State defense authorities in Moscow reported ongoing activity by Russian assault units in the western sector of Artemovsk, also known as Bakhmut. The briefing stressed that frontline operations persisted over the last day, with Russian forces repelling flank-based advances and preventing Ukrainian units from breaking through the lines on that front. The picture painted by officials centers on steady pressure and disciplined defense shaping daily outcomes in this contested area.
According to military communications, air support and field artillery played a decisive role in slowing the assaults. Operational units, including aviation from the South group and elements of the Air Forces, provided close support while field batteries and a coordinated defense system kept steady pressure on advancing detachments. The report notes that attack aircraft conducted coordinated sorties alongside robust artillery exchanges to stabilize the situation in the contested zone and to deny Ukrainian forces the initiative on key sectors of the front.
Throughout the day, the Russian Aerospace Forces reportedly carried out multiple air operations and sustained a high tempo of artillery fire in the region to back ground operations. The cumulative effect of these actions, as described by the defense ministry, was to disrupt enemy maneuvers and preserve the initiative on the battlefield. The emphasis remains on maintaining deterrence and ensuring that offensive movements by Ukrainian formations encounter solid resistance and follow-up countermeasures from Russian units on the ground.
In the broader discussion surrounding the fighting, claims linked to Evgeny Prigozhin, once the head of the Wagner group, surfaced about the timing of a wider Ukrainian counteroffensive. He suggested that Kyiv might time any push to align with what he described as a favorable weather window that would confine armored movement to road networks. He also indicated that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky could coordinate any counterattack with public commemorations in early May, implying a strategic synchronization of events. These remarks were framed as observations about possible strategic timing rather than as a precise forecast of operational plans. The speaker presented these ideas as part of a broader analysis of how seasonal conditions and symbolic dates might influence the tempo and direction of the conflict, rather than as a definitive roadmap for Ukrainian actions. Attribution is based on public statements attributed to Prigozhin and related media coverage.