‘We Outplayed Them’: Ukraine Claims First Underground Counteroffensive

Operation Veles was a Ukrainian maneuver beneath the battlefield near Kupiansk in Kharkiv region. Troops used concealed underground infrastructure to bypass Russian positions, then emerged behind them. Its importance came from surprise: Ukrainian forces created pressure from below while other units attacked across the surface.

The operation involved soldiers from the 2nd Khartiia Corps and several participating units. They moved without GPS, daylight, or reliable conventional radio communications. Engineers prepared the route, while troops trained for confined spaces. Surface forces advanced at the same time, and drone units coordinated strikes through a joint center.

The corps reported that more than 30 Russian personnel were captured and Russian losses exceeded 100. It also said the maneuver disrupted a Russian effort to reach the rear of Ukrainian positions around Kupiansk. The reported distance describes underground movement, not a 15-kilometer front-line advance.

An underground counteroffensive is a military attack that uses concealed routes below the battlefield to bypass defensive positions. In Operation Veles, Ukrainian troops traveled through underground infrastructure before emerging behind Russian lines. This differs from a normal open-ground assault, where advancing soldiers are more directly exposed to observation and fire.

The underground route gave Ukrainian forces a hidden approach. Soldiers had to operate without GPS, daylight, or reliable conventional radio communications. Engineers and support personnel prepared the route, and troops trained physically and psychologically for enclosed spaces. Above ground, other Ukrainian units advanced, while drones supported the operation through a joint center.

The method did not mean the entire battle happened underground. The article describes a combined maneuver, with concealed movement below and attacks on the surface. Khartiia called Veles the world’s first full-scale underground counteroffensive maneuver, but the reported 15-kilometer distance refers only to underground travel.

The scale of Operation Veles was unusual because Ukrainian troops reportedly traveled more than 15 kilometers underground. The article also gives the equivalent as 9 miles. That distance describes the route taken beneath the battlefield, not the distance by which Ukraine moved the front line.

The underground movement required soldiers to cross confined spaces without GPS, daylight, or reliable conventional radio communications. Engineers, combat engineers, and support personnel prepared the route. Ukrainian forces also used their own navigation, communications, and personnel-support systems to keep the underground group moving.

The distinction matters when interpreting the operation’s battlefield effect. A 15-kilometer underground journey can place troops behind enemy positions without representing a territorial advance of the same length. The corps said the movement helped disrupt Russian efforts around Kupiansk, while surface units and drones created additional pressure at the same time.

The attack depended on several Ukrainian elements acting together rather than on the underground troops alone. One force moved through concealed infrastructure, while other Ukrainian units advanced above ground. This created simultaneous threats that could divide Russian attention and expose positions from unexpected directions.

Engineers, combat engineers, and support personnel prepared the underground route. The troops trained for enclosed spaces and used dedicated systems for navigation, communications, and sustaining personnel underground. Above the battlefield, drone operations were coordinated through a joint center, including strikes by the 429th Achilles Unmanned Systems Brigade.

The intended mechanism was synchronized pressure. Russian troops faced Ukrainian forces approaching on the surface while another contingent emerged behind their positions. The corps reported that this combination helped block a Russian attempt to reach the rear of Ukrainian positions around Kupiansk. The operation therefore linked mobility, concealment, communications, and technology.

The reported immediate effects were tactical and operational. The 2nd Khartiia Corps said Ukrainian forces captured more than 30 Russian personnel, while Russian losses exceeded 100. The corps also said the maneuver prevented Russian troops from moving into the rear of Ukrainian positions around Kupiansk.

Those results followed a coordinated attack rather than a single underground raid. Ukrainian troops moved through concealed infrastructure and emerged behind Russian positions. At the same time, surface forces advanced, and drone units conducted coordinated operations. The combined pressure was intended to confront Russian troops from different directions and disrupt their ability to maintain or extend their positions.

The article does not provide independently verified casualty figures or a precise territorial-gain figure. It specifically clarifies that the more-than-15-kilometer distance refers to underground movement. The reported consequence was therefore disruption of Russian operations around Kupiansk, alongside captures and losses, rather than a confirmed 15-kilometer front-line shift.

The article presents Kupiansk and the surrounding Kharkiv region as an active operational area. Khartiia said Operation Veles disrupted a Russian effort to reach the rear of Ukrainian positions around Kupiansk. It also described the operation as part of a campaign to reclaim occupied parts of the Kharkiv region.

That makes the area important within the source’s account because control of positions and rear areas affects whether forces can support, reinforce, or threaten one another. The operation’s concealed route was intended to prevent Russian movement behind Ukrainian defenses. Surface advances and drone activity added pressure around the same battlefield.

The source does not explain Kupiansk’s broader geographic or logistical importance. More generally, in war, rear areas matter because attacks there can disrupt supply, communications, and reinforcement. That wider explanation comes from established military knowledge, not this article. Here, the confirmed point is that both Russian movement and Ukrainian territorial aims focused on the area.

Positional warfare is a form of fighting in which opposing armies rely heavily on defended positions and make limited advances. Such battles can produce a deadlock because attacking troops face prepared defenses, observation, and fire. In the article, Brig. Gen. Ihor Oboliensky described Veles as proof that initiative and technology could challenge positional deadlock.

Operation Veles used surprise and mobility in a specific way. Ukrainian troops traveled through concealed infrastructure and emerged behind Russian positions. Surface units advanced at the same time, while drones supported the attack through a joint center. This created pressure from different directions instead of forcing every Ukrainian soldier to cross the same exposed ground.

The broader military principle is that unexpected movement can make fixed defenses less effective, while coordinated technology helps units find, communicate, and strike. The article reports that Veles disrupted Russian operations around Kupiansk. It does not prove that positional warfare has ended, but it presents the maneuver as one way to challenge a defensive deadlock.