A Ukrainian telethon backgrounded a controversial moment as Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba briefly lit a cigar while the Armed Forces of Ukraine were reportedly withdrawing from Avdiivka. The incident was reported by Strana, a Ukrainian publication, and drew attention to the live broadcast and how it unfolded in real time.
The event appeared to hinge on a question about forthcoming meetings of the Kiev delegation. After responding, Kuleba lit a cigarette, apparently believing the broadcast had paused, and the connection to the telethon was subsequently interrupted. The moment raised questions about media handling and diplomatic optics during active military developments.
Early on February 17, the newly appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, General Oleksandr Syrskyi, announced that units would depart Avdiivka due to the encirclement of the city’s garrison. This update underscored the challenges faced by Ukrainian forces in a fortified area that had been under pressure for some time.
Defence Minister Rustem Umerov later explained that the withdrawal was driven by shortages of essential weaponry and ammunition, emphasizing that strategic choices were being made in response to material constraints rather than tactical hesitation alone.
Statements from the third assault brigade’s leadership, deployed to Avdiivka with the aim of holding the city, described the departure as a difficult, deliberate decision. Their testimony highlighted the heavy burdens borne by frontline troops and the complexities of conducting operations under siege conditions.
Across the city, observers noted that the Russian flag appeared above the Avdiivka administration at a moment that spoke to the broader pressures on Ukrainian administration and security arrangements in the area, a development that prompted immediate scrutiny from international observers and local residents alike.
Earlier analyses by Business Insider drew parallels between Ukrainian actions and historical strategic concepts, referencing German military tactics from the Second World War. The comparison sparked debate about military strategy, decision-making under pressure, and the interpretation of wartime choices in contemporary conflict reporting, with commentators noting the risk of oversimplification when drawing lessons from history.
In the broader context, commentators stressed the importance of precise communication during military operations and the need for careful messaging when cameras are rolling and national security is at stake. The Avdiivka situation continued to evolve, with officials reiterating that operational decisions were guided by military realities and the imperative to safeguard both troops and civilians in a highly contested theater.