**Source**: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8k36eet73Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8k36eet73Q)

**Text version:**

Friends, hello. Today we will talk about assault regiments and assault troops in general. Do we even need such structures?

The discussion is now extremely relevant in society, since a large number of complaints about human rights violations are coming in, about which the office of the military ombudsman of Ukraine has officially stated. And directly two critical public situations arose at once.

First, advisor to the Minister of Defense Serhiy Sternenko stated that the Russians showed strikes and drone defeats of an assault column of the 425th Skelya regiment under Pokrovsk — the defeat and destruction of four vehicles from the composition of this column. He sharply criticized essentially the existence and conducting of such assault actions by assault regiments.

Second, a statement was made by a major of the Armed Forces — not just a statement, but two large interviews (to [Babel](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaobNz3qtjQ), and [RFERL](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha-e11D1rsM)). Major of the Armed Forces Oleksandr Shyrshyn spoke about how, in front of his eyes, as the commander of a battalion of the 47th mechanized brigade, he witnessed significant losses and absolutely illiterate tactical use of assault subunits from two assault regiments.

This caused a great resonance, since it is necessary to understand the context in which this was done. Just now, as is known, a bill on assault troops has been submitted to the Verkhovna Rada — proposing that they become a separate branch of troops altogether. This bill was submitted by the Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi for consideration by the Stavka of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief.

So, many factors coincided, and the situation with assault regiments indeed needs to be discussed.

For a start, for analysis, let's examine the situation that caused the latest media outcry — that is, the assault actions and the defeat/strike on our column in the area of the village Hrishyne under Pokrovsk, the column of the 425th assault regiment.

This column was hit, and we see how Russian fiber-optic drones destroyed one tank and three armored vehicles.

So, was this assault pointless? To begin with, it is necessary to analyze the specific situation, and then we will move on to generalizations.

From the information I received, in the Pokrovsk area the situation is maximally difficult. Our soldiers control some positions on the northern outskirts of the city, literally on the very edge. The enemy, from the side of Myrnohrad in the east and from the village of Hrishyne in the west, has almost surrounded the city. The enemy fully controls most of Pokrovsk at the moment and has now completely created a threat of full encirclement of our positions.

Such a situation was created not yesterday or the day before, but several months ago. The Russians control all the high-rise buildings of Pokrovsk, placed drone operator antennas and positions on them, and have a large number of convenient high-rises and shelters there. It is convenient for them to work from Pokrovsk to cover their communication routes.

Our soldiers, of course, strike at their communications, but this does not succeed every day, even due to the weather. And the enemy strikes, essentially creating continuous fire and drone control over this single supply route, which the enemy has not yet managed to cut on the ground.

In these conditions, for approximately half a year in Pokrovsk, the subunits are fighting. The almost largest part of the forces there is represented by the 425th Skelya assault regiment.

Are they themselves on this northern outskirts in such conditions, when only one road remains, on which there are constantly dozens of Russian drones — "Zhduny" — controlling everything? From Pokrovsk it is very convenient for them to fly, even with Mavics, and to absolutely control the situation.

Is it worth doing this? Can these actions be carried out at all with minimal losses?

In fact, the tactical situation is unfavorable for us. This is visible from the DeepState map. For this you do not need to be some very famous, pumped-up military expert. You open the DeepState map — everything I just told you is obvious from the map. You do not need to invent anything.

We are actually in operational encirclement, because that strip along which the supply is carried out — the enemy from the heights of Pokrovsk, from the high-rises, simply controls it with all types of drones and has an advantage in this area.

So, to conduct combat operations in such a configuration of the front, all other subunits simply cannot hold it. Subunits of the 155th mechanized brigade are also conducting combat operations there. But to hold in such conditions — when even rotation and supply are done through combat — is extremely difficult.

These assault actions that we saw with the columns — this was an attempt to cover their flank in Pokrovsk, because otherwise, without this flank, the defense is generally impossible.

