Ukraine's intelligence chief is free to define "success" or "failure" however he wishes.
If he defines "success" as a repeat of 2022's Ukrainian gains, then "failure" is correct.
But there are other contexts in which success and failure look different.
Clearly, Vlad the Invader failed utterly in his original goals for Ukraine, and has now reset them to more modest, possibly achievable goals.
Ukrainians were successful in 2022 in beating back Vlad's offensives, but since then the lines have stabilized with little movement either way.
Both sides have now chewed up men and equipment for the past year with little to show for it on the ground.
On the other hand, the race to accumulate additional new equipment, technology, training and tactics continues mostly in secret, so the outcomes are as of now unknowable.
In any given day, both Russian and Ukrainian operations can be described as both "successful" and "failures" depending on where you look and how you measure them.
Finally, what Ukraine's intelligence chief Budanov says in public I'd take with a grain of salt or two.
That's because Sun Tsu's maxims apply here -- you want your enemy to think you are strong where you are weak, and weak where you are strong, knowing he will attack where he thinks you are weakest.
So, clearly, Ukraine did not enjoy successes in territories gained in the summer of 2023 equivalent to those of 2022, and I'd not go any further than that now.
Steven Tyler: "And, thankyou for revealing to freepers you are a dumbass who cannot think for himself"
You are, of course, speaking of yourself, just projecting your own inadequacies onto someone else you know nothing about.
Sure, I "get" it, because, when you are a pro-Russian repeater bot, what else can you do?