Executive Summary

The reporting period ending February 6, 2026, marks a critical inflection point in the Russo-Ukrainian conflict as the war enters its fifth year of high-intensity operations. This week was defined by a profound disconnect between high-level diplomatic efforts in Abu Dhabi and a violent escalation of kinetic strikes on the ground, manifesting in the most significant aerial bombardment of the Ukrainian energy sector to date. While trilateral negotiations involving the United States, Russia, and Ukraine yielded a substantive prisoner exchange and the re-establishment of high-level military communication channels, the collapse of a purported “energy truce” suggests that the Kremlin continues to utilize humanitarian coercion as a primary tool of negotiation.

On the frontlines, Russian forces achieved a tactical breakthrough with the seizure of Hulyaipole after a prolonged three-month siege, signaling a shift in operational focus toward the Zaporizhzhia and Dnipropetrovsk administrative boundaries. However, this gain is offset by the increasing “de-mechanization” of the Russian army, which is now heavily reliant on motorized infantry and small-unit probing attacks due to the critical depletion of armored vehicle stocks. The intelligence landscape was further destabilized by a sophisticated assassination attempt in Moscow against Lieutenant General Vladimir Alekseyev, the First Deputy Head of the GRU, an event the Kremlin has characterized as a Ukrainian “terrorist act” designed to derail the peace process.

Strategic stability remains precarious following the expiration of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) on February 5. Although informal discussions suggest a potential six-month extension, the Kremlin appears to be leveraging nuclear uncertainty to pressure the United States for concessions regarding the Ukrainian theater. Concurrently, the European Union has reinforced its commitment through a landmark €90 billion support package for 2026–2027, highlighting a widening gap between the long-term industrial endurance of the West and the immediate tactical pressures exerted by the Russian Federation.

Strategic Theater Assessment: The Attrition Paradigm

The conflict has evolved into a war of attrition where the traditional definitions of battlefield momentum are being challenged by the sheer scale of personnel and equipment losses. As of early February 2026, the data indicates that Russia is paying an extraordinary price for minimal territorial gains, suggesting a declining trajectory as a major global power.¹ Since February 24, 2022, Russian forces have suffered nearly 1.2 million total casualties, including killed, wounded, and missing personnel.¹ This represents a higher loss rate than any major power in any conflict since the end of the Second World War.¹ At the current rates of engagement, combined casualties for both combatants could reach 2 million by the spring of 2026.¹

Despite maintaining the initiative throughout 2024 and 2025, Russian advances have been characterized as glacial, averaging between 15 and 70 meters per day in the most active sectors.¹ This pace is notably slower than almost any major offensive campaign in the last century.¹ The Russian military command is reportedly planning a significant summer 2026 offensive aimed at seizing the remaining unoccupied parts of Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts.³ However, intelligence suggests that Moscow lacks the strategic reserves to both prepare for such a large-scale operation and sustain its ongoing tactical objectives.³

Comparative Casualty and Equipment Data as of February 2026.¹

The “de-mechanization” of the Russian force has become a defining feature of the theater. Over 22,000 Russian vehicles have been destroyed, damaged, or captured, including more than 4,000 tanks and 9,000 armored personnel carriers.⁵ This has forced a transition from organized armored maneuver to a motorized infantry and motorcycle-based force.⁵ The reliance on “turtle tanks”—field-modified armored vehicles designed to withstand drone strikes—highlights the tactical desperation of Russian units, with one such vehicle reportedly requiring 60 FPV drone hits before being disabled.⁵

Frontline Dynamics: Sector Analysis

Southern Axis: The Fall of Hulyaipole

The most significant ground development of the week was the Russian seizure of Hulyaipole, a strategic town in the Zaporizhzhia region.³ The capture of this settlement, which had a pre-war population of approximately 13,000, came after three months of intensive fighting.³ Geolocated footage from February 6 indicates that Russian forces have advanced beyond the town into northern Zaliznychne, suggesting that Ukrainian forces have established new defensive lines further west.⁴

The fall of Hulyaipole is viewed as a foundational step for future Russian offensive operations in the Orikhiv-Zaporizhzhia City direction.³ However, analysts assess that Russian forces are unlikely to make rapid advances beyond this point without deprioritizing other active fronts, such as Pokrovsk, due to the limited availability of high-readiness operational reserves.³ Ukrainian forces continue to conduct mid-range strikes against Russian rear assets to disrupt the consolidation of these new positions.⁶

Central Donetsk: The Pokrovsk Main Effort

The Pokrovsk front remains the primary focus of the Russian military command, where an average of 170 attacks are mounted daily.⁵ These assaults typically involve small groups of five or fewer infantrymen attempting to seize lodgments in treelines.⁵ This tactic leverages an seemingly inexhaustible supply of volunteer recruits (kontrakniki) to conduct repeated probing attacks regardless of the casualty rate.⁵

In the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area, Russian forces have made marginal advances, while Ukrainian defenses remain largely intact despite the sustained pressure.³ The use of motorbikes and e-scooters by Russian units has increased as a means to evade Ukrainian drone surveillance and targeting through high speed and maneuverability.⁵ Despite these innovations, the lack of coordinated air support continues to hinder Russian efforts to achieve a decisive breakthrough.⁵

Northern Sector: Kupiansk and Kharkiv

In the northern Kharkiv Oblast and the Kupyansk-Lyman directions, the frontline has remained relatively stable despite continued Russian offensive operations.⁴ Ukrainian forces have successfully conducted clearing operations in the center of Kupiansk, neutralizing a small number of surrounded Russian assault troops and fully securing the southern part of the town.⁷

The operational environment in the north has been significantly impacted by environmental factors and technological constraints. SpaceX’s decision to block unregistered Starlink terminal operations has reportedly hindered Russian ground operations and tactical strikes, although the blocking is affecting both combatants to varying degrees.³ Ukrainian forces recently achieved localized advances near Borova, demonstrating a capacity for tactical counter-offensives even while maintaining a general defensive posture.³

Diplomatic Maneuvering: The Abu Dhabi Channel

Trilateral Talks and the Prisoner Exchange

A second round of US-brokered trilateral talks concluded in Abu Dhabi on February 5, 2026, marking the most substantive engagement between senior Ukrainian and Russian delegations in months.⁸ The negotiations, mediated by US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, included high-ranking military and intelligence officials such as Kyrylo Budanov (Ukraine) and Igor Kostyukov (Russia).⁸

The most concrete outcome was a reciprocal prisoner exchange involving 157 personnel from each side, totaling 314 individuals.⁸ This included Russian soldiers captured during the Kursk incursion and several civilians.¹⁰ While the exchange provided a tangible humanitarian success, negotiators cautioned that significant work remains to address the core territorial and security issues of the conflict.⁸

