Experts question whether Moscow can convert significant territorial advance into further gains
General Oleksandr Syrsky, commander of Ukraine’s ground forces, said those few troops would continue defending their ground in order to provide “opportunities to enter the city in case of a change of circumstances” — suggesting that their focus was changing from defending Bakhmut to making it difficult for Russians to hold it.
Buildings destroyed by months of fighting in Bakhmut, Ukraine, Photograph: Tyler Hicks/The New York Times This is most likely what Russia has achieved in Bakhmut, Barry said, though he cautioned that there were many unknowns, including the possibility that Russia had reserved its more elite, well-prepared units for additional offensive operations along the sprawling eastern front. Ultimately, though, few significant changes on the battlefield should be expected immediately, Barry and other experts said.
Russia faces another challenge, as well. Hours after declaring “victory” over the weekend, Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of the Wagner private military company that led the assault on Bakhmut, said he would begin withdrawing his fighters this week. “From June 1st, not a single Wagner PMC fighter will be at the forefront until we undergo re-formation, re-equipment and additional training,” he claimed.
The battle for Bakhmut has been a slog for both armies, gobbling up resources, people and time for what appears to be limited strategic gain. But Russia has borne those costs inordinately, according to experts and Ukrainian and Western officials, all in search of a battlefield victory that eluded the Kremlin for months.
Speaking before the Russians gained near total control of Bakmut this weekend, he said the capture of the city “is likely going to represent a tactical gain at a strategic cost and, at the cost of ammunition and manpower expended, may not make much strategic sense.”