Bakhmut’s capture, if confirmed, would put two big long coveted cities in the Donetsk region – Kramatorsk and Sloviansk – in the easy range of Russia. It would also be a morale-boosting battlefield win for Putin after a string of defeats in the last few months. However, the impact is much larger than what meets the eye.
Russian mercenary chief Yevgeny Prigozhin made a statement on Saturday that his Wagner fighters had completed the capture of the Ukrainian city of Bakhmut after months of violent fighting, a claim which was vehemently denied by Ukraine officials.
The main question here is the significance for both sides of the largely ruined megacity at the center of the war’s bloodiest battle.
Logistical Significance of Bakhmut
Bakhmut is largely significant because of its logistical position and if captured by Russia can prove to be a sure turning point in this stretching war. Bakhmut’s capture would lead to putting two bigger, coveted cities in the Donetsk region- Kramatorsk and Sloviansk- within easy range of Russian ordinance. This is exactly what’s demanded by Moscow. It wants to control both to complete what it refers to as the” liberation”.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had told back in March that Russian forces would have “an open road” to the two cities if they took Bakhmut, and said his order to hold it was a critical political decision. The impact of losing Bakhmut can be a highly critical facet of this war.
Potential turning point in this waging war
If verified, this would be Russia’s first major capture since July last year and a true battleground morale booster after a string of defeats in its wake. On the other hand, this could be a morale-weakening incident for Ukraine. The significance of the megacity goes beyond its strategic position.
Retaining it had helped in gaining sustaining harmonious support from Western countries, according to Michael Kofman, an expert on the Russian service at the US-grounded CNA think-tank. Zelenskyy had given the US Congress a battle flag inked by the megacity’s protectors when he’d visited back in December and had told the Associated Press in March that he stressed a Russian capture of the megacity would spark calls from the transnational community and his own country to sue for peace, something which he doesn’t want to do. In this interest, retaining the megacity was a priority not only for Ukraine but more so for the Western powers.
The way to future
According to analysts, Bakhmut capture is not as significant at this point of time as it was a few months ago. Ukraine and Russia have both battled for the city, which Moscow deliberately calls by its Soviet-era name Artyomovsk. There is more this situation than what meets the eye.
While this could be a major morale booster for Russia, the extent of damage and the cost needed to recoup the megacity have majorly softened Russia’s resources. This eventually points out that, indeed, though Russia may have captured the strategically located Bakhmut, it cannot incontinently influence that advantage because of the depleting resources caused by the attempt to capture it. Zelenskyy had rightly portrayed ”Fortress Bakhmut” as a symbol of defiance, which he said was bleeding the Russian army of its resources. His assistant, Mykhailo Podolyak, said the battle had knocked down some of Russia’s strongest units and degraded them. Still, this goes both ways, as retaining Bakhmut has also greatly depleted Ukraine’s resources. With both parties facing depleting resources, changing strategies, and probable new support stances from other countries, this war could be truly heading towards a new path.
