With Russian forces close to Pokrovsk, there are fears that the east has been left exposed, as Kharkiv bombing leaves heavy casualties

Russia has continued to make rapid advances in eastern Ukraine toward the key city of Pokrovsk, sparking public criticism of the Ukrainian military leadership and raising questions about Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s decision to launch a bold incursion into the Russian Kursk region.

For months, Russian forces have been attempting to seize Pokrovsk, a strategically important mining town with a prewar population of about 60,000, but their advance has gained considerable momentum in recent weeks.

Deep State, a Ukrainian group close to Ukraine’s defence ministry that tracks frontline activities, reported that Russian forces on Friday were less than 10km (6 miles) from the outskirts of Pokrovsk, where local officials have ordered a mass evacuation.

MBFC
Archive

  • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
    211·
    3 months ago

    Hmmm

    This is a weird framing. The story’s not wrong, I am sure, but it’s just sort of askew.

    I will make a maybe unwarranted prediction that I will find some other curious opinions being voiced by the specific journalist who wrote this story.

    Brb

    Edit: I am wrong. They’re just reporting from inside Ukraine stuff that is happening and so this is a relevant story.

    • talEnglish
      121·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, there are a number of folks looking at this from the military side I’ve seen saying that they believe it to be better to be defending rather than attacking. Generally, a defender has the advantage, and Ukraine has pretty well-fortified stuff in the area, so they can leverage that advantage.

      The Kursk offensive is embarrassing to Russia, but as far as I know, it doesn’t have strategic implications. Russia capturing Pokrovsk would make defending some other areas in Ukraine difficult.

      That being said, there are a lot of aspects to the conflict, so…shrugs

      • Deebster@programming.devEnglish
        6·
        3 months ago

        Ukraine have destroyed three bridges in Kursk, which will affect Russia’s ability to get supplies to their invading forces, but they’re also over rivers where it’s fairly trivial to set up temporary bridges (unless they are destroyed by drones).

      • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
        41·
        3 months ago

        Defenders have advantage yes but there’s basically noone defending Kursk. With Ukraine focussing on Kursk, Russia may even win as much territory in Ukraine as it’s losing of its own.

        Yet that’s still bound to be a political win for Ukraine as every square metre of Kursk is worth a lot more in terms of negotiating position than a piece of the Donbas. And as we all know war is the continuation of politics with different means, that is, politics is all that it’s about. Winning or losing a war is not decided by square metre of occupied territory, or kill count, or whatnot, but about making it politically advantageous for the enemy to withdraw.

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        3 months ago

        it doesn’t have strategic implications.

        It has two strategic implications:

        one: the place where they stashed all the rich / important kids got fucked.

        two: pressure on neighboring regions is drawing forces from elsewhere, even while RU tries to drive against Pokrovsk - but losing @1000-1300 people every fucking day and gaining little more than abandoned (and boobytrapped) trenches and shelled husks of the outlying neighborhoods.

        If Ukrainian artillery starts operating inside Kursk in large scale, shit’s gonna get REALLY fun quick.