
Russia steps up offensive operations across the front line in Ukraine, in apparent defiance of Trump. What does it mean for the war?
Offensive operations by Russia's army have increased across the front line, according to social media posts by Ukrainian officers, an analysis of information from the General Staff in Kyiv and soldiers speaking to CNN.
It is not yet clear if this is the start of a major spring offensive by Vladimir Putin's forces, of which Ukraine has been warning for some time. However, it appears to suggest the Russian leader is unconcerned about upsetting US President Donald Trump, who will make up his mind 'in a matter of weeks' if the Kremlin is serious about peace, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, said last week.
For several months, some of the fiercest fighting has been taking place to the south of the town of Pokrovsk – a one-time key logistics hub for Ukraine's armed forces in the Donetsk region.
Ukraine's army has achieved several small tactical successes since the start of the year, pushing back some of the Russian advance towards Pokrovsk, which had bought it to within just a few kilometers of the town center.
But a Ukrainian reconnaissance officer deployed in the area told CNN that, over the last 10 days, Russia's armed forces became more active again and were bringing forward further manpower and vehicles for future assaults.
'We see it on the drone footage, and we hear them talking about it on the radio intercepts,' said the officer, who CNN is not naming.
But with Pokrovsk itself heavily defended and the military supplies previously situated there largely relocated, Russia's main effort in the area could be to push westward, rather than north.
Social media posts by Ukrainian soldiers in the last few days describe fears of possible encirclement in one location and breach of a defensive line in another.
'The frontline in this area has entered an active phase. The Russians will not stop,' one Ukrainian with the call-sign Muchnoi wrote on Telegram.
The aim of the advance is a town called Novopavlivka, he said.
'They will enter the Dnipropetrovsk region - this is one of the key tasks set by the Russian command.'
Moving into Dnipropetrovsk would be a significant moment because it would be the first time Russian troops have set foot there. Indeed, it would be the first new Ukrainian region to come under part-Russian occupation since the earlyweeks of the full-scale invasion more than three years ago.
The Ukrainian mapping service DeepState puts Putin's forces just six kilometers (3.7 miles) away from the region while people living along the border are already being evacuated, Dnipropetrovsk officials say.
For Putin – and quite possibly American negotiators as well – any Russian control over a part of Dnipropetrovsk could be seen as a useful bargaining chip in a future negotiation.
Luhansk is Ukraine's easternmost region and the one where Putin's forces have most control – just a few pockets remain in Ukrainian hands. Here, too, Russian troops have made steady gains in recent weeks, particularly the north of the town of Lyman, a railway hub and rear support base for Ukraine's troops.
'It's hard, we need to work on stabilizing the front and methodically knocking out the enemy, otherwise the gangrene will spread,' one Ukrainian officer wrote on Telegram.
Data analysis by CNN of the combat engagements recorded by Ukraine's General Staff shows an increase in Russian activity over the last two weeks along all parts of the front line. While CNN cannot confirm the numbers, and they are unlikely to be definitive, the data provides clear evidence of an upward shift from March 23 onwards.
Before that date, the average number of daily clashes in March had been around 140 (excluding an outlier on March 11). Since then, while tallies have fluctuated, the average has been around 180 clashes per day, an increase of about 30%.
The data includes the Kursk region in Russia, where Ukraine is now holding on to just a few villages along the border, after a slow but successful Russian rollback of Kyiv's surprise gains last summer. The ground advances are also seeing Russia make inroads into Ukraine's neighbouring Sumy region, creating small grey zones where neither side is in complete control.
Further complicating the picture along the northern border is Ukraine's incursion into a slither of Russia's Belgorod region, confirmed by Kyiv for the first time on Monday.
Ukrainian soldiers report a variety of Russian tactics in recent weeks.
In the south of Donetsk region, a Ukrainian officer with the call sign Alex described Russian troops moving forward in columns consisting of both armored and soft-skin vehicles– about four to five infantry fighting vehicles and tanks, while 'the rest are trucks, cars and golf carts.'
He did not hide his scepticism at the prospects for major Russian advances if current maneuvers reveal a real shortage of armor.
