Ukrainian troops have reclaimed roughly 200 square kilometres of land north of the strategic town of Lyman, according to French open‑source analyst Clement Molin. The advance, which began in late May, has pushed Russian forces back to the western bank of the Zherebets River and is being described as one of the most important Ukrainian victories of 2026.

The operation, carried out by the 3rd Army Corps' 3rd Assault Brigade together with the 60th and 66th brigades, started on 22 May with a mechanised thrust from forested ground east of Izium. Within days Ukrainian units had secured the village of Nove, establishing a foothold that allowed further advances through heavily fortified woodland.

How the offensive unfolded

According to Molin's detailed thread on 8 September, the initial assault was supported by intensive electronic‑jamming that disrupted Russian drone activity. Ukrainian forces encountered fibre‑optic drones, a type that can only operate at low altitude, which inflicted limited vehicle damage before being neutralised.

By 1 June the village of Nove was largely cleared, and in mid‑July Ukrainian troops took the nearby settlement of Zelena Dolyna. The push continued eastward, with fighting concentrated along two axes: a main thrust from Nove heading south, and secondary support lines to the east and west that aimed to seal the salient.

By mid‑August the Ukrainian line had reached the northern outskirts of Kolodiazi, effectively cutting the Russian protrusion that had threatened to bypass the fortified belt protecting Sloviansk and Kramatorsk. A second mechanised attack on 24 August widened the pocket, creating a corridor through which Russian units could retreat.

Maps published by Molin and corroborated by the AKM Mapping account show the liberated area stretching from the Nitrius River in the west to the Zherebets River in the east. While the AKM account estimates the cleared ground at 151 square kilometres, Molin's figures remain at just over 200 square kilometres.

Russian reaction and the information war

Russian media have been unusually reticent about the setback. The state‑run channel Rybar mentioned "problems near Lyman" and noted that Ukrainian units were pressing from both north and south, but stopped short of confirming a full loss of the salient. A separate Russian outlet, Two Majors, reported that Ukrainian forces were massing in the village of Stavki and that sabotage groups were active around Ternove, hinting at broader operational difficulties for Moscow's troops west of the Zherebets.

Analysts argue that the silence reflects a deliberate attempt by Russian authorities to mask retreats and preserve morale. The Andrew Perpetua Twitter account observed that the Lyman operation was kept more secret than earlier Ukrainian advances in Kupiansk or Velyka Novosilka, suggesting a coordinated OSINT effort to limit the flow of information.

Strategic significance for the Donbas

The reclaimed terrain lies on the axis that could have allowed Russian forces to encircle Sloviansk and Kramatorsk, two major industrial hubs in the Donetsk region. By eliminating the salient, Ukraine reduces the risk of a northern bypass that would have threatened supply lines and forced a redeployment of Ukrainian troops further west.

"Improving the situation around Lyman is crucial to preventing the bypassing of the belt of fortifications in Donbas," wrote the Woofers account, a pro‑Ukrainian source that tracks front‑line movements. The removal of the Russian foothold therefore strengthens the defensive network that protects the heart of the Donbas, an area already strained by repeated artillery bombardments.

Impact on the wider conflict

While the Lyman operation does not match the scale of the 2022 Kharkiv counter‑offensive, which liberated around 12,000 square kilometres, it demonstrates Ukraine's ability to conduct coordinated, multi‑brigade assaults under tight operational security. The success may also delay Russian plans for a renewed push in northern Donbas, buying time for Kyiv to reinforce its positions and to procure additional air‑defence assets.

In the broader context, Russia continues to rely heavily on glide‑bombs (FAB‑5000) to strike Ukrainian positions. Molin's mapping of over 10,000 such bombs dropped in the past six months shows a concentration of strikes around Kramatorsk, south of Druzhkivka and north‑west of Pokrovsk. Although the volume of glide‑bomb attacks has risen, the Ukrainian front has managed to hold its ground, suggesting that the new Lyman gains could help blunt further Russian artillery saturation.

Human and material costs

Both sides continue to suffer heavy equipment losses. The open‑source Oryx project, which tracks visually confirmed destructions, recorded that by 7 September Russia had lost 24,066 pieces of heavy equipment, including 4,446 tanks, of which 3,351 were destroyed in combat. Ukraine's losses stood at 12,097 pieces, including 1,462 tanks, with 1,120 destroyed.

These figures underscore the brutal attrition that characterises the front line. While neither side publishes reliable casualty numbers, the equipment data points to a war of material exhaustion that places a growing burden on both economies. For European observers, the continued flow of Russian arms, especially precision glide‑bombs, raises concerns about the sustainability of Moscow's war machine and the potential for further spill‑over effects on energy markets and regional security.

Implications for European policy

The Lyman breakthrough arrives at a moment when the European Union is reassessing its military assistance to Kyiv. The EU's recent decision to increase long‑term support for Ukraine's defence industry, including the procurement of air‑defence systems, aligns with Ukraine's expressed need for modern fighters capable of countering Russian bomber sorties. Former defence adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov has called for the delivery of Gripen jets equipped with Meteor missiles, arguing that such platforms could force Russian aircraft to operate from greater distances, reducing the frequency of glide‑bomb attacks.

For European taxpayers, the ongoing conflict translates into higher defence spending and the need to balance support for Ukraine with domestic priorities such as energy security and social welfare. The liberation of territory around Lyman, by limiting Russian advances, may indirectly ease the pressure on EU energy supplies that have been disrupted by Russian missile strikes on infrastructure.

Trade unions across the continent have welcomed the news, noting that a weakened Russian front could lessen the likelihood of further sanctions‑related disruptions to European markets. However, they also warn that prolonged conflict risks inflating defence budgets at the expense of social programmes, a trade‑off that national governments must manage carefully.

Looking ahead

Ukrainian commanders have not publicly detailed the next phase of the Lyman operation, maintaining the operational security that has characterised the campaign. Analysts expect that the 3rd Army Corps will seek to consolidate its gains, fortify the new line along the Zherebets River, and possibly prepare for a further push towards the town of Izium, a historic logistics hub.

For Russia, the loss of the salient may prompt a re‑evaluation of its offensive doctrine in the Donbas. The continued reliance on glide‑bombs suggests an attempt to compensate for ground‑level setbacks, but the effectiveness of such weapons is limited without sufficient infantry support to hold captured ground.

In the coming weeks, the intensity of fighting around Lyman will likely serve as a barometer for the broader war's trajectory. If Ukraine can hold the newly liberated area, it may set the stage for a series of incremental advances that could, over time, shift the front line further west. Conversely, a Russian counter‑offensive could test the resilience of Ukrainian supply lines and the capacity of European aid to sustain prolonged combat operations.

Regardless of the outcome, the Lyman operation illustrates the evolving nature of the conflict: a blend of conventional mechanised assaults, sophisticated electronic warfare, and a relentless information battle fought on social media platforms as much as on the ground. For European citizens watching from afar, the story underscores the human cost of the war, the strategic importance of each kilometre of reclaimed land, and the ongoing need for coordinated political and material support to ensure that victories such as this translate into lasting stability for Ukraine and the wider region.