Ukraine’s top security leadership signals a deliberate shift in how the counteroffensive is waged. Oleksiy Danilov, head of the National Security and Defense Council, stated that the immediate aim is to move away from rapid, high tempo gains toward a sustained effort designed to steadily wear down the Russian military. The plan focuses on pressure across personnel, fuel depots, military hardware, command nodes, artillery, and air defense assets in a coordinated, long term campaign that builds momentum over time.
In wartime discussion, rhetoric often runs hot on all sides. Prudent observers question whether such blunt statements reflect genuine aims or serve as strategic signaling meant to mislead the adversary. On the surface, the justification seems credible. Kyiv has argued that front lines show limited progress, making a measured recalibration reasonable. The option labeled B appears to be the preferred path at this stage for Ukraine’s leadership.
Regardless of the debate, Kyiv seems determined to deliver tangible results before the NATO summit in Vilnius. To gain leverage, Kyiv seeks to reclaim Artemovsk, which Ukrainian authorities call Bakhmut in Donetsk. While these objectives point to both symbolic and practical gains, no confirmed advances are reported at this time.
On the battlefield, Russian forces have tightened their grip from the north near Berkhovka and from the south around Kleshcheevka and Kurdyumovka. The surrounding high ground provides observers with a clear view over Bakhmut, a factor that guides artillery planning and targeting. In this type of fighting, holding the high ground can translate into a decisive advantage.
Currently, the fiercest fighting centers on the Kleshcheevka area. Ukrainian units have launched sustained assaults for several days, conducting multiple strikes daily. While some gains are claimed, Ukraine’s General Staff has not officially confirmed control of the settlement.
Although the village itself may not be pivotal, its position northwest of Bakhmut offers a commanding overlook of the city. If Russian troops withdraw from Kleshcheevka after intense clashes, the consequences for defense lines around Bakhmut would be substantial. Such a shift could complicate any orderly withdrawal by Russian forces in the broader sector.
Available battlefield reports suggest a scenario in which the dominant high ground favors Ukrainian forces, while the village remains under Russian control. Bakhmut has taken on symbolic significance for both sides within this operation. If Ukrainian forces seize the city in the near term, it could stand as a meaningful milestone in Kyiv’s broader counteroffensive, according to independent assessments from researchers and observers.
There is little doubt that a fall of Bakhmut would lift morale among Ukrainian troops and support personnel. The costs of achieving this outcome remain a critical consideration, including money, logistics, and casualties all factor into the calculation.
The path for Ukrainian advances may begin with securing Kleshcheevka and then pressing toward Bakhmut, yet the readiness of Russian forces to concede such positions remains uncertain. Moscow appears to treat Bakhmut as a matter of principle, with Russian units prepared to defend their positions rather than yield ground.
The analysis presented here reflects informed interpretation rather than an editorial stance. Attribution for context comes from open source military analysis and field briefings from independent observers who monitor the situation on multiple fronts.