'Yes, they have a lot of manpower, several times more than we do, but whatever one says, in a war in the 21st century, it is impossible to build on any successes and launch a rapid offensive without mechanized means of delivering and supporting infantry,' Alex wrote on Telegram.
Also writing on Telegram, Ukrainian commander Stanislav Buniatov said Russian forces there were suffering heavy losses but continued undeterred. 'One unit in this area loses ten to 50 Russians per day,' he said.
Further west, close to the Dnipro River, where Russian forces last week gained control of the small settlement of Lobkove, a Ukrainian commander with a strike drone squad told CNN he was observing a build-up of manpower between 10-15 kilometers (6-9 miles) behind the line of contact.
'The Russians are operating in small tactical groups of five to seven men, maximum 10 people. As soon as it's foggy or rainy, they start advancing using bad weather as cover from our drones.'
As spring progresses and the weather turns drier, tactics will change, the drone commander says.
'They can't use heavy vehicles at the moment. It's too wet, they will get stuck. As soon as the land dries up, they will make a move; it's not in doubt, they will charge for sure.'
Despite the downbeat assessments, it is important to keep some perspective. The amount of territory Russia is capturing remains small. For instance, its forces southwest of Pokrovsk, bearing down on Dnipropetrovsk region, are only about 45 kilometers (28 miles) further advanced than they were one year ago.
In fact, Britain's Ministry of Defence, in common with other analysts, assesses Russia's rate of advance to have been in steady decline for six months, from about 730 square kilometers captured in November last year to just 143 last month.
Part of this may well be down to the challenges of warfighting in winter, though the US military's senior commander in Europe, Gen. Christopher Cavoli, in an upbeat testimony to Congress last week, said Kyiv's forces had 'assumed very strong defensive positions,' and were 'well dug in.'
'It is very hard to envision Ukraine collapsing and losing that conflict,' Cavoli concluded.
Even so, land warfare analyst Nick Reynolds, of the Royal United Services Institute in London, cautions against thinking that because Russia has not taken much territory, it is not achieving anything.
Russia's territorial claims, he says, will not be achieved through military advance, tree line by tree line, village by village.
'The aim is attrition, and the goal is not immediate. The goal is to kill people, to destroy equipment, to suck in resources, to bankrupt the Ukrainian state and to break its will to fight.'
Even weak Russian offensives, he says, need some defense by Ukraine, which in turn allows for better mapping of Ukrainian defensive positions, providing targets for artillery or glide bomb attacks.
Even in a best-case scenario, Europe's stepped-up efforts to re-arm Ukraine, amid doubts over US military support, will likely take a few years to come to fruition. While Ukraine's own defense industry has made great strides, it remains more economically dependent on its allies than Russia's, analysts say.
Under pressure from Washington, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky remains publicly committed to an end to the war, as long as any peace agreement is just and secure and does not allow Russia to resume fighting later.
For its part, the Kremlin says it wants peace too, but only if the 'root causes' of the conflict are addressed, which in essence means Ukraine must fall back unequivocally into Moscow's sphere of influence.
But Putin's announcement last week of the largest conscription round in more than 10 years, and his stated ambition to build an army with 1.5 million active servicemen, along with an aerial onslaught that shows no signs of slowing, point more to a campaign of attrition than any intention to stop.
For fighters on the front lines, even high-ranking officers, peace talks mean little.
'Trust me, in my experience, when you are sitting there at the front, you don't think about them. There is an order to follow and there is a desire to survive,' one told CNN.
