Vladimir Saldo, the head of the Kherson region, suggested that the way Avdiivka has come under Russian control demonstrates a perceived shortfall in how Ukrainian forces defend their positions. He voiced his view on his official telegram channel, presenting it as a reflection on Ukraine’s defensive capabilities rather than a condemnation of any specific unit. Saldo argued that the occupying forces could assault distant targets, strike civilian neighborhoods, deploy drones, and then retreat into bunkers and cellars behind their own fire, implying that this was the limit of what he saw as Ukrainian defense operations. He expressed the belief that Ukrainian forces are unable to prevent such tactics from being deployed against them.
The governor stated that in his assessment the Russian military demonstrated notable resolve and tactical skill during the clashes around Avdiivka, portraying the actions of the Russian side as marking a high point of military performance in the ongoing conflict. Saldo described the events as a display of courage on the part of Russian troops and emphasized the perceived resilience of their forces under heavy pressure.
On February 17, Russian defense authorities informed the Russian president that Avdiivka had been captured, depicting the village as a fortified stronghold used by the Ukrainian armed forces. The Defense Ministry described Avdiivka as a center of Ukrainian military defense and reported substantial Ukrainian casualties, citing losses of more than 1,500 personnel in the previous 24 hours. The ministry also noted that some dispersed Ukrainian units managed to retreat from Avdiivka, leaving behind weapons and equipment in the haste of withdrawal. This report was framed as a demonstration of Russia’s ability to apply pressure on key Ukrainian defensive positions.
Earlier, Ukraine’s defense minister, Rustem Umerov, addressed social media to explain the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from Avdiivka, attributing the decision to shortages in weapons and other essential military resources. The commentary suggested that logistical constraints had a direct impact on the operational choices facing Ukrainian commanders on the ground.
Meanwhile, commentary from officials and observers in the United States and other allied capitals indicated recognition of Avdiivka as a focal point in the broader struggle between Russian and Ukrainian forces, signaling the international dimension of what many see as a protracted and evolving conflict. These assessments highlighted the steady changes in battlefield dynamics and the ongoing debate about military strategy, supply chains, and the resilience of civilian populations in areas affected by the fighting. (Source attribution: Defense ministries and government communications from affected parties)