Why does this happen? Why is it necessary to force our troops into such heroism, dooming them to conduct combat in such conditions? To create ideal conditions for enemy drones to work, so that the enemy could disassemble our equipment like that?

For me, in this situation, this is the first question.

I believe that the people in this assault regiment who perform these tasks are simply doing what is required of them by orders. It is exclusively heroism. This is a heroic operation. I do not know what other subunits in Ukraine could perform this. Perhaps some others, undoubtedly we have many worthy military units, but to perform such tasks in such conditions...

And who issues such orders to hold in such disadvantageous conditions?

I can say that this definitely cannot be decided by the regiment itself. Obviously, both the higher military command and the Stavka of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief are aware of this situation. They don’t just read bloggers — I am quite sure they watch what losses are on this section of the front as a result of such "stand to the death" orders and such maneuvers with equipment to positions and breakthroughs.

I think it is obvious that the loss ratio is also analyzed — how many the enemy loses in such a front configuration, and whether we lose more or the enemy does. All this needs to be calculated. And the people who give the order to hold there and set the tasks that the assault regiments then carry out — they should see this well.

Therefore, if we doom the troops to make feats, to break through to positions under fire, under enemy strikes, with full tactical superiority of the enemy — then without losses and without such videos, without such defeats, it is simply impossible.

Simply impossible.

So this is specifically about this situation. I believe that the situation at the front, in my opinion, does not require our troops to be doomed to fights in encirclement or semi-encirclement, so that they are forced to break through to positions.

I believe that planning such actions in this way is negligent and irresponsible — both towards the troops and towards the losses of our people.

Instead of planning to organize defensive battles, we doom ourselves to heroic losses and heroic deeds that are not required by the strategic situation. The enemy is rolling towards us, they are destroyed by drones, crushed, and suffer heavy losses. Why should we act according to the logic of the Russians? Why should we doom ourselves like this instead of destroying the advancing enemy in defense, conducting effective counterattacks under the control of our drones, with full realization of our technological advantage and intellectual advantage over the Russian army?

Instead, we for some reason repeat the actions of the Russian army. What is the point?

I understand when they gave the order and brought Skelya into Pokrovsk in November 2025 to hold these remnants — the remains of the private sector on the northern outskirts and some industrial zone there. The front was crumbling, it needed to be stabilized somehow. Well, that was six months ago. Stabilization happened.

Now why hold it? For the report that we still have positions in the urban strip of Pokrovsk? This is done just like that.

So the people who make such reports and our respected Stavka of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief should draw their conclusions from this video.

And here we always have, as always for some reason... I am waiting, maybe for something, maybe there simply was no such Stavka, we just don’t know something. And I am looking — Sternenko wrote, the advisor to the Minister of Defense stated, the deputy of the military ombudsman of Ukraine made a statement about assault regiments, Major Shyrshyn made a statement. And there is no statement from any leaders.

I haven’t seen a single comment or assessment of this situation from the command of the seventh Air Assault Corps DShV, in whose zone the 425 Skelya regiment performs tasks. As far as I understand, he does not perform them alone, but the corps commander manages, commands these actions, approves combat orders, ensures their execution.

Or was this amateur activity?

The seventh corps says: “We are conducting an official investigation.” So how long have you been conducting an official investigation? You have to sign all this with your own hands — these orders.

Then the Ground Forces are silent. Everyone is silent — the higher leaders.

Where is our position? Well, this is not a question of some regiment conducting combat actions somewhere on its own initiative. People are not recruited by the regiment itself on the streets. They are assigned to it. By combat orders people are provided. Salaries are paid to them by the Ministry of Defense and the Armed Forces. Someone is responsible for this.

So far we see, as always, a discussion on the internet, in the media, and such complete silence about what happened and why.

UA POV: Soldier of the Khartiia Brigade, military journalist Yuri Butusov on the necessity of assaults like those by the 425th Skelya near Pokrovsk, as well as the lack of public response from leadership regarding the situation