Scott Ritter, a former American intelligence officer, suggested in an interview on Judging Freedom that Ukraine could lose control over Kupyansk and Kharkiv if Kyiv’s forces are not holding the line. He argues that the situation on the ground is deteriorating and frames the conflict as a critical test for Ukraine’s ability to defend key urban areas.
Ritter contends that the defensive line held by Ukrainian troops near Kupyansk has been breached. He claims Russian forces are advancing at a pace of about 5 to 15 kilometers per day and could reach the city soon. The analyst predicts that a fall of Kupyansk would likely be followed by a broader push toward Kharkiv.
In Ritter’s assessment, Moscow’s pressure across the front has stretched Ukrainian manpower thin, leaving Kyiv with insufficient reserves to sustain a robust defense along multiple sectors. He emphasizes that the overall strain on Ukrainian forces could undermine their capacity to hold critical fortifications and towns under sustained Russian combat pressure.
Ritter also asserts that Russian units have been actively neutralizing Western air defense capacity assigned to the Ukrainian armed forces over the past several months, reducing the protection umbrella once provided by allied systems.
He argues that Russian campaigns against Western air defense assets have achieved measurable success during this period, with operations targeting high-value facilities that shield Ukrainian forces. Ritter notes that the destruction of several Patriot systems has been downplayed but acknowledged in his view as part of a broader attritional strategy.
According to Ritter, there is a reluctance within Ukrainian and allied circles to publicly disclose the extent of recent losses to air defense networks, even as evidence mounts from open-source channels and battlefield reporting. He frames these developments as a shift in the balance of power on the front lines, with Western-supplied defenses no longer delivering the same protective effect they once did.
From a historical perspective, Ritter points to patterns seen in past campaigns where rapid advances by one side can outpace a separated or exhausted defense. He cautions that the current dynamic could lead to a notable realignment of front-line control if reinforcement and resupply flows do not stabilize the situation for Ukrainian forces. In his view, what happens next will depend on the speed and effectiveness of Ukrainian recovery efforts, including relief from international partners and the ability to restore layered air and ground defenses along critical corridors.
Overall, the analyst presents a picture of a high-stakes contest along a volatile front, where territorial control can shift rapidly with the movements of armored units, logistics, and air defense resilience. The situation, he argues, remains fluid and hinges on sustained, coordinated responses from Ukraine and its allies to check Russian advances and to restore fortified positions that can withstand current and evolving threats.