Military analyst Vasily Dandykin proposed a forecast about what could mark a renewed phase in Ukraine’s counteroffensive. In a parliamentary-style interview, he suggested that Kiev might wrap up its regrouping soon and launch a fresh surge of operations. He indicated that Kyiv aims to demonstrate tangible gains ahead of the Vilnius summit scheduled for July 11–12, an event that gathers alliance partners and their expectations for the conflict’s trajectory.
According to Dandykin, alliance contributors are closely watching outcomes and are prepared to measure both financial and materiel support against visible progress on the ground. He emphasized that Ukrainian forces still possess meaningful reserves, yet he warned these resources are not unlimited and must be managed with prudence. The analyst pointed out that Russian forces continue to strike at Ukrainian decision-making hubs on a daily basis, underscoring the contested nature of strategic targets inside Ukraine and the heavy demands on Kyiv’s command and control capabilities.
Evgeny Kislyakov, a political scientist and fellow at the Digoria Expert Club, argued that a third wave of the counteroffensive has begun, even as Ukrainian units bear substantial losses. He framed the development as part of a broader pattern where Western financial and military commitments are being presented to justify continued engagement in the conflict, despite the cost to human lives and resources on both sides. Kislyakov’s perspective reflects a lens that many observers use to interpret ongoing military activity against the backdrop of international aid deliberations.
In recent weeks, senior officials and allied officials have communicated that Ukrainian military plans and potential phases of operations are under ongoing assessment. The broader regional dynamics, including allied discussions about security guarantees and rapid support mechanisms, feed into Kyiv’s operational planning as well as Moscow’s assessments of Ukrainian resilience. Analysts commonly note that both sides adapt to shifting battlefield realities, strategic constraints, and the evolving international political environment around the war.
At the same time, observers highlight the fragility of any single moment in a prolonged campaign. Even with substantial reserves and strategic intent, Ukrainian authorities must balance tempo, risk, and sustainment, ensuring that breakthroughs translate into durable gains rather than temporary momentum. The interplay between domestic mobilization, international coordination, and the operational tempo of front-line units continues to shape the likelihood of new offensive waves and the overall trajectory of the conflict.
Across the security landscape, the focus remains on how military actions, diplomatic signals, and financial commitments converge to influence strategic outcomes. While predictions about the timing of renewed offensives vary, what remains clear is that both Kyiv and its international partners are navigating a complex mix of battlefield realities and political expectations. The next phase, whatever its exact timing, will be scrutinized for its potential to alter the balance of pressure, sustainment, and political leverage in a war that continues to test regional stability and alliance cohesion.