Outcomes of the Abu Dhabi Trilateral Talks, February 4–5, 2026.⁸

Re-establishment of Military-to-Military Dialogue

A pivotal development on the sidelines of the Abu Dhabi talks was the agreement between the United States and Russia to re-establish high-level military-to-military dialogue for the first time since 2021.⁹ This agreement followed meetings between US EUCOM Commander Gen. Alexus Grynkewich and senior Russian and Ukrainian military officials.¹² The channel is intended to provide a consistent point of contact as the parties work toward a lasting peace, aiming to reduce the risk of accidental escalation between Russian and Allied forces.⁹

Strategic Stability and Nuclear Arms Control

The expiration of the New START treaty on February 5, 2026, has introduced a new layer of complexity to the international security environment.¹² The treaty, which represents the last standing bilateral nuclear arms control agreement between the US and Russia, had limited strategic warheads and launchers for over a decade.¹⁵ On the sidelines of the peace talks, delegations discussed an informal deal to continue observing the treaty’s quantitative limits for an additional six months while negotiating a new permanent agreement.¹²

However, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) has issued contradictory signals, claiming that Russia is no longer bound by any obligations and is “free to choose its next steps,” including “decisive” countermeasures.¹² Analysts assess that the Kremlin is utilizing the treaty’s expiration to pressure the US into making concessions regarding Ukraine, effectively linking strategic nuclear stability to the outcome of the war.¹² Concurrently, Russia has backed the PRC’s refusal to enter trilateral strategic arms control talks, likely as a means to secure ongoing Chinese support for the invasion.¹²

Energy Warfare: The Winter Campaign

The Collapse of the “Energy Truce”

The reporting week began with the dramatic collapse of a brief and disputed “energy truce” between Moscow and Kyiv. President Donald Trump announced on February 2 that he had personally convinced Vladimir Putin to pause strikes on Ukrainian energy infrastructure for one week to build momentum for peace talks.¹⁶ However, the terms and duration of this moratorium were immediately contested. The Kremlin asserted that Putin had only committed to refrain from striking Kyiv for a week until February 1, while Kyiv understood the truce to extend through the Abu Dhabi talks.¹⁶

On the night of February 2–3, 2026, Russia launched the largest aerial assault of the year, involving 450 drones and 71 missiles, including a record number of ballistic weapons.² This attack targeted electricity generation and distribution infrastructure across eight regions, dealing a “powerful blow” to the energy sector just as temperatures in Kyiv dropped to -20°C (-4°F).²

Humanitarian Impact and Grid Degradation

The bombardment has left the Ukrainian energy system in a state of crisis. In Kyiv, more than 1,170 high-rise buildings lost heating, and residents are currently limited to only 4–6 hours of electricity per day.² In Kharkiv, a major power plant was damaged beyond repair, leaving 300,000 residents without electricity.² The cumulative damage has reduced Ukraine’s available generation capacity from 33.7 GW pre-invasion to approximately 14 GW by January 2026.²

Status of the Ukrainian Energy System as of February 6, 2026.²

The strikes on critical nodes like the Vinnytsia 550 and Kyivska 750 substations have caused cascading failures across the backbone power grid, affecting not only Ukraine but also the interconnected energy systems of Moldova and Romania.²¹ This strategic targeting of infrastructure reflects a Kremlin policy of psychological and economic attrition, aimed at forcing a political capitulation through the weaponization of winter.²¹

Intelligence and the Shadow War

Assassination Attempt on Lt. Gen. Vladimir Alekseyev

A major intelligence-related event occurred on February 6 in Moscow, when Lieutenant General Vladimir Alekseyev, the First Deputy Head of the GRU, was shot and wounded in an assassination attempt.³ Alekseyev, who has been instrumental in providing intelligence support for the invasion and was a key negotiator during the 2023 Wagner mutiny, was shot multiple times in his apartment building by an unidentified assailant posing as a food delivery courier.²⁵

The general remains in critical condition and a coma following surgery.²⁶ Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov immediately characterized the shooting as a Ukrainian “terrorist act” intended to disrupt the Abu Dhabi negotiations.²⁷ This incident follows a series of high-profile assassinations of Russian military officials, including car bomb attacks on Lt. Gen. Fanil Sarvarov and Lt. Gen. Igor Kirillov in late 2025.²⁷ The inability of Russian security services to protect senior military personnel in the capital highlights significant vulnerabilities in domestic counter-intelligence.²⁵

Cyber Operations: Operation Neusploit

In the cyber domain, the Russia-linked state-sponsored threat actor APT28 (also known as UAC-0001) has launched a campaign codenamed “Operation Neusploit”.³¹ The operation exploits a newly disclosed high-severity vulnerability in Microsoft Office (CVE-2026-21509) to target Ukrainian government agencies, Slovakian entities, and European Union institutions.³¹

Phishing emails, disguised as meteorological bulletins from the Ukrainian Hydrometeorological Center, deliver weaponized documents that trigger a multi-stage infection process.³¹ This includes the deployment of custom malware payloads such as “MiniDoor,” an Outlook email stealer, and “BEARDSHELL,” a C++ implant.³² The attackers have been observed weaponizing the vulnerability within 24 hours of its public disclosure, demonstrating a high degree of technical agility.³¹

Economic Endurance and External Support

EU Financial Package: 2026–2027

To bolster Ukrainian resilience, the European Commission proposed a €90 billion financial support package for 2026 and 2027.³⁴ This package is structured into two primary components: €60 billion (two-thirds) for military assistance and €30 billion (one-third) for general budget support.³⁴ The support is intended to help Ukraine strengthen its defense capabilities and ensure the continued functioning of the state as the conflict moves toward its fifth year.³⁴

The package will be financed through common EU borrowing and is expected to cover approximately two-thirds of Ukraine’s overall financing needs for the next two years.³⁴ This commitment underscores Europe’s strategy of providing stable and predictable funding to ensure Ukraine enters negotiations from a “position of strength”.³⁴

Oil Market Dynamics and Russian Revenues

The Russian economy remains heavily reliant on fossil fuel export revenues, which accounted for approximately 30% of total federal revenues in 2025.³⁶ Currently, Russian Urals crude is trading between $62 and $65 per barrel, which is above the original G7 $60 price cap but significantly higher than the new EU floating cap of $47.60 introduced in September 2025.³⁷ To bypass Western sanctions, Russia continues to utilize a “shadow fleet” of tankers, allowing it to maintain export volumes to major buyers like China and India.³⁷

However, falling global oil prices—driven by demand uncertainty and increased OPEC supply—pose a significant risk to the Russian budget.³⁶ The 2026 Russian budget assumes an average export price of $66 per barrel; if the current downward trend continues, Russia could face a budget deficit of up to 5 trillion rubles (2.3% of GDP), potentially forcing a reduction in military spending or increased domestic taxation.³⁶

Oil Market Indicators as of February 6, 2026.³⁶

Regional and Global Geopolitics

The Sino-Russian Alliance

On February 4, 2026, Presidents Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin held a video call to reaffirm their strategic partnership.⁴⁰ Both leaders hailed their countries’ “stabilizing” role in a “turbulent” global environment and committed to deepening coordination within multilateral frameworks like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).⁴⁰

