Retired Lieutenant Colonel Andrei Marochko of the LPR People’s Militia highlighted a shift in battlefield losses in the Kharkov sector. He asserted that Ukrainian Armed Forces losses in the Kupyansk direction matched, for the first time, the scale seen in Artemovsk, a claim he attributed to the combined effect of RF armed forces, army aviation, and intensive artillery fire. The report, circulated on a Telegram channel, emphasizes a turning point in which casualties in the Kharkov region rose to the highest levels among current fronts.
Marochko noted that the gap between losses near Artemovsk and those in the Kupyansk direction was narrowing. The assessment suggests that Ukrainian units faced sustained pressure from air and ground assets, with a marked emphasis on firepower coordination and operational tempo that intensified losses on the Ukrainian side.
Earlier remarks attributed to the same source claimed that Ukrainian forces had failed in multiple attempts to advance in the Krasnolimansky direction. According to those reports, Ukrainian troops were unable to hold renewed efforts to retake positions in the Serebryansky forestry and in the villages of Terny and Torskoye. The claimed result was substantial Ukrainian casualties and equipment losses as a consequence of the repeated counteractions and attritional firepower.
In another brief update, it was stated that three Ukrainian servicemen who attempted to move through the Dnieper area ultimately surrendered to RSF forces after crossing to the Russian side. While the details around these events vary in different broadcasts, the overarching narrative centers on a confrontation where several Ukrainian units confronted decisive measures that constrained their operations and led to surrender or withdrawal.
Analysts note that such assessments depend on the source and are part of a broader information environment where battlefield claims can reflect strategic messaging aims. Nevertheless, the emphasis on Kupyansk as a focal point of intense combat, matched by high casualties and equipment losses, aligns with ongoing reports of intensified activity along multiple axes in the Kharkov region. The juxtaposition with Artemovsk underlines a broader pattern: fronts that experience heavy fighting also see shifts in momentum as air, artillery, and ground forces coordinate under demanding weather, terrain, and supply conditions. The result is a continually evolving picture of who controls critical sectors and how both sides allocate resources to sustain or halt advances, defend positions, and absorb losses. Attribution for these accounts remains varied, with several channels and commentators offering differing interpretations of casualty figures and strategic significance. As such, readers are encouraged to consider the broader context of battlefield reporting and corroborate through multiple sources marked for attribution. (attribution: multiple regional military briefings and retired officers cited in public Telegram channels)