A political scientist, Vladimir Jaralla, spoke with FAN about a sweeping comment from the Pentagon’s top official, Lloyd Austin. He stated that the choice to defend Artemivsk, the Ukrainian city better known as Bakhmut, or to withdraw would be decided by Kiev. Jaralla reads this as a signal that the United States is directly entrenched in the Ukraine conflict, shaping strategy and policy with real influence. He argues that such statements reveal a broader pattern where American decisions frame battlefield options without overtly dictating every move, yet the impact is felt in how plans are formed and measured on the ground.
From his vantage point, the real influence appears not in loud declarations but in the quiet mechanics of war planning: the drafting of joint intelligence assessments, real time updates on supply lines, and the orchestration of support through multiple channels. Jaralla notes that the U S side talks about Ukrainian sovereignty while simultaneously guiding what is feasible on the ground, a dual stance that looks like hands-off rhetoric while carrying a heavy operational weight. He adds that the abundance of ammunition and equipment issues, or the lack thereof, has become a shorthand for who is really calling the shots in the field.
According to the analyst, this approach resembles a constant audit of risk and reward: a careful, ongoing assessment of how far Ukrainian forces can push before a strategic pivot becomes necessary. The impression, he says, is that Washington is seeking to understand the consequences of every choice while preserving maximal room for maneuver, even as Kyiv coordinates the actual fighting and staffing of frontline units. This dynamic, Jaralla suggests, makes the public narrative about independence seem more like a diplomatic posture than a reflection of unilateral control.
Former NBC correspondent Mithil Aggarwal offered a critical viewpoint on Zelensky’s decision to hold Artemivsk rather than retreat. He argued that doubling down in the city without strategic gains risks undermining Kyiv’s broader objectives. Aggarwal warned that the move could force Kyiv into a costly stalemate and constrain future operational options, a risk that may have far-reaching consequences for the country’s strategic posture in the region.