While China has not officially denounced the war, it has become Russia’s most critical economic lifeline, absorbing redirected energy exports and providing high-tech components.⁴⁰ The call highlighted a shared vision for an “equal and orderly multipolar world,” contrasting their partnership against what they characterize as “unpredictable” US initiatives like the “Board of Peace”.⁴⁰ Putin has accepted an invitation to visit China in the first half of 2026, signaling that the relationship will continue to break “new ground” despite Western pressure.⁴⁰

NATO’s Northern Flank: The Finland Border

In response to Finland and Sweden joining NATO, Russia has begun a long-term military buildup near the Finnish border.⁶ Satellite imagery reveals new military infrastructure, including expanded helicopter bases near Murmansk and increased concentrations of Tu-22 long-range bombers at the Olenya air base.⁴³ At a restored Cold War-era base in Kamenka, over 130 troop tents and dozens of new buildings have appeared to house military vehicles.⁴³

Finland has responded by indefinitely closing land border crossings to counter Russia’s weaponization of migration and is hosting a forward NATO land force of 4,000–5,000 troops.⁴⁴ Norwegian defense officials have also warned of a “formidable nuclear fleet” amassing on the Kola Peninsula, signaling that Russia is prioritizing its Northern Fleet and Arctic capabilities even as ground forces are consumed by the war in Ukraine.⁴⁵

Information Warfare and Disinformation Trends

Russian “informational war” strategies have intensified, utilizing the “Gerasimov doctrine” to shape global narratives and demoralize Ukrainian civilians.⁴⁶ The Russian bot network “Matryoshka” has recently launched a campaign exploiting the release of US Justice Department files related to Jeffrey Epstein to smear European leaders and the Ukrainian government.⁴⁷ This includes fabricated reports claiming French President Emmanuel Macron visited Epstein’s island 18 times and false suggestions that President Zelenskyy had knowledge of child involvement in the network.⁴⁷

These operations are designed to create “hybrid confusion,” blending cyberattacks with deepfake audio and video to transform minor technical outages into public safety crises.⁴⁸ For example, AI-generated disinformation was recently used to manufacture safety threats ahead of the 2026 Winter Olympics, aiming to deter spectators and delegitimize host nations.⁴⁹ In Ukraine, the Russian military continues to use electronic warfare systems like the Orlan-10 drone to send threatening text messages to the mobile phones of Ukrainian soldiers and their families to spread panic.⁴⁶

Conclusions and Strategic Forecast

The situation as of February 6, 2026, indicates a high-stakes transition toward a fifth year of conflict, characterized by tactical deadlock and strategic competition. The capture of Hulyaipole represents a marginal Russian success, but the systemic “de-mechanization” of the Russian army suggests that Moscow lacks the armored capacity for a decisive offensive breakthrough in 2026. Conversely, Ukraine’s resilience is increasingly tied to the functionality of its energy grid; the record-breaking strikes this week demonstrate that Russia remains capable of inflicting severe humanitarian and economic costs that could eventually undermine domestic stability.

The “Abu Dhabi channel” has emerged as a vital de-escalation mechanism, facilitating the return of POWs and the re-opening of military hotlines. However, as long as Moscow maintains its maximalist demands for the entirety of the Donbas and Ukrainian neutrality, a comprehensive settlement remains unlikely. The expiration of New START and the subsequent linkage of nuclear arms control to the Ukrainian theater suggests that the Kremlin will continue to utilize strategic uncertainty to leverage concessions from the West.

In the near term, the conflict will likely remain focused on the “energy war” as both sides attempt to endure a particularly harsh winter. Ukraine’s ability to repair and defend its grid, supported by European financial aid and advanced air defenses, will be the decisive factor in preventing a humanitarian catastrophe. Simultaneously, the assassination attempt on Lt. Gen. Alekseyev and the discovery of “Operation Neusploit” indicate that the shadow war of intelligence and cyber operations will continue to escalate, potentially leading to increased paranoia and instability within the Russian military command.

Please share the link on Facebook, Forums, with colleagues, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email us in**@*********ps.com. If you’d like to request a report or order a reprint, please click here for the corresponding page to open in new tab.

