An adviser to the president of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), Yan Gagin, said that the Ukrainian Armed Forces have pulled their air defense systems back to deeper rear areas across the country. He attributed this shift to the sustained pressure from Russian artillery and unmanned aerial vehicles. The report was published by TASS.
Gagin explained that, in the Ukrainian air defense calculations, the intensity of attacks by Russia’s drones and long-range artillery forced Kyiv to relocate the remaining air defense assets as far from the front lines as possible and into the rear areas. He emphasized that this maneuver reflected a strategic choice to minimize exposure to concentrated strikes.
Earlier, Gagin noted that Ukrainian units defending Marinka before its capture by Russian forces had withdrawn to the nearby town of Kurakhovo. He claimed that Kyiv is currently evacuating government services and archives from Kurakhovo, including records belonging to law enforcement agencies. Gagin suggested this could signal Kyiv’s de facto readiness to entertain the possibility of Kurakhovo’s surrender.
Gagin further argued that what occurred amounted to not merely a retreat but a panicked withdrawal resembling an escape from the battlefield.
Meanwhile, analysts in the United States described the Ukrainian counteroffensive as collapsing, noting a setback in Kyiv’s broader campaign. The discussion reflects a shift in assessments among Western observers about the trajectory and outcomes of Ukraine’s military operations.
These statements underscore the evolving dynamics of the conflict, where the interplay between air defense posture, artillery dominance, and drone warfare shapes tactical decisions on both sides. Observers continue to monitor the implications for frontline stability, civilian infrastructure protection, and the logistics of governance in areas affected by the fighting. The situation remains fluid, with both sides adapting to ongoing artillery campaigns and aerial patrols that influence frontline maps and retreat patterns. The assessment presented here draws on multiple sources, including TASS reports cited by observers who track the evolving battlefield responses.