Ukraine: Pokrovsk marks the beginning of a foretold defeat

The Western narrative insists on portraying the Ukrainian army as resilient, ready to resist "until victory." But the figures and operational dynamics emerging from the front tell a very different story: Ukraine is not collapsing, but losing , and the next significant defeat could come at Pokrovsk .

A lack of men that paralyzes the defense

The most serious issue is numerical: the Ukrainian armed forces are operating with an estimated deficit of 300,000 personnel . This shortage makes it impossible to maintain a continuous front, transforming the defense lines into a constellation of isolated and vulnerable positions. Instead of concentrating efforts on replenishing existing units, Kiev's strategy favors the creation of new brigades, further fragmenting the already limited operational capacity.

Cannibalization of forces and attrition

The lack of trained infantry forces the military to "cannibalize" its structure: support personnel are moved to the front lines, depriving the rear areas and logistics of vital resources. The result is a depleted army, deprived of rotations and worn down by constant Russian pressure. Overall strength is rapidly deteriorating, while the desertion rate is rising, a phenomenon that has been on the rise since 2024 and exacerbated by forced mobilization.

Allocation errors and failed historical models

Ukraine's elite brigades, rather than being deployed in targeted offensive operations, remain locked in static defense. It's a pattern reminiscent of the Wehrmacht's final phase in World War II: valuable troops pinned down in positions destined to fall, by order of a higher command that feared the loss of face more than the loss of men. The Battle of Bakhmut is emblematic of this approach: maintaining control of the terrain at all costs, even at the cost of unsustainable losses, initiated a cycle of attrition from which the army has never recovered.

The weight of an obsolete command

Within the Ukrainian forces, the command structure has taken on a more rigid and centralized form, with micromanagement slowing down necessary tactical retreats. The gap between those who make decisions in Kiev and those who fight on the ground is creating growing frustration, with officers denouncing decisions disconnected from operational reality.

Logistical challenge and strategic vulnerabilities

The Russian advance is forcing Kiev to concentrate troops on vital supply routes, emptying other areas, such as the Kiev area. This emergency redeployment opens up new vulnerabilities and risks turning into a logistical nightmare, as Moscow exploits every crack in its defenses.

Diplomacy and negotiations: Putin has the advantage

On the political level, Putin's strategic positioning has strengthened. On the eve of talks with Donald Trump in Alaska, Moscow reiterated its conditions: a ceasefire and Ukrainian withdrawal from areas under Russian control. Trump, while refusing to negotiate the territorial issue without Kiev's direct involvement, says he is ready to push for an immediate truce. According to some rumors, he has even considered offering Russia access to rare earth minerals and other resources as an incentive for peace.

An unstable balance

The European side and Trump have declared that a ceasefire should be the first step, but history teaches that negotiating in the midst of hostilities favors those in a position of strength on the ground. If the current dynamics do not change, Ukraine risks arriving at the negotiating table at a clear disadvantage , with Pokrovsk as the new symbol of a strategy that has consumed men and resources without achieving lasting gains.

Russia aims at attrition and not at advancement as a priority While the slogan of "resistance until victory" continues to be repeated in the West, the facts show a Ukrainian army in structural erosion , forced to fight with tired men, depleted resources, and a command that prioritizes narrative over the survival of its troops. If Pokrovsk falls, it will not only be a tactical defeat: it will mark the beginning of a phase in which the war can no longer be presented as a balanced arm wrestling match, but as what it already is—a slow and methodical Russian advance towards objectives declared from the outset.