Sources Used

1. Russia’s Grinding War in Ukraine – CSIS, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-grinding-war-ukraine
2. The Russia-Ukraine War Report Card, Feb. 4, 2026 | Russia Matters, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.russiamatters.org/news/russia-ukraine-war-report-card/russia-ukraine-war-report-card-feb-4-2026
3. ISW Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, February 6, 2026 – Kyiv Post, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.kyivpost.com/post/69606
4. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, February 6, 2026 | ISW, accessed February 7, 2026, https://understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-february-6-2026/
5. How the Russian Army Fights – Wavell Room, accessed February 7, 2026, https://wavellroom.com/2026/02/04/how-the-russian-army-fights/
6. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, February 1, 2026 | ISW, accessed February 7, 2026, https://understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-february-1-2026/
7. Conflict Intelligence Team — Teletype, accessed February 7, 2026, https://notes.citeam.org/
8. Second day of Ukraine-Russia peace talks in UAE end without …, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/05/second-day-of-ukraine-russia-peace-talks-in-uae-end-without-breakthrough
9. Russia-Ukraine talks conclude without breakthrough on ending war, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/5/russia-ukraine-talks-end-with-agreement-on-prisoner-swap
10. US and Russia agree to re-establish military dialogue after Ukraine peace talks in Abu Dhabi – Yahoo News Singapore, accessed February 7, 2026, https://sg.news.yahoo.com/us-russia-agree-establish-military-044518957.html
11. Russia and Ukraine Conduct First Prisoner Swap in Five Months After Abu Dhabi Talks, accessed February 7, 2026, https://caspiannews.com/news-detail/russia-and-ukraine-conduct-first-prisoner-swap-in-five-months-after-abu-dhabi-talks-2026-2-7-0/
12. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, February 5, 2026 | ISW, accessed February 7, 2026, https://understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-february-5-2026/
13. US and Russia agree to reestablish military-to-military dialogue after Ukraine talks, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.coastreporter.net/the-mix/us-and-russia-agree-to-reestablish-military-to-military-dialogue-after-ukraine-talks-11839589
14. U.S. and Russia agree to reestablish military dialogue after Ukraine talks | PBS News, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/u-s-and-russia-agree-to-reestablish-military-dialogue-after-ukraine-talks
15. Strategic Prudence and Extending New START – Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, accessed February 7, 2026, https://quincyinst.org/research/strategic-prudence-and-extending-new-start/
16. Russia Bombards Ukraine Ahead of Peace Talks, Ending Brief Energy Truce Amid Freezing Weather, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2026/02/03/russia-bombards-ukraine-ahead-of-peace-talks-ending-brief-energy-truce-amid-freezing-weather/
17. Trump insists Putin ‘kept his word’ on energy truce, contradicting Zelenskyy, accessed February 7, 2026, https://english.nv.ua/russian-war/trump-insists-putin-kept-his-word-on-energy-truce-50580787.html
18. Trump on ‘energy truce’: Putin kept his word – Hromadske, accessed February 7, 2026, https://hromadske.ua/en/world/258894-tramp-pro-enerhetychne-peremyria-putin-dotrymav-svoho-slova
19. Russia hammers Ukraine after halt announced by Trump, plunging thousands into frigid dark on eve of talks, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-ukraine-war-energy-truce-over-massive-strikes-before-peace-talks/
20. Ukraine ‘ready to play ball’ on peace deal but Russia ‘creating chaos’ with its attacks, says Nato chief – as it happened, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/feb/03/russia-ukraine-europe-live-eu-us-military-plan-response-latest-news
21. Russia hit Ukraine’s energy for 257 times this cold season. What makes latest damage different could take months or years to repair, accessed February 7, 2026, https://euromaidanpress.com/2026/02/04/russia-hit-ukraines-energy-for-257-times-this-cold-season-what-makes-latest-damage-different-could-take-months-or-years-to-repair/
22. A sham “energy truce”. Day 1441 of the war | OSW Centre for Eastern Studies, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/analyses/2026-02-03/a-sham-energy-truce-day-1441-war
23. Ukraine’s energy system under attack – IEA, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.iea.org/reports/ukraines-energy-security-and-the-coming-winter/ukraines-energy-system-under-attack
24. The Drone Paradox and Institutional Decay in Modern Conflict, accessed February 7, 2026, https://debuglies.com/2026/02/06/the-drone-paradox-and-institutional-decay-in-modern-conflict/
25. A deputy chief of Russia’s military intelligence service is shot and wounded in Moscow, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.courthousenews.com/a-deputy-chief-of-russias-military-intelligence-service-is-shot-and-wounded-in-moscow/
26. Officials: Top Russian Intelligence General Shot, Wounded In Attempted Assassination, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-general-gru-shooting-assassination-attempt/33671131.html
27. Senior Russian general wounded in apparent assassination attempt in Moscow, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.aninews.in/news/world/asia/senior-russian-general-wounded-in-apparent-assassination-attempt-in-moscow20260206210713
28. Deputy head of Russian military intelligence hospitalised after assassination attempt in Moscow, accessed February 7, 2026, https://novayagazeta.eu/amp/articles/2026/02/06/deputy-head-of-russian-military-intelligence-hospitalised-after-assassination-attempt-in-moscow-en-news
29. Vladimir Alekseyev (general) – Wikipedia, accessed February 7, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Alekseyev_(general)
30. Russian army general shot in Moscow as foreign minister blames Ukraine for “terrorist act”, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russian-army-general-shot-in-moscow-as-foreign-minister-blames-ukraine-for-terrorist-act/
31. Hackers Actively Exploit Microsoft Office Zero-Day to Deliver Malware – Cyber Press, accessed February 7, 2026, https://cyberpress.org/microsoft-office-zero-day-to-deliver-malware/
32. APT28 Uses Microsoft Office CVE-2026-21509 in Espionage-Focused Malware Attacks, accessed February 7, 2026, https://thehackernews.com/2026/02/apt28-uses-microsoft-office-cve-2026.html
33. CVE-2026-21509: APT28 Actively Exploits Microsoft Office Vulnerability in Ukraine, accessed February 7, 2026, https://socradar.io/blog/cve-2026-21509-apt28-microsoft-office-ukraine/
34. Commission presents a financial support package for Ukraine for 2026–2027, accessed February 7, 2026, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_90
35. EU to split Ukraine financial support with 30 billion euros for budget, 60 billion for military, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.globalbankingandfinance.com/eu-split-ukraine-financial-support-30-billion-euros-budget/
36. Falling oil prices reduce Russia’s budget revenues – Bank of Finland Bulletin, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.bofbulletin.fi/en/blogs/2025/falling-oil-prices-reduce-russia-s-budget-revenues/
37. Urals Oil – Price – Chart – Historical Data – News – Trading Economics, accessed February 7, 2026, https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/urals-oil
38. New oil price cap adds to Russia’s economic distress – Bank of Finland Bulletin, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.bofbulletin.fi/en/blogs/2025/new-oil-price-cap-adds-to-russia-s-economic-distress/
39. Stiffening European sanctions against the Russian oil trade – Brookings Institution, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/stiffening-european-sanctions-against-the-russian-oil-trade/
40. Xi, Putin hail ‘stabilising’ China-Russia alliance – International – World – Ahram Online, accessed February 7, 2026, https://english.ahram.org.eg/News/561784.aspx
41. Xi and Putin deepen China-Russia coordination, vow broader global cooperation, accessed February 7, 2026, https://biz.chosun.com/en/en-international/2026/02/04/MO4WXLYNNFDWDNRR57VKQ2BGJU/
42. Xi, Putin hail ‘stabilising’ China-Russia alliance – CNA, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.channelnewsasia.com/east-asia/xi-jinping-putin-call-china-russia-ties-5907211
43. Satellite Images Show Russian Military Buildup Near Finland – NYT – The Moscow Times, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/05/19/satellite-images-show-russian-military-buildup-near-finland-nyt-a89129
44. Fortress Finland: Nordic deterrence against Russia – GIS Reports, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/fortress-finland-nordic-deterrence/
45. Putin Masses Nuclear Fleet Near NATO Arctic Border – Evrim Ağacı, accessed February 7, 2026, https://evrimagaci.org/gpt/putin-masses-nuclear-fleet-near-nato-arctic-border-513552
46. Russian information war against Ukraine – Wikipedia, accessed February 7, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_information_war_against_Ukraine
47. Russia Turns Epstein Files Into a Disinformation Weapon Against Macron and Ukraine, accessed February 7, 2026, https://united24media.com/latest-news/russia-turns-epstein-files-into-a-disinformation-weapon-against-macron-and-ukraine-15638
48. Cyber Insights 2026: Cyberwar and Rising Nation State Threats, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.securityweek.com/cyber-insights-2026-cyberwar-and-rising-nation-state-threats/
49. Understanding the Russian Cyberthreat to the 2026 Winter Olympics – Unit 42, accessed February 7, 2026, https://unit42.paloaltonetworks.com/russian-cyberthreat-2026-winter-olympics/
50. Cyber News Roundup – February 6th 2026 – Integrity360, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.integrity360.com/cyber-news-roundup-february-6th-2026

DATES: January 17 – 24th, 2026

1. STRATEGIC OVERVIEW

The reporting period ending January 24, 2026, marks a pivotal and highly volatile juncture in the nearly four-year Russia-Ukraine conflict. The strategic landscape is currently defined by a “fight-and-talk” dynamic, where intensified kinetic operations are being leveraged to shape the parameters of nascent, high-stakes diplomatic engagements. This week witnessed the convergence of three critical vectors: the commencement of unprecedented trilateral peace negotiations in Abu Dhabi, a massive Russian escalation in the strategic air campaign targeting Ukraine’s crumbling energy infrastructure, and a grinding intensification of positional warfare in the Donbas.

