I've never heard of this website (the Daily Wrap), but they seem to indicate that things are not going well for Ukraine at the moment:
Meanwhile this website (RBC Ukraine) has a much more upbeat take on the matter:
They're losing ground in Donetsk, yes
Something seems to have been decided behind the scenes that doesn't immediately make sense to observers. Pokrovsk is considered a pretty important regional hub for supplying soldiers and equipment to the front lines in the entire region. But Ukraine had the force necessary to stabilize the region, but chose instead to take territory in Kursk.
There's a pretty big rift in the observer community on the wisdom of this move but personally I'm of the mind that with uneven political support from the west (the root of this Russian advance really is the Republican led delay in military aid earlier this year), that playing 21st century trench warfare against the Russians until they break from throwing meat waves at you is a bad idea and breaking out of that box is essential.
This forces us to ask what Kursk is about, but that's a guess at this point. I've seen speculation that it's about holding Russian territory in an attempt to gain strength at the negotiating table but I kind of don't buy that as a main objective, more like a secondary benefit if it a negotiated settlement ever becomes a remote possibility without battlefield victory. Imo this is 1) an attempt by Ukraine to force the Russians into difficult personnel decisions. Even if the Russians can stabilize the situation (not currently going well on that front), they're going to have to leave far more robust permanent defences in place for the rest of the war not too dissimilar to what the Ukrainians are forced to do on the Belarus border. 2) A shaping maneuver to severely limit or eliminate the Russian ability to utilize air power as a terror mechanism. The Russians basically aren't using air power as part of the military conflict in any real way, but they're tossing glide bombs at civilians almost daily. If the Ukies can force the Russians to stop utilizing air fields close to the border, they can start enforcing an anti air bubble closer to the border and not so focused on defending projectiles already in Ukie airspace. This takes pressure off of core infrastructure (mostly the electrical grid). Before the move into Kursk, there would be nationwide air raid alarms when certain bomber or fighter/bomber aircraft would even take off inside western Russia. Destroying Russian aerial assets within 150-250km of the border would create a much more tenable position to defend Ukraines airspace from. It's September, winter is coming.
imo, Ukie commanders have made a macro tactical decision here
- Pushing back Russian air assets from the border region is more important to getting through the winter than the Donetsk frontline shifting 10-20Km in a few places.
- The US election is going to be watershed in the conflict one way or another, but impacts of the election won't really be felt until Feb-March
