Bakhmut: There is no operational environment, the Armed Forces keep the city defense
In fact, there is no operational environment in Bakhmut. The use of this term is both mistaken and grossly unprofessional in those descriptions of the operational situation in and around the city. Although it is perfectly clear why Russian propaganda imposes this term, which is not clear to anyone, but from which they try to squeeze the maximum effect, disseminating distorted information, which is at the same time intended to motivate and demotivation. It all depends on the consumer.
After the ninth month of the offensive on Bakhmut is a small town not surrounded! And how to impose on the consumer of the information fast food? It is very simple - to feed him incomprehensible terms in which he does not understand anything, but remotely draws a distorted picture.
What is an "operational environment"? It is the position of the unit when it is isolated from the main group of troops, which can result in the unable to receive supply or to provide for itself a way out of the isolation zone, but has freedom of maneuver.
That is, the "operational environment" is if Bakhmut in its current state would be completely surrounded, but the city itself would be under the control of the Armed Forces that could move freely within it to reflect the attacks of the enemy - they would have freedom of maneuver. Therefore, the city is not now in an operational environment, and the use of this term is not only incorrect, but also a play by Russian propaganda, which extends manipulation within the common chain of Bakhmut.