For the first time since the onset of full-scale hostilities in February 2022, senior representatives from the United States, Russia, and Ukraine convened simultaneously, signaling a potential shift from indirect signaling to direct, albeit contentious, dialogue.¹ However, the synchronization of these talks with Russia’s largest missile barrage of the year against Kyiv and Kharkiv underscores a Kremlin strategy of “coercive diplomacy”—utilizing terror and infrastructure degradation to force capitulation on territorial demands before any ceasefire can be formalized.³

Strategically, the conflict has moved beyond a stalemate into a phase of acute attritional pressure. Russia is exploiting its material advantages to push for maximalist aims encapsulated in the “Anchorage Formula,” demanding the cession of the entire Donbas region.⁵ Conversely, Ukraine, fortified by a renewed US diplomatic push under the “20-Point Peace Plan,” remains steadfast in its refusal to trade sovereignty for a pause in fighting, even as its energy generation capacity plummets to critical levels.⁶ The operational tempo has not slackened; rather, it has adapted, with both sides institutionalizing drone warfare and electronic contestation to a degree that fundamentally alters the doctrine of modern combat.

The following report provides an exhaustive analysis of these developments, integrating intelligence on diplomatic maneuvering, kinetic operations, force generation, and economic warfare to provide a holistic assessment of the conflict’s trajectory.

2. DIPLOMATIC DYNAMICS: THE ABU DHABI PROCESS & COMPETING FRAMEWORKS

The diplomatic domain this week was characterized by a flurry of high-level activity moving from the World Economic Forum in Davos to bilateral meetings in Moscow, culminating in the trilateral summit in Abu Dhabi. This sequence of events represents the most significant diplomatic intervention by the United States since the war’s inception, driven by the Trump administration’s accelerated timeline for conflict resolution.

2.1 The Trilateral Engagement in Abu Dhabi

On January 23 and 24, 2026, delegations from the United States, Russia, and Ukraine met in the United Arab Emirates. The choice of venue—Abu Dhabi—highlights the rising prominence of Gulf states as mediators capable of maintaining dialogue with all belligerents.¹

Delegation Composition and Strategic Signaling

The composition of the respective delegations offers deep insight into the substantive focus of the negotiations. Unlike traditional diplomatic summits led by Foreign Ministers, this engagement was dominated by security, intelligence, and “special envoy” figures, indicating a focus on “hard” security parameters—ceasefire lines, demilitarized zones, and enforcement mechanisms—rather than broad political normalization.

• United States Delegation: The US team was led by Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff and former Senior Advisor Jared Kushner, accompanied by Josh Gruenbaum, a senior advisor to the newly formed “Board of Peace”.⁷ The reliance on Kushner and Witkoff, rather than career diplomats from the State Department, underscores the personalized nature of the Trump administration’s foreign policy and a desire to bypass traditional bureaucratic channels to achieve a rapid deal. Their presence signals that Washington views this not merely as a regional security issue but as a component of a broader geopolitical realignment.⁹
• Russian Delegation: Moscow dispatched a highly militarized delegation led by Admiral Igor Kostyukov, head of the Main Directorate of the General Staff (GRU).² The decision to send the GRU chief—responsible for military intelligence and special operations—rather than a diplomat like Sergey Lavrov represents a clear signal: Russia views these talks through a strictly military-strategic lens. The presence of Kirill Dmitriev, CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), indicates that sanctions relief and the unfreezing of assets are Russia’s primary non-military objectives.⁹
• Ukrainian Delegation: Kyiv matched the securitized nature of the talks. The delegation was headed by Defense Minister Rustem Umerov and included Intelligence Chief Kyrylo Budanov (HUR), Chief of the General Staff Major General Andriy Hnatov, and SBU First Deputy Head Oleksandr Poklad.⁷ This lineup confirms that Ukraine is prioritizing the immediate survival of its state and armed forces, focusing discussions on security guarantees and the mechanics of any potential armistice.

Outcomes and Assessments While US officials characterized the initial rounds as “productive,” no concrete breakthrough was achieved regarding the core territorial disputes.¹¹ The talks extended into a second day on January 24, even as Russian missiles struck Kyiv, a dichotomy that Ukrainian officials labeled as cynical sabotage.¹ The primary friction point remains Russia’s demand for total control over the Donbas, a condition Kyiv views as existential capitulation.

2.2 The “Anchorage Formula” vs. The “20-Point Plan”

The negotiations are currently deadlocked between two competing frameworks. Understanding the nuance of these frameworks is critical to assessing the probability of a ceasefire.

The Russian “Anchorage Formula” Throughout the week, Kremlin aides Yuri Ushakov and Dmitry Peskov repeatedly referenced the “Anchorage Formula,” a set of demands allegedly derived from a summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska in August 2025.⁵

• Core Demand: The surrender of the entirety of the Donbas (Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts) to Russia.
• Territorial Implications: This would require Ukrainian forces to voluntarily withdraw from key industrial strongholds they currently hold, including Kramatorsk, Slovyansk, and Pokrovsk. These areas represent approximately 10.6% of the Donbas (roughly 2,187 square miles or 5,000 sq km) that Russia has failed to capture militarily after four years of high-intensity warfare.⁵
• Strategic Rationale: Moscow frames this as a prerequisite for “demilitarization” and establishing a defensible line of control. By labeling it the “Anchorage Formula,” the Kremlin is attempting a psychological operation to lock the US administration into a perceived prior agreement, effectively pressuring Washington to force Kyiv’s compliance or risk collapsing the peace process.¹²
• Assessment: This is a maximalist demand. Surrendering the industrial heart of the unoccupied Donbas without a fight would be politically fatal for the Zelenskyy administration and would strip Ukraine of its most fortified defensive belts, opening the path to Dnipro.⁵

The “20-Point Peace Plan” (US/Ukraine) In contrast, the “20-point plan,” an evolution of a previous 28-point draft, represents the framework supported by Ukraine and the US administration.¹²

• Status: President Zelenskyy described the plan as “90% ready” during his appearance at Davos.¹⁴
• Key Elements:

• Territorial Freeze: The plan likely proposes freezing the lines in situ (along the current Line of Contact) rather than demanding Ukrainian withdrawals, creating a de facto partition similar to the Korean scenario.¹⁵
• Security Guarantees: Discussion has centered on a 15-year security guarantee from the United States, which would require ratification by the US Congress, providing a binding commitment short of full NATO Article 5 membership.¹⁶
• Demilitarized Zones (DMZ): The creation of buffer zones monitored by international peacekeepers. However, Russia has preemptively rejected the presence of European NATO troops.¹⁷
• Economic Incentives: The plan includes provisions for a “tariff-free zone” for Ukraine to boost its post-war economic recovery.¹⁸
• Implementation Body: Oversight would be managed by a “Board of Peace,” a controversial new international mechanism.¹⁴

2.3 The “Board of Peace” Initiative: Structure and Controversy

The “Board of Peace,” championed by the Trump administration, has emerged as a controversial mechanism intended to oversee the implementation of peace deals, not just in Ukraine but globally (including Gaza).