Victoria Butenko contributed reporting.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump EPA moves to repeal climate rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions from US power plants
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas, an action that Administrator Lee Zeldin said would remove billions of dollars in costs for industry and help 'unleash' American energy. The EPA also proposed weakening a regulation that requires power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants that can harm brain development of young children and contribute to heart attacks and other health problems in adults. The rollbacks are meant to fulfill Republican President Donald Trump's repeated pledge to 'unleash American energy' and make it more affordable for Americans to power their homes and operate businesses. If approved and made final, the plans would reverse efforts by Democratic President Joe Biden's administration to address climate change and improve conditions in areas heavily burdened by industrial pollution, mostly in low-income and majority Black or Hispanic communities. The power plant rules are among about 30 environmental regulations that Zeldin targeted in March when he announced what he called the 'most consequential day of deregulation in American history.' Zeldin said Wednesday the new rules would help end what he called the Biden and Obama administration's 'war on so much of our U.S. domestic energy supply.' 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November,' he added in a speech at EPA headquarters. 'They wanted to make sure that … no matter what agency anybody might be confirmed to lead, we are finding opportunities to pursue common-sense, pragmatic solutions that will help reduce the cost of living … create jobs and usher in a golden era of American prosperity.' Environmental and public health groups called the rollbacks dangerous and vowed to challenge the rules in court. Dr. Lisa Patel, a pediatrician and executive director of the Medical Society Consortium on Climate & Health, called the proposals 'yet another in a series of attacks' by the Trump administration on the nation's 'health, our children, our climate and the basic idea of clean air and water.' She called it 'unconscionable to think that our country would move backwards on something as common sense as protecting children from mercury and our planet from worsening hurricanes, wildfires, floods and poor air quality driven by climate change.' 'Ignoring the immense harm to public health from power plant pollution is a clear violation of the law,' added Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'If EPA finalizes a slapdash effort to repeal those rules, we'll see them in court.' The EPA-targeted rules could prevent an estimated 30,000 deaths and save $275 billion each year they are in effect, according to an Associated Press examination that included the agency's own prior assessments and a wide range of other research. It's by no means guaranteed that the rules will be entirely eliminated — they can't be changed without going through a federal rulemaking process that can take years and requires public comment and scientific justification. Even a partial dismantling of the rules would mean more pollutants such as smog, mercury and lead — and especially more tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs and cause health problems, the AP analysis found. It would also mean higher emissions of the greenhouse gases driving Earth's warming to deadlier levels. Biden, a Democrat, had made fighting climate change a hallmark of his presidency. Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a strict EPA rule issued last year. Then-EPA head Michael Regan said the power plant rules would reduce pollution and improve public health while supporting a reliable, long-term supply of electricity. The power sector is the nation's second-largest contributor to climate change, after transportation. In its proposed regulation, the Trump EPA argues that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from fossil fuel-fired power plants 'do not contribute significantly to dangerous pollution' or climate change and therefore do not meet a threshold under the Clean Air Act for regulatory action. Greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired plants 'are a small and decreasing part of global emissions,' the EPA said, adding: 'this Administration's priority is to promote the public health or welfare through energy dominance and independence secured by using fossil fuels to generate power.' The Clean Air Act allows the EPA to limit emissions from power plants and other industrial sources if those emissions significantly contribute to air pollution that endangers public health. If fossil fuel plants no longer meet the EPA's threshold, the Trump administration may later argue that other pollutants from other industrial sectors don't either and therefore shouldn't be regulated, said Meghan Greenfield, a former EPA and Justice Department lawyer now in private practice. The EPA proposal 'has the potential to have much, much broader implications,' she said. Zeldin, a former New York congressman, said the Biden-era rules were designed to 'suffocate our economy in order to protect the environment,' with the intent to regulate the coal industry 'out of existence' and make it 'disappear.' National Mining Association president and CEO Rich Nolan applauded the new rules, saying they remove 'deliberately unattainable standards' for clean air while 'leveling the playing field for reliable power sources, instead of stacking the deck against them.' But Dr. Howard Frumkin, a former director of the National Center for Environmental Health and professor emeritus at the University of Washington School of Public Health, said Zeldin and Trump were trying to deny reality. 'The world is round, the sun rises in the east, coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change, and climate change increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms and many other health threats,' Frumkin said. 'These are indisputable facts. If you torpedo regulations on power plant greenhouse gas emissions, you torpedo the health and well-being of the American public and contribute to leaving a world of risk and suffering to our children and grandchildren.' A paper published earlier this year in the journal Science found the Biden-era rules could reduce U.S. power sector carbon emissions by 73% to 86% below 2005 levels by 2040, compared with a reduction of 60% to 83% without the rules. 'Carbon emissions in the power sector drop at a faster rate with the (Biden-era) rules in place than without them,' said Aaron Bergman, a fellow at Resources for the Future, a nonprofit research institution and a co-author of the Science paper. The Biden rule also would result in 'significant reductions in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, pollutants that harm human health,' he said.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
