Russia is aching for a ceasefire but the its propaganda logic dictates that this option can only be taken when Russia achieved a small or even Pyrrhic victory without the impression of being beaten over and over again as it is the case right now, especially after Kherson.

Bakhmut is supposed to be a future propaganda facade with some tactical background but no strategic value. In the contrary, even when we project that Russians might achieve that objective it would be extremely hard to hold it with no additional reserves.

Neither Russia’s industry nor the botched mobilization are in a shape for sustaining that, at least not for the moment. But there is the thinking in Russia that this might be changed in future when there is tactical pause (ceasefire). Imho I find that conclusion questionable.

Furthermore, the Russian missile strikes aim to coerce Ukraine but more importantly the West to accept Russian terms of a ceasefire, at least the perception of it, if it is offered after a Bakhmut victory. If Ukraine denies that (and it should) the Russian calculus falls apart.

Overall it is clear that the Ukrainian strategy is working. Russia lost tens of thousands square kilometers, from Balakliya up to Kherson. The final stages of the war might be difficult but doable, as long as the momentum is kept. This means, no ceasefire, but also more supplies.