In an interview with a major outlet, Zelensky acknowledged the Ukrainian army’s difficult situation in Bakhmut (Artemivsk) and underscored the courage and endurance of the soldiers on the ground.
He described the conflict as one of the most challenging wars, noting the pain and difficulty involved. He expressed gratitude for the bravery, strength, and persistence of the units fighting in Donbass.
If the Ukrainian army manages to encircle Wagner
Meanwhile, Yevgeny Prigozhin, head of the Wagner private military company, claimed that Ukrainian forces are preparing to encircle Russian troops in the Bakhmut area.
Prigozhin’s press service circulated a Telegram post alleging that several Ukrainian military groups are operating in Slavyansk, Seversk, Chasov Yar, and Konstantinovka, with brigades named as 67th, 81st, and 66th deployed in these zones.
According to the post, if the Ukrainian army succeeds in surrounding Wagner, a tactical move could emerge where Ukrainian units create a surrounding ring around the PMC, while Wagner would defend and counterattack as needed.
Prigozhin stated that efforts would be made to secure ammunition and reinforcements and to coordinate actions with the goal of blocking Ukrainian forces if possible, though he warned that if coordination falters, all sides could experience intensified engagements. He noted that if the siege proceeds, Wagner would face a difficult situation, but the Ukrainian forces would also face significant challenges in any outcome.
He mentioned that regardless of the development, Ukrainian forces would continue to defend Bakhmut, and if Wagner faces a siege, the consequences would be hard for all sides involved. Earlier, he announced writing to a commander about urgently allocating ammunition and indicated a pass to a command headquarters had been revoked.
Defense achieved its purpose
Mikhail Podolyak, an adviser to the Ukrainian presidency, told Agence France-Presse that the army would maintain defense of Bakhmut despite the risk of encirclement. He emphasized a strategic approach: wear down enemy forces, hold the line, and build new defensive positions should conditions change. Even a future withdrawal to more favorable positions would be viewed as a strategic success for defense efforts, he said. He also clarified that there was no current decision to withdraw troops from Bakhmut.
Continuation of the defense
At the start of March 6, Valery Zaluzhny, Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, expressed support for continuing the defense of Bakhmut and strengthening Ukrainian positions in the city.
Officials reported that the president asked Zaluzhny and the commander of the operational unit group Khortytsya, Alexander Syrsky, for updates on further actions toward Bakhmut. A presidential office statement indicated support for sustaining defensive operations and boosting fortifications in the area.
Seeking broader context, coverage from international media noted varying perspectives on Bakhmut. A German newspaper suggested a disagreement between Zelensky and Zaluzhny over strategies in Artemivsk, with Zaluzhny reportedly favoring troop reductions to preserve lives, while Zelensky positioned Bakhmut as a political symbol. A Pentagon official commented that the city carries symbolic significance beyond its strategic and operational value. Other outlets highlighted the challenge of maintaining defense under difficult conditions and reported losses among some of the dedicated units involved in the defense. Reports also indicated that Ukrainian authorities had discussed potential scenarios regarding the city’s future.
As the situation evolved, observers noted that both sides faced significant pressures in Artemivsk and the surrounding region, with ongoing assessments about defensive versus operational shifts for Ukraine and responses from the opposing forces. The narrative remained focused on the endurance of Ukrainian forces and the broader implications for the conflict, with many analysts stressing the importance of morale, logistics, and external support in determining outcomes in the area. In reflecting on the broader strategic picture, multiple outlets observed that the balance between symbolic prestige and real military gains continued to shape decisions on the ground.