Contrasting Narratives: Analyzing Russias Claims of Victory Amidst Battlefield Setbacks

In late August, Valery Gerasimov, the chief of Russia’s General Staff, announced significant victories for his forces throughout eastern and southern Ukraine as part of their summer offensive. He referred to thousands of square kilometers of newly acquired territory, nearly 150 captured settlements, and a near-encirclement of Kupiansk, a vital town in the Kharkiv region.

However, independent evaluations portray a far more subdued reality.

Western analysts, Ukrainian officials, and even pro-Russian military bloggers contend that Moscow’s advancements are much less substantial than what the Kremlin asserts, and these gains have come at a high cost in terms of lives and equipment.

Analysts argue that the discrepancy between the Russian military’s optimistic proclamations and the actual situation on the battlefield contributes to President Vladimir Putin’s belief that Russia is prevailing in the conflict. This perception potentially undermines any motivation for the Kremlin to pursue genuine peace negotiations.

Ukrainian military expert Ivan Stupak pointed out that there is no clear distinction between a «spring-summer offensive,» noting that Russia’s strategic goals are ambiguous.

«The Russian military has been progressing continuously since October 2023. Lacking concrete plans, the Kremlin can label any result a ‘victory’ — it’s always possible to present the outcomes achieved as part of the original strategy,» Stupak remarked to The Moscow Times.

The U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War reported that Russia has captured approximately 2,346 square kilometers and 130 settlements since March 1, which is about a third less than the figures Gerasimov provided.

Regarding Kupiansk, where Gerasimov claimed Russian forces control half the city, satellite images and publicly available data indicate that Moscow only holds about 6.3% of the urban area.

Some inconsistencies seem to be intentional. For instance, the map displayed during Gerasimov’s briefing included areas taken as early as early 2024, thereby exaggerating the achievements of this year.

Analysts from ISW suggest that the intention behind this is twofold: to project power to Western audiences pondering military aid to Ukraine and to comfort a domestic populace fatigued by war.

On the battlefield, Moscow did not capture a single major Ukrainian city this summer.

The sole notable success occurred in Chasiv Yar, a small but strategically important town in the Donetsk region that has been left in ruins after months of combat.

In other locations, Russian progress has either stagnated or been reversed.

Russian forces reached the outskirts of Pokrovsk, a Ukrainian stronghold in Donetsk, but were unable to establish control.

In August, Russian units made rapid advances near Dobropillia, northeast of Pokrovsk, although Ukrainian forces have recently regained some territory through a counteroffensive.

Stupak, citing military sources, mentioned that Kyiv is currently striving to «trim» the salient around Dobropillia; this effort is slow and costly, but Ukraine still holds the initiative in this specific operation.

In Kupiansk, which was liberated from Russian occupation by Ukrainian forces in late 2022, over a year of intense fighting has yet to result in a breakthrough.

Gerasimov’s assertion that half of the city is under Russian control has not been verified by Ukrainian open-source intelligence projects and has even attracted skepticism from some pro-Russian bloggers.

The pro-Russian Telegram channel Anatoly Radov, referencing Russian soldiers, reported that a significant portion of the area surrounding Kupiansk is a “grey zone,” where only small groups of soldiers navigate through the forests, rather than establishing a solid occupation.

“They are gradually penetrating our defenses. We are low on personnel — some units have dwindled to 14% of their full strength. A Ukrainian withdrawal is unavoidable, but it won’t be on the scale the Kremlin desires,” Stupak explained.

Russia is capitalizing on Ukraine’s manpower shortages by deploying small contingents to infiltrate Kyiv’s lines, then following up with reinforcements to take territory, according to Stupak.

The Russian Defense Ministry has released videos showing soldiers planting flags in disputed regions of Kupiansk, portraying these actions as proof of territorial gains.

However, critics — including pro-Russian bloggers — maintain that such actions often serve as symbolic photo ops rather than demonstrations of enduring control.

“The announcement of the liberation of half of Kupiansk is particularly sensational, especially as it is reported to the Supreme Commander-in-Chief,” journalist Yuri Kotenok, a Russian military correspondent, noted in reference to Putin. “It now remains to investigate the origins of this claim and the author or co-author of this briefing from the General Staff.”

They accuse commanders of sending inadequately prepared troops on perilous missions to generate images that align with official narratives.

“This represents blatant betrayal! Don’t those at the top see that this could mean doom for our assault troops, our guys? It’s a one-way mission,” the Telegram channel Yasinovataya: Donbas on the Frontline criticized in response to Gerasimov’s statements and the Defense Ministry’s videos from Kupiansk.

The humanitarian impact of Russia’s offensive is staggering.

Exiled Russian media outlets Meduza and Mediazona estimate that Russia has lost around 220,000 soldiers since 2022.

For the summer 2025 campaign alone, Russian analyst Yan Matveev estimates casualties to be approximately 30,000 killed and as many as 60,000 wounded.

Soldiers recount harsh, attritional tactics and “meat assaults” — mass charges where waves of troops are sent forward until surviving members can seize a position.

In some instances, units have lost up to 95% of their personnel before being deemed combat ineffective, according to testimonies from pro-Russian channels. Regulations typically mandate withdrawal after losses of 30 to 50%.

Simultaneously, Russia seems to be managing its armored resources carefully.

Matveev observed that losses of tanks and vehicles decreased over the summer, indicating commanders are conserving equipment in anticipation of prolonged engagements rather than risking quick destruction at the frontlines.

Soldiers frequently depend on vehicles acquired through personal funds or donations, only to witness them swiftly destroyed in battle.

“Certainly, the Russian army maintains the initiative on the battlefield,” Matveev commented. “However, the summer of 2025 highlighted its limitations and its inability to secure a decisive victory in the war.”

For the time being, the Kremlin continues to assert consistent gains — and analysts caution that Putin remains convinced of this narrative.