When Russia mounted its surprise advance into Kharkiv province on May 10, 2024, it was not simply another move in the process of trying to drive back the front lines. It was intended to test the defenses of Ukraine, to make Kyiv have to redeploy troops, and to cut a buffer along the border. Kharkiv was sensible on the drawing board—near Russia, strategically important, and symbolically worthwhile.
But within weeks, the assault ground to a halt, revealing the same vulnerabilities that have plagued Russia since the war began and revealing Ukraine’s ability to adapt through pressure. An estimated 40,000 Russian soldiers were involved in the advance, attempting to pull Ukrainian troops off of other routes and create an avenue further into Donetsk.
Moscow’s true objective was not to seize Kharkiv city proper, but to force Ukrainian lines back far enough that artillery could envelop the city in a consistent drizzle of fire and, by doing so, protect Russia’s own border towns. At least for a little while, it did. Russian forces seized about 100 square kilometers of territory—their largest single gain since 2022. But by early June, the offensive stalled. Ukrainian strikes at lines of supply, even in Belgorod, as well as tenacious defense, progressively compressed the attackers. The reaction of Kyiv was swift and unified.
Foreseeing the Russian attack, Ukrainian officials had already ramped up the northeast with troops and arms. When Russian troops moved forward, they were greeted by coordinated defenses, city-block fighting in cities such as Vovchansk and Lyptsi, and block-by-block fighting. By mid-June, Ukrainian forces had managed to halt the assault and gain the initiative.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy subsequently asserted that Russia had lost considerably more troops than Ukraine had multiple times over, and how prepared Ukraine was for the invasion. The battle for Kharkiv uncovered deeper issues in Russia’s war effort.
Two years of all-out war later, Russian forces still use out-of-date Soviet-era tactics and equipment. Planning is still bad, morale is questionable, and the destruction of more modern vehicles has forced them to rely even more on the older, less powerful equipment.
Deficits and sanctions have only compounded the problem. Moscow can neither pay for losses nor sustain high-intensity effort nor even aircraft manufacture. The much-vaunted defense industry is stretched to the limit. Meanwhile, Ukraine continues to demonstrate how a quick response can level the playing field.
Western military support—artillery, drones, precision munitions—has assisted, but Ukraine’s greatest asset is the speed at which it deploys those weapons on the battlefield. Decentralized command permits front-line officers to respond more quickly than Russian front-line officers, and an ethos of experimentation keeps Moscow guessing. Deep within Russian lines, pockets of resistance provide feedback to Kyiv and disrupt supply lines, adding to the strain. But Ukraine is not without issues either. Recruitment is a continuous problem, with resources stretched thin and losses difficult to replace.
Generational fault lines add to the complexity. Younger officers are calling for change, and older, old-guard leaders of certain stripes remain committed to hard-line, Soviet-style thinking. Corruption and internal fighting over assets may impede progress, and it is questionable how operations in the future will be financed.
All of this notwithstanding, Ukraine held firm in Kharkiv. However, attrition wars devour more than intellectual resources—they devour men, hardware, and endurance month by month. By the summer, the broader war had bogged down into a stalemate. Russia persistently put pressure on Donetsk and around Chasiv Yar, counting on constant pressure to drain Kyiv’s resources.
Ukraine resisted, though, and recaptured in places, but mobilizing massive counterattacks was beyond its capabilities until a critical turn on the battlefield. The lessons were brutal: Russia pays the price for holding onto obsolete doctrine and inflexible logistics, while Ukraine discovers the boundaries of resolve in a war of endurance. Defense is paramount in this phase of combat—and the battle is as much one of endurance as it is one of ground.