The Ongoing Ukrainian Offensive Explained from the Field
By:Giorgio Provinciali
Live from Ukraine ????????
Mykolaiv The Ukrainian Armed Forces are successfully conducting an offensive operation on the southern front, having re-established control over 400 square kilometers of territory since January.Officiallyreleasedby the Ukrainian General Staff in the past few hours, this statement formally impeccable removes Ukraine from a position that was becoming thorny, explaining many things.
After the Russian General Staffspreadthe false news of a Ukrainian counteroffensive to justify its lack of control over a series of settlements already publicly declaredconquered, many pro-Ukrainian bloggers began to exploit that narrative.
On its side, the Ukrainian command initiallydeniedthat similar operations were underway, only to later confirm their existence in a fragmented manner and without going into much detail. One after another, villages such as Ternuvate, Zelenyj Hai, Orestopil, Lukianivske, Nechaivka, Novooleksandrivka, Primorske, and Ternove were more or less officially declaredliberated, even though Russian troops had never occupied them.
Being in the immediate rear of the theater of such an anomalous counteroffensive inappropriately praised from afar by a slew of self-styledOSINT analysts is astonishing, to say the least, especially after seeing howRussian troops instead capitalized on very slow but substantial gains in Pokrovsk, Myrnohrad, Chasiv Yar, Rivne, Toretsk, and Huliaipole.
Although poorly portrayed in this way, the Ukrainian offensive has gradually assumed increasing strategic importance, not only at the narrative level to overshadow negative events such as those illustrated, thus restoring Kyivs weight at the (alleged) negotiating table but also at the operational level, to actively counter them through rapidly implementable and effective measures with limited technical and human costs.
The official intervention of the Ukrainian General Staff serves to correctly frame the scope of this operation.
It is not being conducted with the deployment of large-scale personnel and mechanized equipment as misrepresented by certain so-called milbloggers, who, in exaggerating its scope, ended up reducing it to a farce but it is nevertheless producing more than satisfactory results.
In modern warfare, control of an area the size of one of those settlements is no longer achieved solely through physical occupation but by establishing such air and ground supremacy that the enemy cannot capitalize on it.
This occurs primarily through the use of drones, jamming systems typical of electronic warfare (EW), and artillery. As we have been writing for some time now,the concept of a gray zone as it has always been understood is now largely obsolete. There is no longer a clear line between Russian and Ukrainian control.
There are gradients of risk, shades of gray that extend well beyond the line of contact. The distinction between front lines and rear areas has become porous.The gray zone is no longer a defined geographical space but a dynamic and variable condition, which changes from hour to hour based on ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) coverage, the availability of jammers, and the presence of FPV operators.
Talking about liberated or conquered villages therefore risks being misleading. General Syrskyjs statement is timely in this context, clarifying any doubts by clarifying that Ukraine hasreestablished controlover those areas.
Observed through the real-time images visible on the integrated system used by the Ukrainian Armed Forces,the ongoing offensive therefore appears to be a modern offensive in full swing, exploiting Kyivs dominance in unmanned and EW systems to capitalize on significant strategic gains while minimizing human and mechanized intervention in the traditional sense. Therefore, losses are far more costly and increasingly unsustainable for the Russians as well.
Ukraine is increasingly aggressively adopting an innovative military doctrine, which allows it to inflict devastating losses on the enemy while greatly limiting its own.
In the classic paradigm from World War II to the Russian invasion of Donbas between 2014 and 2021 territorial control was marked by a continuous infantry presence, the consolidation of defensive lines, stable logistical rotation, and military administration of the area.
Today, that model is technically obsolete.
Control is measured by three variables: ISR dominance, electromagnetic supremacy (EW), and persistent kinetic interdiction capability (FPV, artillery, and drones as loitering munitions). If a force can constantly observe an area, jam enemy communications, and strike any enemy concentration within minutes, the enemy cannot capitalize on that area, regardless of whether a flag is raised there. This is exactly what Kyiv is doing, while the Russians continue to send cannon fodder to take selfies with the imperial flag in kill zones, where they hold out for only a few minutes.
The Russian General Staff declared settlements it had never occupied permanently asconquered.Subsequently, to explain the physical absence of its troops, it spoke of a Ukrainian counteroffensive. Some pro-Ukrainian bloggers amplified the idea of ??a classic liberation, generating a misunderstanding: it seemed to be a matter of mechanized columns, breakthroughs, and visible advances.
