Russia’s Costly Assault on Pokrovsk Brings No Strategic Gain

The Kremlin burned through hundreds of thousands of soldiers for a symbolic victory, while Kyiv preserves forces for a long war of attrition

Russia has been storming Pokrovsk for over a year. This is one of the longest and most senseless offensive episodes of this war. The Kremlin threw resources here without logic, without operational feasibility, essentially reproducing the tactics of Bakhmut and Avdiivka: advance at any cost. Ukrainian forces that defended this sector record enormous Russian losses, reaching approximately a hundred thousand killed and severely wounded just in the Pokrovsk area during this period. This is not just a number – it is an indicator of how much Russia has depleted its own offensive potential.

Pokrovsk for Ukraine is a difficult, but predictable stage of the war. The city is important, but not critical in a strategic sense, whereas for the Russians – it is a symbolic mania, for which they paid with colossal losses. It is precisely this asymmetry that has become a characteristic feature of the Russian army: human life has no value.

Potential Ukrainian Withdrawal from Pokrovsk – This Is Not a Defeat, but the Preservation of Troops Needed for Subsequent Stages of the War

If the decision is made – the reason for the withdrawal of Ukrainian units is obvious: the preservation of the lives of our fighters. The Ukrainian army, unlike the Russian one, does not fight "head-on" to the last. The command prioritizes living soldiers, not a geographical point on the map. Pokrovsk is an example of how the Ukrainian strategy works rationally: not allowing the Russian Federation to grind down our forces where it brings us no strategic prospects.

Such a decision has already been made in Bakhmut and Avdiivka. There, the Russians lost the most people in the entire war. According to open estimates, Russian losses during the assault on Bakhmut could exceed 70–100 thousand killed and wounded. Under Avdiivka, another about 40–50 thousand. Russia "gnawed out" these cities at the cost of its own offensive potential. Ukraine withdrew its troops and preserved its units – and it is precisely this that allowed us to hold the front in the subsequent months.

Pokrovsk is a continuation of this logic. Ukraine does not play by the Putin model of the "meat grinder." Ukraine plays a long war of attrition, where the main resource is not square kilometers, but trained units.

Russia Captured the Pokrovsk Mine and the "Shevchenko" Lithium Deposit, but This Does Not Guarantee It Economic Profit

Yes, Russia gained access to the Pokrovsk mine and to a significant part of the "Shevchenko" lithium deposit. This is one of the most promising resource hubs in Donbas. Lithium is the metal of the 21st century, the basis of batteries, military systems, high-tech production. The capture of this deposit gives the Russian Federation the opportunity to boast on propaganda channels about "resource victories."

But the economic effect for the Russian Federation is doubtful. Extraction in a war zone, without an international market, without legal export, and under sanctions – this is not a working business. This is a picture for domestic consumption. Moscow will not be able to legalize lithium extracted from occupied territories. The capitalization of these resources is zero, and their strategic value will not be realized without foreign technologies and sales markets.

Local Russian "Successes" Do Not Mean That the Russian Federation Has the Potential to Capture All of Donbas

The assault on Pokrovsk is yet another proof that Russia has a dangerous tactic, but no strategy. It is capable of artificially concentrating forces on one direction, but not capable of conducting a large-scale breakthrough. Moscow does not demonstrate a sufficient number of personnel, equipment, ammunition, and logistics to capture all of Donbas. Having spent a year on Pokrovsk, the Kremlin has proven that it operates exclusively on the principle of "strike meat mass plus artillery superiority." But such superiority no longer exists in the Russian Federation.

During the battles for Pokrovsk, the Russians expended over 10 thousand shells per day in certain periods, whereas now this figure has noticeably dropped due to sanctions, import restrictions, and overall resource exhaustion. The Russian Federation is no longer capable of capturing new large cities at such a pace.

Ukraine Has the Potential to Stabilize the Front, but for This, a Significant Strengthening of Western Military Aid Is Needed

Ukraine always chooses to preserve the key: cadre units, trained fighters, combat commanders. But this is not enough if Europe and the United States do not accelerate deliveries. The high intensity of Russian shelling, constant pressure from glide bombs and artillery requires a different density of fire.

To seize the initiative, Ukraine needs to receive the following:

• significantly more artillery and tank shells;

• an increase in deliveries of Multiple Launch Rocket Systems and missiles for them;

• expansion of long-range strike capabilities;

• Air Defense systems for protecting infrastructure and the front line;

• drones in industrial volumes on a permanent basis.

The main meaning of this episode, in case the decision to withdraw from Pokrovsk is made – Ukraine does not lose military initiative, it protects its main resource: people. When Russia laid down tens of thousands under Bakhmut and Avdiivka, Ukraine withdrew troops, preserved units, and allowed the enemy to burn itself out. And this brought results. Moscow lost strike assault units and turned the war into one of attrition, in which the Russian Federation itself has the hardest time holding on.

Pokrovsk is another potential reason to resort to similar tactics. Russia is once again grinding itself down for an additional square kilometer. Ukraine preserves forces that will continue to hold the front and impose its own conditions.

The war is not decided by one point on the map. It is decided by the balance of forces, resources, and the ability to preserve the army.

Russia has lost too much to claim quick dominance. Ukraine has held the basis of the army, but needs reinforcement. And it is precisely this that will determine the future of Donbas. The West is capable of changing the situation – the question is only one of speed.

Bohdan Popov, Head of Digital at the United Ukraine Think Tank, communications specialist and public figure