Detector Media analyzes what has been written about the situation in the Kursk region and the plans for it, both from Ukraine and Russia, in the propagandist segment of Telegram channels.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) Kursk operation began on August 6, 2024, and has been ongoing for over three months. On November 6, the Member of Parliament of Ukraine, Maryana Bezuhla, interpreted a post by UAF Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi summarizing the three-month operation in Kursk as a hint at the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from Russian territory. This triggered discussions on the topic and related issues among propagandists.
Meanwhile, a report by the U.S. Institute for the Study of War (ISW) on November 12 stated that Russia has concentrated around 50,000 military personnel in the Kursk region, including 8,000–10,000 North Korean soldiers, in preparation for driving Ukrainian forces out of Russian territory. According to The Telegraph, Putin aims to reclaim the part of Kursk under Ukrainian Armed Forces control before Donald Trump assumes office as U.S. President on January 20, 2025.
We analyzed a dataset of 530 messages from Russian and pro-Russian Telegram channels that appeared between the start of November 6 and 7:30 PM on November 12. These messages contained combinations of keywords using the formula: "Kursk" and ("Syrskyi" or "Ukrainian Armed Forces" or "withdrawal" or "offensive"). The information was provided by LetsData.
"The Ukrainian Armed Forces will withdraw from Kursk under the pretext of a 'gesture of goodwill'"
According to propagandists, the Ukrainian army's potential withdrawal from the Kursk region in the near future is motivated by the political leadership's desire to appeal to newly elected U.S. President Donald Trump. Such a move by Ukraine would be seen as politically driven, positioning Ukraine as peacemakers ready for constructive negotiations with Russia. A pro-Russian Telegram channel with over a million subscribers claimed:
"Yermak’s plan is to sell the Kursk operation to Trump and shift the narrative toward blaming Russia for disrupting negotiations."
On the other hand, some Telegram channels suggested that the Ukrainian Armed Forces high command might not merely display a "gesture of goodwill" but instead declare the objectives of the Kursk operation fully achieved before announcing a withdrawal. The rationale is similar:
"It’s possible that Ukraine’s General Staff, the president, and the military command could decide that the objectives of the Kursk operation have been met. This could serve as a negotiation tool to establish certain lines after the war ends. Such statements could become markers forming the basis for talks," said Ukrainian political advisor Oleksandr Kharebin, whose words were widely quoted in propagandist posts, one of which garnered over 350,000 views.
While some propagandists argued that the Ukrainian Armed Forces could still withdraw from Kursk at any time, dismissing the idea of a "trap" for the Ukrainian army, others disagreed. For instance, a Russian war correspondent ("voenkor") with nearly 600,000 followers compared the situation to the 2014 Ilovaisk encirclement:
"Why would Kyiv assume we’d allow the invading forces to leave peacefully? Remember what happened in Ilovaisk in 2014."
However, reports of a possible Ukrainian Armed Forces withdrawal from Kursk in the near future were denied in several propagandist Telegram channels, suggesting that such claims might be part of a "Ukrainian disinformation operation."
"The Ukrainian Army will stay in Kursk despite everything"
In contrast to earlier claims about a potential withdrawal, posts with the opposite message were more prevalent. These emphasized Ukraine’s determination to maintain control over parts of the Kursk region. Supporting this claim, propagandists pointed to the presence of elite Ukrainian Armed Forces units in the area, regular troop rotations, and top-tier supplies. However, these same propagandists sought to downplay the significance of the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ presence in Kursk. A pro-Russian Telegram channel with 435,000 followers stated that the territory seized by Ukraine in Kursk "has no strategic importance."
At the same time, propagandists highlighted a supposed lack of manpower, equipment, and ammunition on Ukraine's Donbas front. They claimed Ukraine prioritized Kursk at the expense of Donbas, suggesting that "the Kursk territories are so valuable to Ukraine that they are being supplied at the cost of the Donbas front."
Some posts referenced an article in the Spanish newspaper El País, which claimed that Ukraine has stationed more troops in the Kursk region than in southern Donbas. According to the article by Christian Segura, based on information from a Ukrainian soldier, rotations in a Kursk platoon occur every ten days. In contrast, in Russian-surrounded areas in eastern Ukraine, like Kurakhove, infantry units remain on the front lines for an average of 25 days, as reported by four brigades consulted by the newspaper in October. A pro-Russian Telegram channel with 145,000 subscribers interpreted the article as follows:
"Someone deliberately moved all the troops to Kursk to abandon Donbas."
