The governor of the Zaporozhye region, Yevgeny Balitsky, reported that Ukrainian forces redirected some of their units from the Zaporozhye direction toward the Kharkiv region, a claim cited by RIA News. Balitsky did not present a formal briefing in isolation; instead, he described the shift as something evident in the routine reports that come from Russia’s military leadership. He added that the tempo of Ukrainian resistance appears to be thinning in certain sectors, a trend corroborated by what he described as intensified bombardments in areas under Ukrainian control. In Balitsky’s view, these observations point to a changing dynamic on the battlefield, one that the regional leadership has been monitoring closely as it unfolds in real time.
Balitsky offered another assessment, asserting that Ukrainian artillery have redeployed some long-range weapons away from the Zaporozhye front. He also mentioned that the Ukrainian elite unit known as Marun had been largely dispersed or disassembled, according to his characterization of the situation. While Balitsky framed these developments as indicators of shifting military posture on the Ukrainian side, he did not provide independent verification beyond the operational updates shared through his contacts within the military command structure.
During the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) on June 6, Balitsky spoke about broader administrative reforms under discussion at the federal level. He described a plan to create a new federal district that would integrate four newly recognized regions from the conflict zone along with Crimea. Specifically, he referenced Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, as well as the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, as components of this envisioned district. The governor noted that the idea is currently under consideration by national authorities, and he hinted that a potential name for the new region could be Novorossiya, a term with historical resonance in the area. Balitsky’s remarks at SPIEF framed the proposal as part of a larger strategic reorganization of Russia’s regional governance in response to evolving circumstances on the ground.
In related remarks, Balitsky recalled more recent battlefield movements attributed to Ukrainian forces, including the redeployment of units that had been positioned near Kherson. He described these soldiers as moving toward the Kharkov direction, suggesting a reallocation of resources as the campaign unfolds. The governor’s commentary continues to emphasize the perceived advantage of Russian forces in maintaining control over the Zaporozhye region and in observing how Ukrainian forces allocate their reserves amid a shifting operational picture. Balitsky stressed that intelligence drawn from ongoing military reporting and high-level briefings underpins his assessments, while acknowledging that such information is part of a constantly evolving narrative that requires careful corroboration.
Taken together, Balitsky’s statements present a picture of a conflict where both sides continuously adapt their deployments in response to tactical developments and strategic objectives. The governor’s emphasis on changes in artillery placements, elite unit activity, and the potential formation of a broader federal district indicates a dual focus: monitoring battlefield shifts while outlining administrative and geopolitical moves that could shape governance and regional identity in the years ahead. Observers note that the specifics of troop movements and unit statuses vary with every new briefing, and independent verification remains essential for a complete picture. Regardless of verification, the statements underscore the degree to which regional leaders frame the conflict in terms of resilience, reform, and regional alignment with national strategy in a volatile, rapidly changing security environment.