• Structure: The Board is chaired by Donald Trump (designated as a “member for life”), with an Executive Board that includes high-profile figures such as Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan, and World Bank President Ajay Banga.¹⁹
• Membership Model: Reports indicate a transactional “pay-to-play” model where permanent seats on the board require a $1 billion contribution, ostensibly to fund reconstruction efforts.²¹
• Global Reaction: The initiative has received a polarized reception. European allies, notably France and Norway, have rejected joining, viewing the Board as a parallel structure designed to undermine the United Nations Security Council and G7.²² Conversely, over 20 nations, including Israel, Egypt, and Hungary, have reportedly agreed to join.²²
• Russian Manipulation: President Putin has expressed interest in Russia joining the Board, cynically proposing to pay the $1 billion fee using frozen Russian assets currently held in the United States.¹⁸ This maneuver presents a strategic trap: accepting this payment would implicitly legitimize the use of frozen assets for Russian-directed projects (potentially rebuilding Russian-occupied Donbas) rather than Ukrainian reparations, effectively releasing the funds back into the Russian economic sphere.¹⁸

3. OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT: KINETIC ACTIVITY

While diplomats convened in air-conditioned suites in Abu Dhabi, the operational reality on the ground and in the air over Ukraine degraded significantly. The reporting period saw a marked escalation in Russia’s strategic air campaign and a grinding, relentless pressure on the eastern front.

3.1 Strategic Air Campaign: The “Negotiation” Strikes

The air domain has seen an escalation directly linked to the diplomatic timeline. Russia is executing a campaign of “maximum pressure” on Ukraine’s energy grid to erode civilian morale and leverage negotiating power.

The January 24 Combined Strike Coinciding with the second day of the Abu Dhabi talks, Russia launched one of its most complex strike packages of the year targeting Kyiv and Kharkiv.¹

• Scale and Composition: The attack involved approximately 396 aerial targets, a mix of missiles and drones designed to overwhelm air defenses.²⁴ This included a high volume of Shahed-136/131 loitering munitions, Kh-22 anti-ship missiles (launched from Tu-22M3 bombers and known for their devastating inaccuracy against ground targets), and at least two 3M22 Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles.⁴
• Tactical Significance of Zircon Usage: The deployment of the Zircon, Russia’s premier conventional hypersonic weapon, against Kyiv signifies a high-priority effort to penetrate the Patriot and SAMP-T shields protecting the capital. These missiles are scarce and expensive; their use suggests an intent to guarantee destruction of high-value hardened targets or to send an uninterceptable message to the negotiators.⁴
• Targeting and Impact: The primary targets were critical energy generation nodes, specifically CHP-5 and CHP-6 (Combined Heat and Power plants) in Kyiv, and the Darnytsia CHP.⁴ The strikes resulted in one fatality and 18 injuries in Kyiv.¹ More critically, they severed power to 800,000 consumers and cut heating to 6,000 apartment blocks in temperatures plummeting to -13°C.⁴
• Strategic Signal: This “diplomacy by fire” demonstrates that the Kremlin feels no pressure to de-escalate during negotiations. By targeting heating infrastructure in the dead of winter, Moscow is attempting to create a humanitarian catastrophe that forces the Ukrainian government to accept the “Anchorage” terms to save its population.

3.2 Ground Domain: Eastern Theater (Donbas)

The Donbas remains the primary theater of operations, where Russia is employing an “optimized positional warfare” doctrine. This involves the use of small, dispersed infantry groups supported by massive artillery and drone superiority to achieve incremental gains.

Pokrovsk and Kurakhove Sectors The Pokrovsk axis remains the focal point of the Russian offensive. Russian forces are utilizing “infiltration tactics,” sending small teams disguised in captured uniforms or civilian vehicles to bypass Ukrainian strongpoints before larger assault waves follow.²⁶ This sector has seen the highest intensity of combat engagements, with Russian forces advancing near Shevchenko (northwest of Pokrovsk).¹⁸

Velyka Novosilka and the Capture of Vremivka A significant tactical shift occurred on January 17 with the Russian capture of Vremivka.²⁷

• Operational Context: Vremivka is located on the southern flank of Velyka Novosilka, a key logistics hub for Ukrainian forces in the southern Donetsk region.
• Implication: The seizure of this village allows Russian forces to threaten the envelopment of Velyka Novosilka from the south, potentially forcing a Ukrainian withdrawal without the need for a costly frontal assault. This aligns with the broader Russian objective of securing the administrative borders of Donetsk Oblast to fulfill the “Anchorage” criteria militarily if diplomacy fails.

3.3 Northern & Southern Fronts

Northeastern Front (Kharkiv/Sumy)

Russia continues to conduct shaping operations along the northern border to pin Ukrainian reserves and stretch air defenses.

• Kupyansk: The battle for Kupyansk has intensified, with Russian sources claiming to be engaged in street fighting in Kupyansk-Vuzhlovyi.²⁹ However, Ukrainian reports indicate that while infiltration attempts are frequent, the city remains under Ukrainian control, though it is being systematically leveled by glide bombs.²⁶
• Sumy Border Incursions: The Russian Ministry of Defense claimed the capture of border villages Hrabovske and Komarivka in Sumy Oblast.³⁰ Intelligence assessment suggests these are likely temporary incursions by Reconnaissance-Sabotage Groups (DRGs) rather than a consolidated occupation. The primary goal is psychological—to create the perception of a widening front and force Ukraine to divert critical units from the Donbas to defend the extensive Sumy border region.²⁹

The Kursk Salient

The Ukrainian incursion into Russia’s Kursk Oblast remains a strategic thorn in the Kremlin’s side.

• Status: Ukraine continues to hold an estimated 600-800 square kilometers of Russian territory.
• Foreign Fighter Involvement: North Korean troops have been heavily committed to the counter-offensive in this sector. Reports estimate 4,000 DPRK casualties in Kursk, indicating distinct command-and-control issues and a reliance on “human wave” tactics to clear entrenched Ukrainian positions.²⁷
• Strategic Value: Kyiv intends to hold this territory as a bargaining chip for the ongoing negotiations—offering to withdraw from Kursk only in exchange for reciprocal Russian withdrawals from occupied Ukrainian lands.

Southern Axis (Kherson) In Kherson, the Dnipro River remains the line of contact. Russia has escalated its terror tactics against the civilian population in Ukrainian-controlled Kherson city. Known as “human safari” tactics, Russian FPV drone operators are actively hunting individual civilians and private vehicles, aiming to depopulate the near-rear areas and disrupt logistics through sheer terror.⁷

4. FORCE GENERATION AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADAPTATION

Both belligerents are racing to adapt their force structures to the realities of a “transparent battlefield,” where persistent drone surveillance makes massed formations suicidal.

