Once more, Russia advances. Once more, Ukraine pulls back.
The fierce and protracted battle that had been predicted for Lysychansk was avoided, according to the regional governor, by a strategic withdrawal.
Serhiy Haidai told me: “Russia currently has a huge advantage in artillery and ammunition. They would have simply destroyed it from a distance, so there was no point in staying.”
That does seem to tally with Russian accounts of the capture of the city, seemingly moving in unopposed. Videos posted on social media on Sunday show Chechen fighters dancing in the central districts.
And well they might celebrate. The capture of Lysychansk means that Russia has essentially taken the entire Luhansk region, a key strategic aim of President Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
So, what does it mean both for the battle for the Donbas, but also the wider war?
Let’s start from the Ukrainian perspective. For them, the crucial thing was to avoid an encirclement, as was seen in Mariupol. Although their defence of the southern port city did slow the Russian advance by many weeks, the end result was the killing or capture of thousands of the most capable soldiers in the Ukrainian army.
Ukraine wanted to avoid that at all costs.
In his nightly address, President Zelensky stated this explicitly. “We will rebuild the walls, we will regain the land, but people must be saved above all else,” he told the nation.
Serhiy Haidai made exactly the same point, telling me: “Our troops have retreated to more fortified positions… We held the defence of Luhansk for five months. While that defence was holding, we were building new fortifications in the Donetsk region. Now the troops have gone there.”
Writing a few hours after the fall of Lysychansk, presidential adviser Oleksiy Arestovych even went as far as calling the defence of Lysychansk-Severodonetsk “a successful military operation”.
Given that the Russian flag now flies above both cities, that logic may seem a little perverse, but his point is that they were playing a long game, buying valuable time.
To understand this logic, you need to understand the importance of Western weapons to Ukraine’s resistance. In short, without Nato supplies they would be in even greater trouble than they currently are.
The longer they can delay the Russian advance, the more advanced rocket and artillery systems they can bring to the fight. US-provided HIMARS, already in action, are said to radically alter the balance of the conflict. More time means more supplies, which in turn tips the scales in their favour, especially given that sanctions mean Russia is struggling to replace its spent hardware and ammunition.
