Russia made nearly no territorial gains in Ukraine in March: Analysis

The Hindu · 🇮🇳 public India · Apr 04, 2026 · 422 words · By AFP

headphones Listen to the eFinder podcast briefing

Generate a natural audio summary of this story

Daily briefing

What to know about Russia made nearly no territorial gains in Ukraine in March: Analysis

Russia’s army recorded almost no territorial gains on the front line in Ukraine in March for the first time in two and a half years, AFP analysis of data from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) showed.

Claims checked 12

Techniques found 0

Topics 0

Coverage spectrum

Coverage gap: Low Left coverage

Left0%

Center83%

Right17%

6 sources compared across this story cluster. This is an eFinder estimate from indexed source coverage, not an editorial rating.

What happened

Why it matters

The Russian army has been slowing in its advances since late 2025 — because of Kyiv’s localised breakthroughs in the southeast of the country — and lost ground in February and March on the southern section of the front line between the Donetsk and…

Common ground

Across the entire front line, the Russian army seized only 23 sq.

Perspective signals

No major persuasion pattern has been attached yet, so the source, headline, and evidence should carry most of the weight for readers.

Follow-up questions

What concrete event or decision sits underneath the headline: Russia made nearly no territorial gains in Ukraine in March: Analysis?
What evidence would most clearly confirm or weaken the claim that The Russian army has been slowing in its advances since late 2025 — because of Kyiv’s localised breakthroughs in the southeast of the country — and lost ground in February and March on the southern section of the front line between the Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk regions?
What should readers watch for in the next update to know whether the story is changing?

open_in_new Read the original article: https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/russia-made-nearly-no-territorial-ga…

fact_checkClaims Checked

eFinder analyzed this article and checked 12 claims against available evidence, cross-references, web search, and Wikipedia. Here is what the fact-checking layer found.

help Insufficient Evidence 6

verified Verified By Reference 3

schedule Pending 2

info Single Source 1

verified

Claim 1: “The Russian army has been slowing in its advances since late 2025 — because of Kyiv’s localised breakthroughs in the southeast of the country — and lost ground in February and March on the southern section of the front line between the Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk regions.”

VERIFIED BY REFERENCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it verified by reference based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — On 24 February 2022, during the Russo-Ukrainian war, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, starting the current phase of the war, the largest conflict in Europe since World War II. By Apri…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukrai…

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — The Russo-Ukrainian war began in February 2014 and is ongoing. Following Ukraine's Revolution of Dignity, Russia occupied Crimea and annexed it from Ukraine. It then supported Russian separatist armed…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Ukrainian_war

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — On 24 February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine, starting the largest and deadliest war in Europe since World War II, in a major escalation of the existing war between the two countries that began when Ru…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Ukrainian_war_(2022–pres…

verified

Claim 2: “Russia’s army recorded almost no territorial gains on the front line in Ukraine in March for the first time in two and a half years, AFP analysis of data from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) showed.”

VERIFIED BY REFERENCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it verified by reference based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

menu_book

schedule

Claim 3: “Four years after the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Moscow occupies just over 19% of the country, the majority of which was seized during the first weeks of the conflict.”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

help

Claim 4: “As in February, Russia lost ground on the southern section of the front line, between the Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk regions, where it occupied more than 400 sq. km at the end of January. This area shrank to 200 sq. km in February and to 144 sq. km in March.”

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it insufficient evidence based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

help

Claim 5: “The ISW worked with the Critical Threats Project (part of the American Enterprise Institute, or AEI), another U.S. think tank specialising in conflict.”

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it insufficient evidence based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

verified

Claim 6: “Across the entire front line, the Russian army seized only 23 sq. km in March, losing territory in some areas, according to the analysis.”

VERIFIED BY REFERENCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it verified by reference based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

menu_book

info

Claim 7: “The Russian army made 319 square kilometres of gains in January and 123 sq. km in February, which was then the smallest advance since April 2024.”

SINGLE SOURCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it single source based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

compare_arrows

cross reference SUPPORTS — The Russian army has been slowing its advance since late 2025 due to counter-offensives in the southeast of the country, with 319 square kilometres of gains in January and 123 square kilometres in Feb…
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20260402-russia-military-…

help

Claim 8: “Its advance in March was the smallest since September 2023.”

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it insufficient evidence based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

help

Claim 9: “But in the first three months of 2026, Russian territorial gains were half those of the same period in 2025.”

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it insufficient evidence based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

help

Claim 10: “The ISW attributed the slowdown to Ukrainian counter-offensives, but also to 'Russia’s ban on using Starlink terminals in Ukraine' and 'the Kremlin’s efforts to restrict access to Telegram'.”

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it insufficient evidence based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

schedule

Claim 11: “Approximately 7%, including Crimea and areas in the Donbas region, was already under Russian or pro-Russian separatist control before the invasion.”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

help

Claim 12: “In 2025, the Russian army made more progress in Ukraine than in the preceding 24 months.”

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it insufficient evidence based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

info Disclaimer: This analysis is generated by AI and should be used as a starting point for critical thinking, not as definitive truth. Claims are verified against publicly available sources. Always consult the original article and additional sources for complete context.