4.1 Ukrainian Defense Reforms and Drone Doctrine

Ministry of Defense Leadership Purge On January 22, Ukrainian Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov executed a significant leadership overhaul, dismissing five deputy defense ministers, including Anatoliy Klochko and Oleksandr Kozenko.¹⁸

• Analysis: Fedorov, widely recognized for his background in digital transformation, is clearing the “old guard” to streamline procurement and accelerate innovation. The explicit goal stated by the ministry is to strengthen “asymmetric and cyber strikes” capabilities.³³ This signals a decisive shift away from Soviet-legacy heavy mechanized warfare doctrine toward a more agile, technology-centric approach that prioritizes unmanned systems and precision strikes.

Institutionalizing Drone Warfare Ukraine has formally established specialized Unmanned Systems Brigades, upgrading units like the 20th Separate Drone Brigade and “Madyar’s Birds” from battalion to brigade status.³⁴

• Doctrine: These units are no longer merely support elements but are now primary maneuver forces. They are capable of denying terrain, halting armored advances, and conducting deep strikes at a fraction of the cost of traditional artillery. The 20th Brigade alone reportedly neutralized over 350 enemy personnel in January using the latest K-2 drone systems.³⁵

4.2 Russian Force Adaptation and Manpower

Light Mobility Tactics Intelligence indicates a shift in Russian tactical mobility. The Russian command is prioritizing the procurement of light motorized vehicles (buggies, ATVs, motorcycles) over heavy Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFVs) for transporting infantry to the front.¹⁸

• Tactical Logic: In a drone-saturated environment, heavy armor is easily spotted and destroyed. Small, fast, dispersed teams on motorcycles have a higher survival rate when closing the “last mile” to Ukrainian trenches. This “Mad Max” style of logistics and assault is a direct adaptation to Ukrainian FPV dominance.

AI and Situational Awareness Reports suggest the Russian military is deploying an AI-enabled “tactical situational awareness system” to the front.¹⁸

• Purpose: This system is designed to compensate for the severe degradation in the quality of junior officers (lieutenants and captains). High casualties have decimated the professional officer corps; AI decision-support tools are being introduced to help inexperienced replacements manage complex battlefield geometry and coordinate fire support, attempting to bridge the “competence gap” with technology.

Drone Networking Russian forces are increasingly equipping their drones (specifically Shaheds and FPVs) with Chinese-manufactured mesh networking modules.³⁶ This technology allows swarms of drones to communicate and relay signals to one another, effectively extending their range and allowing them to overcome Ukrainian Electronic Warfare (EW) jamming bubbles by maintaining a signal link through the swarm network rather than a direct line to the operator.

5. ECONOMIC AND MARITIME DOMAINS

The economic war has opened a new front in the Mediterranean, highlighting the West’s belated but escalating enforcement of energy sanctions.

5.1 The Shadow Fleet and Maritime Sanctions

Seizure of the Grinch On January 22, the French Navy intercepted and seized the Russian tanker Grinch in the Mediterranean Sea.³⁷

• Precedent: This operation marks a major escalation in sanctions enforcement. Previously, Western naval powers monitored but rarely physically interdicted “shadow fleet” vessels—aging, uninsured tankers used by Russia to bypass the G7 oil price cap.
• Legal Basis: The seizure was predicated on the vessel flying a “false flag” (claiming Comoros registration improperly) and violating safety regulations.³⁷ This provides a legal veneer for what is effectively a blockade action.
• Strategic Impact: The interception was supported by US and UK intelligence, signaling a coordinated NATO effort to crack down on Russia’s primary revenue stream. If this becomes a pattern, it could significantly raise insurance premiums for Russian cargoes and deter “grey market” shipping operators from carrying Russian oil, constricting the financial lifeline of the war effort.

5.2 Energy Infrastructure and Economic Resilience

Grid Capacity Crisis The cumulative effect of Russian strikes has been devastating. As of late January 2026, Ukraine’s available power generation capacity has plummeted to approximately 14 GW, down from a pre-war capacity of 33.7 GW.⁶

• Human Impact: The destruction of substations and distribution nodes has made the grid extremely fragile. The targeting of CHPs (heating) rather than just electricity is a calculated move to make major cities uninhabitable.
• Economic Impact: With capacity halved, industrial output is severely curtailed. The “20-point plan” proposal for a tariff-free zone is an attempt to provide an economic lifeline, but without reliable power, industrial production and reconstruction efforts remain theoretical.

6. GEOPOLITICAL RAMIFICATIONS

6.1 The Axis of Evasion: Russia-Iran-North Korea

Russia continues to deepen its alliances with rogue states to sustain its war machine, though limits are emerging.

• Iran: A “Comprehensive Strategic Partnership” was signed between Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on January 17.²⁸ Crucially, intelligence analysis reveals that the agreement lacks a mutual defense clause. This indicates that while military-technical cooperation (drone supply, missile technology transfer) will continue, Tehran is wary of a formal defense pact that could drag it into a direct war with NATO, and Russia currently lacks the bandwidth to guarantee Iran’s security.³⁹
• North Korea: Pyongyang remains Russia’s most reliable source of external manpower. However, the cost is high. With an estimated 4,000 casualties among North Korean troops in the Kursk sector alone, the sustainability of this force is questionable.²⁷ A new deployment of DPRK personnel is expected by mid-March 2026 to backfill these losses and maintain the tempo of infantry assaults.²⁷

6.2 Western Unity and Divergence

The “Board of Peace” initiative has exposed fissures within the Western alliance. While the US administration pushes for this new mechanism, traditional European powers like France and Norway have refused to join, citing its potential to undermine the UN system.²² This divergence complicates the formation of a unified front in negotiations, as Russia can exploit these cracks to drive wedges between Washington and Brussels. The seizure of the Grinch by France, however, demonstrates that on the operational level—sanctions enforcement and military support—European resolve remains hardened.

7. STRATEGIC FORECAST AND INTELLIGENCE OUTLOOK

Near-Term Outlook (1-2 Weeks):

• Diplomatic Stagnation: The Abu Dhabi talks are unlikely to yield a comprehensive ceasefire agreement in the immediate term. The gap between the “Anchorage Formula” (territorial cession) and Ukraine’s sovereignty is currently too wide to bridge. We anticipate a joint statement may be issued focusing on humanitarian corridors or POW exchanges as a “face-saving” measure, but the core conflict will continue unabated.
• Military Intensification: Russia will likely intensify its offensive in the Donbas (Pokrovsk/Velyka Novosilka) to maximize territorial control before the spring thaw (Rasputitsa) hampers mobility. The capture of Vremivka suggests a dangerous enveloping maneuver is developing in the south that could destabilize the Ukrainian defense in Donetsk.
• Strategic Air War: We assess a high probability of follow-on strikes against the Ukrainian energy grid. Russia aims to cause a systemic collapse of the grid during the peak winter freeze (late January/early February) to force the Zelenskyy administration to reconsider the “Anchorage” terms under duress.