This is not the current model.
Today, there are no static margins, but interdiction zones. Ukraine possesses a qualitative and quantitative advantage in the unmanned domain, allowing it to continuously interdict Russian rear areas, selectively destroy logistics, and prevent safe enemy rotations. Moscow, on the other hand, pays a very high price for every meter consolidated, as in the cases mentioned above.
Demonstrating persistent offensive capabilities in the fifth year of a full-scale war against the supposedly second-largest army in the world disrupts the psychological linearity of the front and therefore also impacts the (alleged) negotiating table. Syrskyspeaksof control. Not of conquests, liberations, and occupations. Expressing in modern language the profound paradigm shift that has characterized his management of the ЗСУ .
The ongoing blackouts severely damaged our houses heating system in Western Ukraine while we were in the Donbas.
Without electricity, the pump couldnt circulate the liquid while the fire was lit. As a result, the system caught fire, and the whole house was at risk of burning. Fortunately, it did not, but the whole system needs to be changed, and the house needs to be restored. Tubes are all bent, walls are blackened by haze, and the heating system doesnt work, requiring an entirely new system.
We are doing our best since Allas parents live there, but theres still a lot to work on here, too, as the people around us are in no better situation.
Were renewing our fundraising campaign and thanking everyone who joins us in helping us restore what Russia is destroying. Even a small donation helps. Well keep you updated on developments.
Thank you all, dear friends????????
烏克蘭前線現場解讀：正在進行的烏克蘭攻勢
作者:Giorgio Provinciali
翻譯：旺財球球
烏克蘭前線報道????????
尼古拉耶夫烏克蘭武裝部隊在南線成功開展攻勢，自一月以來已重新控製400平方公裏領土。該聲明由烏克蘭總參在過去數小時正式發布，措辭上無懈可擊，也將烏克蘭從日益棘手的立場中解脫出來，並解釋了許多問題。
（照片來源：RBK）
在俄軍總參散布烏克蘭反攻的虛假消息，以為其對一係列已公開宣稱已被占領的定居點失去控製找借口後，許多親烏博主開始利用這一敘事。
烏方方麵起初否認有類似行動正在進行，後來又以零散且不詳的方式予以確認。先後有特爾努瓦特、澤連伊海伊、奧雷斯托皮爾、盧基亞尼夫斯克、內查伊夫卡、諾沃奧列克桑德裏夫卡、普裏莫爾斯克和特爾諾韋等村莊或多或少被正式宣稱解放，盡管俄軍從未占領過這些地方。
