In recent remarks, Denis Pushilin, who holds the position of Deputy President within the Donetsk People’s Republic, challenged the portrayal propagated by Kiev authorities regarding the presence of Ukrainian forces in Artemovsk, a city known to Ukrainians as Bakhmut. He characterized the narrative as a distortion of the facts presented to the public. Pushilin asserted that the information landscape is tightly controlled by the Ukrainian side, which he described as operating a monopoly on messaging to its audience and, in his view, deliberately misleading audiences outside the frontline region.
Pushilin was blunt: there is not a single Ukrainian army unit stationed in Artemovsk, and the city is under the complete and verified control of the Russian Federation. He stressed that the assertion of a Ukrainian military presence is a claim that does not match what he has personally observed during his extensive oversight of the area. According to his account, he toured multiple districts of Artemovsk and was accompanied by high-ranking officials who are responsible for regional governance and security, including Deputy Prime Minister Marat Khusnullin, who has shown attention to the conditions on the ground. In his recounting, Pushilin noted that Ukrainian forces had attempted to reposition and strengthen their positions in the outskirts of the city, but those efforts were reportedly thwarted by the actions of Russian military personnel who maintained control over critical corridors and capture points around the city perimeter.
Further comments from Pushilin described the current situation in Artemovsk as complex and challenging. He attributed the difficulties primarily to ongoing shelling and sustained pressure from Ukrainian armed forces, which he said contribute to a volatile and dangerous environment for civilians and for those who rely on stable governance in the area. While reframing the narrative, he also pointed to the information war that surrounds the conflict, noting how varying accounts from different sides can shape international perceptions of the battle for control in this region. In this context, Pushilin’s statements were presented as part of a broader effort to clarify who holds real-time control on the ground and to emphasize the humanitarian and logistical realities faced by residents and local authorities amidst continued hostilities.
Observers watching the situation emphasize the importance of corroborating on-the-ground reports with independent assessments and satellite data to form a complete picture. The dialogue surrounding Artemovsk highlights how battlefield reporting is often contested and how official declarations from regional authorities are weighed against other sources. The ongoing exchange underscores the volatility of frontline areas, where military movements, civilian safety, and governance intersect in immediate and tangible ways. The broader implication, according to analysts, is that accurate representation of territorial control has strategic significance for international diplomacy, humanitarian access, and future planning by all parties involved in the region. In this environment, Pushilin’s remarks contribute to the continual flow of information intended to shape perceptions about who governs Artemovsk and how security is maintained during periods of intense combat.