OSU falls victim to budget cuts, putting a damper on scientific research
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — The awarding of an OSU microfluidics research fund of $45 million has been called off by the Trump administration, leaving researchers fumbling for options. Microfluidics, the scientific study of the behavior of liquid on a microscopic level, is a recently established field and is hoped to aid in the medical realm as well as the manufacturing of semiconductors, a partially conductive component of many day-to-day electronic devices. The grant's cancellation has been a source of upset for researchers, but OSU is already looking ahead to future opportunities. Anti-ICE protests escalate outside Southwest Portland facility 'While we are disappointed in the notification of the EDA award cancellation for CorMic [Corvallis Microfluidics Tech Hub], we fully intend to participate in the EDA's next Notice of Funding Opportunity and remain well positioned to further national security interests as a global leader in microfluidics for semiconductor manufacturing, ' Tom Weller, Gaulke Professor and Head said. 'Oregon State University will continue to work alongside HP and other partners to further the commercialization of new microfluidics-connected technologies for semiconductor manufacturing, biotechnology, and advanced materials manufacturing.' This is not an isolated incident, with Trump having attempted to cut billions in allocated federal funding to scientific research since the beginning of his current term. White House spokesperson Kush Desai said, 'The Trump administration is spending its first few months reviewing the previous administration's projects, identifying waste, and realigning our research spending to match the American people's priorities and continue our innovative dominance.' Universities are getting hit with the full force of these budget cuts, with biomedical research being classified as 'waste.' Just in February, the National Institutes of Health proposed cutting billions of dollars to OHSU research looking at cancer and heart disease, among other afflictions. These cuts were immediately met with lawsuits from, but not limited to, the Association of American Universities and 22 state attorneys general. These lawsuits are still in progress. The Association of American Universities' lawsuit called the NIH cuts 'flagrantly unlawful' and expressed concern that 'our country will lose its status as the destination for solving the world's biggest health problems.' Scientists of the NIH itself have begun to speak out, publicly disagreeing with the institute's actions, claiming that the cuts 'undermine the NIH mission.' Cuts to scientific research are becoming a recurring source of contention as Trump's second term continues. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
U.S. Prepares to Evacuate Iraq Embassy as Netanyahu Ramps Up Threats
The American embassy in Baghdad is preparing to evacuate in a troubling sign for nuclear talks between the U.S. and Iran, as well as greater regional unrest, according to Reuters. Three U.S. and two Iraqi sources confirmed Wednesday that preparations for a departure were underway, but did not specify what security concerns had prompted the move. It's more than likely that the sudden withdrawal is related to Israel's recent threat to target Iran's nuclear facilities, despite ongoing nuclear talks between the United States and Iran. Ahead of a sixth round of talks set to begin this week, Iranian Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh warned in a press briefing Wednesday that if the negotiations failed, and 'conflict is imposed' on Iran that 'all U.S. bases are within our reach and we will boldly target them in host countries.' In an interview on the Pod Force One podcast released Wednesday, Donald Trump spoke about the talks, saying that he was 'less confident now than I would have been a couple of months ago.' 'Something happened to them, but I am much less confident of a deal being made,' he said. The New York Times reported in April that Israel, which is not a participant in the ongoing nuclear talks, had made plans to Iranian nuclear sites that were waved off by Trump, who wanted to continue negotiating with Tehran. Still, Netanyahu has continued to push for military action against Iran, without assistance from the United States. In a phone call Monday, Trump urged Netanyahu to stop talking about attacking Iran, and put an end to the leaks about his military's plans, a source familiar with the conversation told CNN. Netanyahu told him that Iran wasn't serious about the talks, and was simply using delaying tactics. He has some experience with that, after drawing out negotiations for a ceasefire deal in Gaza for months on end. The exact details of the U.S. withdrawal from Baghdad are still unclear. An Iraqi foreign ministry official said that a 'partial evacuation' had been confirmed due to 'potential security concerns related to possible regional tensions.' A U.S. official told Reuters that the State Department was intending to execute the departure through 'commercial means,' though the U.S. military was 'standing by.' In Bahrain, U.S. military dependents have been given the greenlight to temporarily evacuate due to escalating regional tensions, one U.S. official told Reuters.