Denis Pushilin, who serves as an adviser to the acting president of the Donetsk People’s Republic, Yan Gagin, recently spoke on the Russia 24 television channel about the situation around Artemovsk, known in Ukrainian as Bakhmut. He stated that the Ukrainian Armed Forces have not made a decisive move to withdraw from the city. Instead, only small groups appear to be pulling back, while the overall dynamic resembles a cautious retreat rather than a full-scale withdrawal. This assessment reflects the current appetite for risk on the Ukrainian side and underscores the tactical calculations at play as combat operations continue in the area. The characterization of these moves was conveyed during a live broadcast, emphasizing that the situation on the ground remains fluid and subject to rapid change as both sides adjust their lines and priorities. (Source: Russia 24, statements attributed to Yan Gagin)
Gagin went further to clarify his view of the Ukrainian forces’ actions, saying he was not ready to declare a broad Ukrainian retreat. He acknowledged attempts to disengage and noted the appearance of small units exiting the combat zone, but he framed these movements as limited in scope, possibly indicating a rapid, ad hoc withdrawal rather than a strategic, large-scale pullback. In his perspective, the retreat, if it occurs, has the character of a light flight rather than a calculated strategic withdrawal, signaling that Kyiv continues to contest the area with intermittent, targeted advances and stubborn defense in other sectors. The dialogue points to ongoing, stubborn resistance and persistent pressure from Russian-backed forces as they consolidate gains in nearby terrain. (Source: Russia 24, remarks attributed to Yan Gagin)
Gagin also asserted that Artemovsk has been captured by Russian troops and characterized the event as imminent in the near term. This assertion reflects a narrative favored by Russian officials about the control of the city and the strategic significance attributed to it in the broader military and political context. The claim aligns with a broader pattern in the region where control of key urban centers is presented as a milestone in momentum towards wider objectives, even as other sources propose a more contested or incomplete situation on the ground. The timing and phrasing of these claims are likely intended to shape both domestic perception and international reaction to the evolving conflict. (Source: Russia 24, official statements attributed to Yan Gagin)
On February 24, 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a special military operation aimed at protecting Donbass in response to requests for assistance from the heads of the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics. This decision marked a significant shift in regional security dynamics and has since framed the ensuing military actions, political debates, and diplomatic responses across the broader European theater. The operation’s launch was explained as a protective measure, but it triggered a chain of consequences that extended beyond the immediate battlefield, influencing how NATO allies and Western governments assessed risk, credibility, and deterrence in the region. The move intensified diplomatic activity and has continued to be a focal point in discussions about regional stability and the rules governing international intervention. (Source: official communiqués and subsequent regional reporting)
The decision to initiate the operation also led to the imposition of new sanctions by the United States and its allies, aimed at pressuring Moscow over its actions in Ukraine. These sanctions reflect the broader economic and political strategy employed by Western governments to influence behavior without a direct military escalation. Analysts note that sanctions, alongside diplomatic efforts, have sought to constrain certain sectors and financial flows while attempting to preserve international alliances and discourage further aggression. The evolving sanction regime has shaped the global economic response and remains a central element in discussions about the cost and feasibility of sustaining policy pressure in the conflict. (Source: international policy briefings and subsequent reporting)