（圖：Alla正在烏克蘭頓巴斯陣地報道版權所有，Giorgio Provinciali）
處在這樣一場異常反攻戰場的直接後方遭一眾自封OSINT分析師在遠處不當讚頌至少可以說簡直令人驚愕，尤其是在看到俄軍反而在波克羅夫斯克、米爾諾格拉德、查西夫雅爾、裏夫內、托列茨克和赫利亞伊波利等地以緩慢但實質性的推進獲利之後。
盡管被如此弱化描繪，烏克蘭的攻勢已逐步獲得越來越重要的戰略意義，不僅在敘事層麵以掩蓋前述負麵事件，從而恢複基輔在（所謂）談判桌上的分量也在作戰層麵通過可快速實施、且技術與人員成本有限的有效措施積極予以遏製對方。
烏克蘭總參謀部的官方介入有助於正確界定此次行動的範圍。
（圖：我指向波克羅夫斯克前線後方小路上一枚俄製無人機留下的彈坑。照片拍攝於撰寫此文約兩周前版權所有，Giorgio Provinciali）
此次行動並非像某些所謂軍博所誤傳的那樣，通過大規模兵力與機械化裝備的投入來實施那些人誇大其規模，反而把它貶為一出鬧劇但它仍然取得了相當令人滿意的成果。
在現代戰爭中，對與這些定居點規模相當地區的控製，不再僅靠物理占領，而是通過建立足以使敵方無法加以利用的空中與地麵壓製來達成。
這主要靠無人機、典型的電子戰幹擾係統和火炮來達成。正如我們早已指出的，傳統意義上的灰色地帶概念現在在很大程度上已過時。俄烏控製已不再有明確界線。
存在風險的梯度和超越接觸線的多種灰色地帶。前線與後方的界限已變得不清晰。灰色地帶不再是明確的地理空間，而是一種動態可變的狀態，隨情報-監視-偵察（ISR）覆蓋、幹擾器可用性和第一視角無人機（FPV）操作員的存在而小時級別地變化。
因此稱某些村莊為解放或征服容易產生誤導。在此情境下，西爾斯基將軍的聲明是及時的，明確指出烏克蘭已重新建立對這些地區的控製，以消除疑慮。
（圖：我在紮波羅熱前線附近一村莊，指著被FPV版權所有，Giorgio Provinciali）
通過觀察烏克蘭武裝部隊所使用的集成係統上可見的實時影像，當前的攻勢因此呈現為一場全麵展開的現代攻勢，利用基輔在無人係統與電子戰方麵的優勢，在盡量減少傳統意義上人力與機械化介入的情況下，獲取重大戰略收益。因此，對俄方而言，損失代價更高且日益難以承受。
烏克蘭正日益積極采用一種創新的軍事學說，使其在極大限度降低自身損失的同時，對敵方造成毀滅性損失。
在經典範式中從二戰到2014至2021年間俄羅斯對頓巴斯的入侵領土控製以持續的步兵駐守、防禦線鞏固、穩定後勤輪換與該地域軍事行政為標誌。
如今，這一模式在技術層麵上已趨於過時。
控製由三項變量衡量：ISR主導、電子戰（EW）電磁優勢，以及持續的動能幹預能力（第一視角無人機、火炮和作為滯空彈藥的無人機）。如果一支部隊能持續監視某一地區、幹擾敵方通訊，並在數分鍾內打擊任何敵方集結點，那麽敵方無論是否在那裏升旗，都無法利用該地區。這正是基輔所為，而俄方則繼續派炮灰到死亡地帶與帝國旗幟合影，最多堅守幾分鍾。
（圖：俄軍聲稱多次占領波克羅夫斯克，僅僅是在幾名士兵在被烏方消滅之前在那裏揮舞俄國旗幟照片來源：半島電視台）
俄軍總參將其從未長期占領的定居點宣稱為征服。隨後為解釋其部隊實際缺席，便宣稱是烏克蘭的反攻。一些親烏博主放大了經典解放這一概念，產生誤解：似乎是在談論裝甲縱隊、突破與可見的推進。
這不是當前的模式。
如今不存在靜態的邊界，而是封鎖帶。烏克蘭在無人領域擁有質與量上的優勢，使其能持續封鎖俄方後方，選擇性摧毀後勤並阻止敵方安全輪換。莫斯科則為每一米的固守付出極高代價，如上文所舉諸例所示。
在對抗所謂世界第二大軍隊的全麵戰爭進入第五年時，展示出持久的攻勢能力打破了前線的心理線性，因此也影響到（所謂的）談判桌。西爾斯基談的是控製，不是征服、解放或占領。用現代話語表達了自他掌管烏克蘭武裝部隊以來那一深刻範式轉變。
（圖：我在烏克蘭尼古拉耶夫拍攝的照片，拍攝於撰寫本文前片刻????????版權所有，Giorgio Provinciali）
***
持續的停電嚴重損壞了我們在烏克蘭西部的家中的供暖係統，而我們當時就在頓巴斯。
沒有電，點著的爐火無法通過水泵循環熱水。結果，係統起火，整個房子麵臨著燒毀的風險。幸而未被燒毀，但整個係統需要更換，房子也需要修複。管道都是歪的，牆壁被煙霧熏黑，供暖係統無法正常工作，需要徹底更換。
我們正在盡最大努力，因為Alla的父母住在那裏，但這裏還有許多工作要做，周圍的人處境也好不到哪兒去。
我們正在重啟籌款活動，感謝每一位支持我們修複被俄羅斯摧毀一切的朋友。即使是小額捐款也有幫助。我們會及時更新進展。
感謝大家，朋友們。
????????如果你相信我們的工作，請支持我們????????????
在過去的三年裏，我們一直在烏克蘭戰爭的各個前線進行報道
https://www.paypal.com/pools/c/9mFvpzKUrU
