Ukraine’s shock invasion of Russia shows it can pull off complex, surprise attacks even on a modern battlefield where something’s usually watching

Ukraine’s ambitious cross-border attack began Tuesday with troops advancing up to six miles into the Kursk region, an area bordering Sumy and just north of Belgorod and Kharkiv. The mechanized offensive seemed to advance rapidly in the days that followed, per geolocated footage and Russian claims gathered by The Institute for the Study of War, a Washington DC-based think tank. However, it remains unconfirmed how much territory Ukraine actually controls in the region.

Ukraine’s intentions in this assault are also unclear, though some have speculated on the potential for it to gain leverage in negotiations with Russia, humiliate Putin, distract the Kremlin, boost Ukrainian morale, and/or pull Russian focus and forces from other fights along the front.

Regardless of Ukraine’s intent in this assault, the sudden push into Russia appears to have caught Moscow by surprise. The Kremlin attempted to downplay recent developments amid growing concern and criticism from ultranationalist Russian voices and Kursk residents calling on Russian President Vladimir Putin for assistance. They say the information he’s been receiving about the situation on the ground has been inaccurate.

As the offensive continues to play out and additional details become available, one thing is beginning to ring clear: Ukraine was successful at pulling off an operationally secure, coordinated, and extensively prepared offensive despite the often transparent nature of the battlespace as a result of extensive reconnaissance and surveillance.

“The attack demonstrates that despite ongoing discussions about a so-called transparent battlefield, where every movement of each vehicle and soldier can be tracked, achieving surprise at the tactical level is still possible at this stage of the war,” Franz-Stefan Gady, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, told Business Insider.

Gady said that part of the success of Ukraine’s combined arms operation — which in this case involved the integration of air defense and missile defense with mechanized units and electronic warfare — was that it appears to have “significantly disrupted the electromagnetic spectrum of Russian communication systems.”

The effectiveness of that effort somewhat prevented Russian forces and Kursk authorities from communicating and helped Ukraine maintain an element of surprise.

It’s even unclear if Ukraine informed its key allies, including the US, of this mission.

Conflict analysts, military officials, and other expert war watchers have debated the idea that the conflict in Ukraine is a “transparent battleground,” or at least a demonstration that modern war is increasingly transparent due to the challenge posed by the prolific presence of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities that make it hard to hide from the enemy.

In the war in Ukraine, drones of all kinds and the ability to employ unmanned vehicles to collect information, scout positions, or launch attacks beyond enemy lines offer increased situational awareness. And these are often paired with other more traditional ISR capabilities.

Beyond the sensors, some of which possess thermal and night-vision options, advances in electronic warfare have also made it harder, leaving forces and systems exposed in the electromagnetic spectrum. But the capabilities watching the battlefield are not necessarily comprehensive, and things slip through.

On Thursday, as it became increasingly evident that Ukraine adeptly kept its operation details a secret, some experts weighed in. “Maybe we can finally dispense with the ‘transparent battlefield’ fallacy,” Mick Ryan, a retired Australian major general and strategist focusing on evolutions in warfare, posted on X.

Ryan praised the Ukrainians, adding that “the level of strategic, operational, and tactical deception shown by the Ukrainians during the planning, assembling forces, and ongoing execution of the Kursk operation has been superb.”

The impact of the shock Ukrainian invasion, particularly on Russian leadership and the Kremlin, is notable, too. It leaves Putin in a delicate situation, specifically one in which it must simultaneously prove that Russia can secure its borders and maintain its costly war effort in order to quell any potential concerns or unrest from Russian citizens.

It also, Gady noted, has left Russian leadership somewhat embarrassed as the attack “was either not detected or not adequately responded to,” which he said is “often the case in Russian military culture.”

Ukraine’s problem now is whether it can accomplish whatever its goals are, both in and out of Russia. If the Kursk operation is meant to distract, pull focus, or provide leverage, Ukraine will need the ammunition, manpower, vehicles, and other resources to maintain momentum and actually hold it. That’s a tall order.

And Russia is already trying to break Ukraine’s momentum, claiming on Thursday that it halted an incursion although some fighting in the area was still ongoing. Moscow also said it was bombing Ukrainian positions in the Sumy region bordering Kursk with over 6,000-pound glide bombs.

Another goal, though, could be to simply dominate in the information war. “By dominating the informational landscape, Ukraine signals to Western partners that it is capable of planning and conducting complex military operations in secrecy,” Gady said.

He added that “it also demonstrates to Russia that Ukraine can bring the war to its territory, underscoring their current momentum.”