Russia stands to gain very little from the bloody battle for Pokrovsk

9 comments

1. 1. We’ll never lose that strategically important city
   2. The enemy is being pulverized around that city
   3. The enemy is trying to capture that city but suffers catastrophic losses
   4. The enemy is baited into trying to capture that city
   5. We may lose that city but the enemy lost much more
   6. That city was never relevant anyway
   7. Here’s why losing that city is actually a win for us

   We are on step six I think, classsic

2. I know all the “Europe” flaired accounts with hundreds of daily contributions and a year-old account are going to be very unhappy with this headline, but it is nonetheless true.

   Pokrovsk was a logistics hub – when the front was Bakhmut! It ceased to be one once it became a frontline city and entry became incredibly difficult due to drone coverage.

   Its primary value is to the defenders. A smoking ruin behind the advancing Russian lines is largely useless. Maybe they can hide equipment and personnel better from long range Ukrainian strikes inside the city’s shelter, but this is a marginal gain at best. The biggest advantage to taking Pokrovsk is the information gain – bolstering the narrative of Russian battlefield success, which is a key strategy at the moment given the otherwise meager, attritional gains Russia has achieved thus far.

   No, Putin has a narrative to sell, the same damn tactic Russia has always used. Lie and bluster and project power even if it is hollow. The louder they get the worse their situation truly is.

3. There have been a number of articles from the Western outlets recently.

   I guess Pokrovsk is completely lost in that case.

   I wonder how much longer can Zelensky justify not conceding territory.

4. It would be a morale boost more than anything. Conversely, if Russia cannot capture the city even after sending so many soldiers to their deaths it would be a huge blow to their self esteem.

5. However it may be, is this not a punch in the face for all the ukrainians who lost their lives protecting this city against the russians? Like i dont know how i’d react if someone i knew got killed just for people online to then say “it wasn’t important anyway”.

6. The Russia glazing that happens in these thread continues to be something to behold.

   Credible sources still put Ukrainian casulties at a 2 to 1 advantage over russia in this conflict. We can stop pretending these assaults aren’t extremely costly for russia from a manpower and equipment perspective. Of course Ukraine isn’t going to indefinitely hold all thier positions are they have a big manpower disadvanatge and a even bigger equipment disadvanatge.

   The question is, with how many advantages russia has, why do they continue to take massive losses and extreme time and effort to capture small areas? Almost 4 years in and Dontensk iand Luhansk aren’t even secured yet. A massive embarassment for Russia.

7. This is a repost / update of a week old article, and at this point it’s even more detached from reality than it was a week ago.

   Pokrovsk and Myrnohrad are going to fall (by some accounts Pokrovsk is already gone), and that is bad news for Ukraine. There’s no logical way to spin this as a good development. Now to be fair, this is not a back-breaking event by itself, but it is yet another fortress lost, and it puts the Russians in favorable position to try to get around behind the remaining fortress belt running from Kostiantynivka to Sloviansk.

   It is true that this has been a tremendously expensive endeavor for the Russians. They’ve lost many thousands of men, and a proportionally high number of vehicles and other equipment. The problem is, it’s a price they seem to be willing and able to pay. This grinding, attritional type of warfare always favors the side with a bigger populace and bigger industrial capacity.

   It just seems dishonest to try to argue that Russia isn’t gaining anything by winning this battle. They’re gaining advantageous position for future advances, and they’ve presumably inflicted high casualties on the Ukrainian army in the process. Something Ukraine can ill afford.

   The pressure on Pokrovsk also seems to have created opportunities elsewhere on the front. The Russians have been steadily advancing in the south (with surprisingly little media attention I might add), and they’re about to be knocking on Huliaipole’s door. I don’t think this would have been possible if Ukraine wasn’t so heavily engaged in Pokrovsk.

   I hate to be so negative about the situation, but it’s hard not to when you analyze what’s happening out there.

8. “the enemy never wins”

   However, there are nuances to this. Obviously, this location was used by Ukraine because it had better conditions for moving equipment in the area. “The Donetsk logistics center”.

   That does not mean that the logistics itself is destroyed, only that it will move to a less optimal location. Whether the Russians can use it in the same way that the Ukrainians did remains to be seen and will require building infrastructure, something that the Russians can do but with serious limitations.

   Everyone seems to be expecting a collapse, but that collapse never comes and probably never will.

9. The reason why it has nothing to gain is because it’s basically already gained the strategic value of it without capturing it. The main value of Pokrovsk was that it was a logistics hub and that it produced coke coal. Ukraine has already been forced to move its logistics elsewhere from the city, thereby disrupting them like was the goal, and coal production has been shutdown for months because of the fighting. Ukraine has basically been denied all the strategic value of pokrovsk at this point, it not just wants to actually capture the city for the symbolic victory. Hopefully Ukraine makes it as bloody for them as possible without needlessly sacrificing troops.

Comments are closed.