Ukrainian forces have retreated nearly entirely from the Kursk region of Russia, concluding an ambitious summer operation that caught the Kremlin off guard with its swiftness and boldness. Soldiers at the front described a withdrawal that was methodically planned in parts and disorganized in others, as Russian forces surged through their lines, pushing them back to the border.

The Ukrainian command, known by his call sign, Boroda, recounted the arduous two-day retreat of his platoon from their positions near the Russian village of Kazachya Loknya to the Ukrainian border, totalling over 12 miles. By the time of the withdrawal, the area they once controlled had already been overtaken by Russian forces.

At the zenith of their campaign, Ukrainian forces controlled about 500 square miles of Russian land. By the end, they clung to a mere 30 square miles along the Russia-Ukraine border, according to Pasi Paroinen, a military analyst with the Finland-based Black Bird Group. However, the exact extent of Ukrainian control in Kursk could not be independently confirmed and ongoing fierce combat was reported.

The shifting of forces in Kursk is less about territorial control now, and more about preventing further Russian advances into the Sumy region of Ukraine and opening a new front in the conflict. Soldiers explained that their efforts are now focused on establishing robust defensive positions on the Russian side of the border.

Describing the end of the Kursk operation, Andrii, a Ukrainian intelligence officer, emphasized the need to now focus on stabilizing the situation. Military analysts view the Kurst operation as an ill-conceived gamble, stretching Ukraine’s military thin and leading to heavy casualties, yet it also provided a crucial morale boost and could have served as a strategic point for future cease-fire negotiations.

The loss of momentum in Kursk, culminating in a withdrawal that intensified this month, was not down to a single factor. Russian forces disrupted supply lines and sealed off escape paths, and North Korean troops brought in by Moscow, initially ineffective, improved their combat skills. Notably, there was a crucial lapse in U.S. support, including intelligence sharing.

When The New York Times visited the Sumy-Kursk border in late January, daytime movement was nearly impossible due to the prevalence of Russian drones. The area already bore scars of conflict, with burned vehicles and military equipment scattered along the main road from Sumy to Sudzha, a Russian town occupied by Ukrainian forces since August.

Despiteuga, Ukraine had deployed some of its most experienced brigades to the operation, but the continuous Russian assaults and the addition of North Korean troops took a toll. Although the North Koreans had pulled back in January to regroup, they returned with improved combat skills.

By mid-February, Russian forces advanced close to Ukraine’s supply routes into Sudzha, allowing them to target the roads with drones—a many of which were tethered to fiber optic cables, making them resistant to jamming. Ukrainian soldiers also encountered Russian attack drones used for ambushes and mines placed to hinder their retreat.

Artem, a senior Ukrainian brigade commander, cited the destruction of bridges, including one dropped by a 6,000-pound guided bomb, as a key reason for the sudden withdrawal from certain positions.

Further complicating matters for Ukraine, the Trump administration’s suspension of military aid and intelligence sharing in early March undermined the Ukrainian defense, rendering American-made HIMARS rocket launchers ineffective as their crews could not precisely target without the American intelligence.

On March 8, Russian troops breached Ukrainian lines, foot through a gas pipeline, leading to chaos and triggering the start of the Ukrainian withdrawal. Andrii, the intelligence officer, admitted to briefly surrendering to panic and described the North Korean troops’ successful assault south of the village of Kurylivka as causing further supply issues for Ukraine.

As Ukrainian forces pulled back, Russian forces continued pressing toward Sudzha, leaving the evacuation of military hardware behind in burned-out vehicles, an obstacle for a cleaner retreat.

On March 10, the command was given for certain units to pull out of Sudzha. Soldiers attested to the mixed nature of the retreat, sometimes coordinated, sometimes chaotic, depending on factors like fatigue, command orders, and coordination success.

Despite conflicting claims from world leaders regarding the extent of the Ukrainian casualty figures, there was no sight of Kyiv’s forces being encircled. Ukraine’s military has not actively acknowledged the loss of Sudzha, but the territorial control map indicates their hold on Kursk has dramatically diminished. The town of Sudzha, once home to 5,000 residents, bore the brunt of the heavy combat.

With the Ukrainian retreat, there are now fears of a new Russian push towards Sumy, with President Volodymyr Zelensky accusing Russian forces of preparing to trap Ukrainian units. Natives of Sumy, like volunteer Oksana Pinchukova, express worry over their uncertain future, anticipating the toll of further conflict.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/16/world/europe/ukraine-kursk-retreat-russia.html