Propagandists also speculated about President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's personal motivations for keeping the Ukrainian Armed Forces in Kursk. They argued that Ukraine’s presence on Russian territory prevents any peace negotiations, which would allow Zelenskyy to maintain power. One propagandist wrote:
"The Kursk adventure is just an inoculation against freezing the frontline conflict! As long as the Ukrainian Armed Forces are in Kursk, there can be no talk of freezing the war, and the conflict will continue. If the war continues, the Zelenskyy administration will retain power, and billions in Western funds will keep flowing into their hands."
This post by propagandist Tetiana Montian received over 230,000 views.
Despite claims of Ukraine's full military readiness in Kursk, other Telegram channels simultaneously pushed the opposite narrative, alleging severe issues in the Ukrainian Armed Forces' operations there. Reports cited resource and reserve replenishment delays, high casualties, and a lack of medical evacuations. A channel with over 500,000 followers summarized:
"The Ukrainian Armed Forces are completely demoralized. Convicts are being sent to the front lines without proper support (drones, ammunition, food, water, etc.). Wounded soldiers are not evacuated, bodies are left behind, and there are no rotations."
At the plenary session of the Valdai Club on November 7, Putin claimed that Ukrainian losses in Kursk were massive, exceeding 30,000 in three months—more than the total losses for all of 2023. However, a pro-Russian Telegram channel with 152,000 followers pointed out inconsistencies in his statement:
"Someone who looks like Putin claimed that the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost more in Kursk in three months than in all of 2023—30,000 people. A year earlier, the same speaker said Ukraine had lost 90,000. It seems this 'candidate of economic sciences' has trouble with math."
"Russians don’t want a 'frozen conflict,' so they’re advancing in Kursk"
On November 7, the Ukrainian analytical project DeepState reported that Russian forces launched a new wave of offensive operations in Kursk, using their traditional tactic of deploying infantry via BMP vehicles. Russia resumed attacks on Pogrebki, Zelenyi Shlyakh, Dar’yino, and Sudzha, later extending operations to the Novoiivanivka district. A pro-Russian Telegram channel with over 370,000 views reacted by stating that Russia decided to reclaim its territories by "preempting the Office of the President" and "depriving Ukraine of any maneuvering opportunities".
Forbes military correspondent David Axe, writing on November 7, described the first day of Russia’s renewed offensive—now reinforced by North Korean troops—as a “bloodbath.” However, he warned against expecting Russia to halt its attacks. According to Axe, the dynamics of Russia’s 33-month-long war against Ukraine are shifting following Donald Trump’s election victory.
Reportedly, Russia aims to reclaim the Kursk region before a potential “freezing of the war” along the frontlines, an idea detailed in The Wall Street Journal as part of Trump’s alleged plan to end the conflict. Several pro-Russian Telegram channels cited the Forbes article, quoting Axe's statement that even the idea of drawing a demarcation line within the Kursk region might “make Putin blanch.” One prominent propagandist, Tetiana Montian, whose channel has over 500,000 followers, elaborated:
"Indeed, freezing the frontlines as they are now would mean Sudzha and its surroundings remain ‘frozen’ under Ukrainian control. This would result in Russia losing part of its ancestral lands, which the Kremlin would never accept."
Conversely, another pro-Russian Telegram channel with nearly 300,000 followers argued that Russia’s intensified assaults on Ukraine’s positions in Kursk shouldn’t be linked to hypothetical talks about freezing the frontlines:
"The reality is slightly different. The Kremlin doesn’t want to give Zelenskyy the chance to ‘sell’ the Kursk region as a symbolic gesture in negotiations and appear as peacemakers."
Propagandist messages about the future of the Ukrainian Armed Forces-controlled part of Kursk often contradict one another, suggesting that neither Kyiv nor Moscow has a clear strategy for the region in the coming months. Notably, propagandists paid little attention to the involvement of North Korean fighters in the new wave of Russian offensives. Discussions about the Kursk region have intensified following Trump’s election win, indicating potential concerns on both sides about the future trajectory of the war, particularly on Russian territory.
Main page illustration and infographic: Natalia Lobach
