An interesting point analysts make is that the Russian army is technically in Ukraine at the invitation of the DPR & LPR
Then how do they justify occupying Zaphoriziya and Kherson regions? This was a justification only to initiate the SMO. Now six months into it, no one really cares about justifications on either side. So to say Russia is modulating its response based on that seems like a stretch.
Russia has done two things recently, Putin has got the Duma to approve Russian military to increase its force rise by some 180K troops. And a third Russian army has been sent to bolster the SMO. They will rotate some of their deployed troops, and reinforce where necessary, both men and equipment.
I'm still not convinced Russia has under mobilised troops if we consider that they are still pursuing the same objectives of 6 months ago. Freeing Donbass - LPR done, DPR around 70%. Demilitarisation- on going, Ukr forces are falling over themselves to reach the front line and get destroyed. Their own equipment is largely gone, surviving on donated vehicles, artillery and armour, which is also getting destroyed faster than the west can replenish. Most of their mil factories and workshops are destroyed. Even command structure is partially gone, though a lot of it still remains intact in central and western Ukraine which Russia is not seriously attacking except some missile strikes now and then. Foreign mercenaries are dwindling. Contracted soldiers from US, Poland etc are said to be manning M777s, HIMARS and tanks - plausible because with just a few weeks of training AFU troops cant use them effectively. The losses of various militias are hard to gauge, but Azov is in PoW jails, Kraken etc are taking losses regularly.
All this doesn't mean with the tremendous intel, planning and command support NATO is giving, Ukraine cannot score any tactical victories and push back here and there. They are doing it here and there. But to what end? Ukraine's objectives are not clear. They go all the way from retaking everything including Crimea as per Zsky to occupying Moscow as per some airheads. And everything in between depending on whom you ask in Ukraine, NATO or the west.
One thing is sure, neither side is looking for an immediate decisive overall victory. So while we as observers may want the movie to fast fwd towards some resolution before the popcorn is over, the protagonists are continuing to grapple trying to gain a significant edge over the other on the battle field and various other political motives outside it.
Dragging only plays into Putin's hands, because he has got/has been given an energy chokehold on Europe, and his overall aim is to push back NATO and cut down Europe's belligerence to size. The SMO is but one of his means to achieve that. And as the energy crisis grows, Europe will see an economic disaster, civil and political unrest and it will be its turn to face some existential questions. Meanwhile they will continue demilitarisation at a pace that suits them, and in a manner that minimises their own losses.
I hope EU leaders wake up, listen to their people and start de-escalating, make some distance from US and focus on diplomatic means to push towards resolution.
