negotiations. Two, Ukraine wanted to assure the West that it retains its fighting capability and can put Russia on the back foot after more than a year of being on the defensive. Three, Ukraine hopes that its push into Kursk will force Russia to divert troops from the Donbas region and slow down Russia's year-long offensive in that region.

The Institute for the Study of War, based in Washington, offers a cautious view:

The Ukrainian incursion into Kursk Oblast and Russian offensive operations in eastern Ukraine are not in themselves decisive military operations that will win the war. Both Russian and Ukrainian forces lack the capability to conduct individual decisive war-winning operations and must instead conduct multiple successive operations with limited operational objectives that are far short of victory, but that in aggregate can achieve strategic objectives. It is too early to assess the outcomes and operational significance of the Ukrainian incursion into Russia and the ongoing Russian offensive effort in eastern Ukraine. The significance of these operations will not emerge in isolation, moreover, but they will matter in so far as they relate to a series of subsequent Russian and Ukrainian campaigns over time.

FT worries about whether the transfer of large number of troops from the East to the Kursk front will make it easier for Russia to make gains in the Donetsk region that is the focus of its efforts. Crucially, Ukraine has not yet succeeded in getting Russia to divert forces away from the Donetsk region and to Kursk:

Russian soldiers are still grinding their way through Ukrainian defences, capturing villages and towns and bringing Moscow closer to its stated goal of complete control of the Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine. On Monday, Russian troops appeared to have captured nearly all of the town of Niu-York, entered nearby Toretsk and were encroaching on the logistical hub of Pokrovsk. One Ukrainian artillery brigade commander in eastern Ukraine told the Financial Times that part of the reason for the Russian advance was Kyiv moving its scarce resources north.....

....Ukrainian soldiers and military analysts tracking the war said there had been no clear indication that Russia was moving a consequential amount of forces from the hottest area on the frontline in its east. “Despite the successes of the defenders in the Kursk region, the Russians have not yet transferred their troops en masse from here,” said Ukraine’s 47th Mechanised Brigade. “Its main strike force remains.”

The Economist, which has been for long hawkish on Russia's operations in Ukraine and a cheer-leader, for Ukraine offers a surprisingly downbeat assessment. It sees Ukraine's drive into Kursk as a desperate move to save the career of Ukraine's army chief, General Oleksandr Syrsky. It also sees worrying signs of Russia getting its response to the Kursk threat right:

The plan to invade part of Russia did not come from a happy place. In early July, General Syrsky, Ukraine’s newly appointed top commander, was under pressure. For months he had been grappling with a less-than-ideal inheritance from his predecessor, Valery Zaluzhny, and the army’s leadership was at odds with the president over mobilisation policies, leading to significant manpower shortages. In America Congress had delayed support. Avdiivka, a stronghold north of Donetsk, had consequently fallen. Front lines in the Donetsk region were crumbling, most especially around the logistical hub of Pokrovsk. Rumours circulated that General Syrsky was on the verge of being dismissed....

.....Evidence of an intensifying response inside Kursk is now clear. Ukrainian soldiers on the ground inside Russia say they are already beginning to see a different level of resistance. Losses are increasing. The Russians have reinforced with better trained units, including marines and special forces. They had studied the area.

Finally, Moon of Alabama, a military blog, offers the startling view that it was Britain, not the US, which knew about Ukraine's plans for Kursk and provided the necessary backing:

Britain, in a bipartisan move, wants to prolong the war in Ukraine. It suggested to and helped Ukraine to invade Russia even as it knew that this would interrupt peace talks in Qatar. It also promised to press its allies  for long range attack permission against Russia. But the U.S. and Germany are still blocking such attacks. Zelensky now complains that Britain failed to deliver on its promise.

The U.S., miffed about the British involvement in a likely useless Ukrainian attack on Russia, is leaking about the Ukrainian/Russian negotiations in Qatar. 

The above is largely based on the U.S. claims that it was not really involved in the planing of the Kursk incursion.

Whatever the long-term significance of the Ukrainian move, there is little doubt that is at the moment a PR coup for Ukraine and a massive blow to President Putin. Ukraine crows that Putin's red lines for the West are just bluff;  Russia does not have the capacity to retaliate massively and Ukraine has in itself to hand Russia a military defeat.

Whether Putin can prove this narrative wrong or not may well determine not just the outcome of this conflict but Putin's own future.