Strategic Warning:

The combination of the energy crisis in Ukraine, the “fight-and-talk” diplomatic pressure, and the shifting US political landscape creates a window of extreme vulnerability for Kyiv. The coming weeks will likely determine whether the conflict enters a frozen state along the current line of contact—leaving millions of Ukrainians under occupation—or escalates into a potentially decisive and even more destructive spring campaign.

End of Report

Please share the link on Facebook, Forums, with colleagues, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email us in**@*********ps.com. If you’d like to request a report or order a reprint, please click here for the corresponding page to open in new tab.

Sources Used

1. Russian attacks on Ukraine kill 1 and wound 18 ahead of second day of peace talks, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.wboc.com/news/international/russian-attacks-on-ukraine-kill-1-and-wound-18-ahead-of-second-day-of-peace/article_ee4092b6-8365-53a8-ad42-a23f73a5181e.html
2. Russia keeps up demand for Ukrainian land as three-way talks begin in UAE – The Guardian, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/23/us-ukraine-russia-abu-dhabi-talks-putin-witkoff-kushner
3. Russia-Ukraine war live: Kyiv, Kharkiv come under attack amid peace talks, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2026/1/24/live-kyiv-kharkiv-come-under-attack-amid-russia-ukraine-peace-talks
4. 88,000 Homes in Kyiv Cut Off as Russia Launches Massive Strikes …, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.kyivpost.com/post/68693
5. Russia in Review, Jan. 16–23, 2026, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.russiamatters.org/news/russia-review/russia-review-jan-16-23-2026
6. The Russia-Ukraine War Report Card, Jan. 21, 2026, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.russiamatters.org/news/russia-ukraine-war-report-card/russia-ukraine-war-report-card-jan-21-2026
7. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, January 23, 2026 | ISW, accessed January 24, 2026, https://understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-23-2026/
8. Putin meets US envoys in Moscow ahead of trilateral talks on Ukraine peace plan, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/putin-holds-talks-with-trump-envoys-witkoff-kushner-possible-ukraine-peace-plan-2856453-2026-01-23
9. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, January 21, 2026, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-21-2026
10. Ahead of Russia-Ukraine-US talks: Kremlin lays down ‘very important condition’ — what is it, accessed January 24, 2026, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/europe/ahead-of-russia-ukraine-us-talks-kremlin-lays-down-very-important-condition-what-is-it-donbas/articleshow/127270861.cms
11. Rare US-backed Ukraine-Russia talks open amid deep territorial rifts, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/ukraine-russia-us-talks-open-in-abu-dhabi-territory-still-a-hurdle-2857040-2026-01-24
12. Kremlin uses Alaska summit to pressure Trump on Ukraine – ISW, accessed January 24, 2026, https://english.nv.ua/nation/isw-russia-pressures-trump-to-abandon-ukraine-peace-talks-50578172.html
13. No deal on territory as Ukraine–Russia peace talks begin in Abu Dhabi, accessed January 24, 2026, https://english.nv.ua/nation/peregovori-v-oae-23-sichnya-zakinchilisya-bez-kompromisu-shchodo-donbasu-50578176.html
14. Trump team considers creating Board of Peace for Ukraine modelled on Gaza – FT, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/01/17/8016596/
15. Behind the contact line, accessed January 24, 2026, https://meduza.io/en/feature/2026/01/09/behind-the-contact-line
16. U.S. offers Ukraine 15-year security guarantee as part of peace plan, Zelenskyy says, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/u-s-offers-ukraine-15-year-security-guarantee-as-part-of-peace-plan-zelenskyy-says
17. Putin cannot accept any peace deal that secures Ukrainian statehood, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putin-cannot-accept-any-peace-deal-that-secures-ukrainian-statehood/
18. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, January 22, 2026 – Institute for the Study of War, accessed January 24, 2026, https://understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-22-2026/
19. Board of Peace – Wikipedia, accessed January 24, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_Peace
20. Statement on President Trump’s Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict – The White House, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2026/01/statement-on-president-trumps-comprehensive-plan-to-end-the-gaza-conflict/
21. ‘Imperial’ agenda: What’s Trump’s Gaza development plan, unveiled in Davos?, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/23/imperial-agenda-whats-trumps-gaza-development-plan-unveiled-in-davos
22. Trump Overrides Israeli Objections to Advance Gaza Peace Plan, accessed January 24, 2026, https://thesoufancenter.org/intelbrief-2026-january-22/
23. What to know about Trump’s “Board of Peace” as world leaders sign founding charter in Davos – CBS News, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-board-of-peace-what-to-know/
24. Russia Launches Large-Scale Ballistic Missile and Drone Attack on Kyiv as Peace Talks Take Place in the UAE, accessed January 24, 2026, https://united24media.com/latest-news/russia-launches-large-scale-ballistic-missile-and-drone-attack-on-kyiv-as-peace-talks-take-place-in-the-uae-15297
25. ‘Massive’ Russian strikes on Ukraine hit negotiation table as well as people, Kyiv says – Europe live – The Guardian, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/jan/24/ukraine-russia-war-us-talks-uae-europe-live-latest-news-updates
26. Ukrainian battlefield success denies Russia a key city as a bargaining chip, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2026/01/19/ukraine-kupyansk-russia-war-drones/
27. Russia in Review, Jan. 17-24, 2025, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.russiamatters.org/news/russia-review/russia-review-jan-17-24-2025
28. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, January 17, 2025 | ISW, accessed January 24, 2026, https://understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-17-2025/
29. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, January 15, 2026 – Critical Threats, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-15-2026
30. Russia Reports Control of New Village in Northeast Ukraine, Shoots Down 356 Drones, accessed January 24, 2026, https://qna.org.qa/en/News-Area/News/2026-1/5/russia-reports-control-of-new-village-in-northeast-ukraine-shoots-down-356-drones
31. Russia claims to have captured another settlement in eastern Ukraine – Anadolu Ajansı, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.aa.com.tr/en/russia-ukraine-war/russia-claims-to-have-captured-another-settlement-in-eastern-ukraine/3798995
32. Ukraine dismisses five deputy defense ministers – Xinhua, accessed January 24, 2026, https://english.news.cn/europe/20260123/e2c0b68f188645c0872cb35ca9335c4e/c.html
33. Government dismisses 5 dpty ministers of defense – Fedorov, accessed January 24, 2026, https://interfax.com.ua/news/general/1138576-amp.html
34. Russia’s War in Ukraine: Drone-Centric Warfare – International Centre for Defence and Security, accessed January 24, 2026, https://icds.ee/en/russias-war-in-ukraine-drone-centric-warfare/
35. Ginko Supports Strategic Defense as Drones Halt Russian Attack on Key Frontline – weareiowa.com, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.weareiowa.com/article/news/local/plea-agreement-reached-in-des-moines-murder-trial/524-3069d9d4-6f9b-4039-b884-1d2146bd744f?y-news-28238163-2026-01-16-ginko-supports-strategic-defense-drones-halt-russian-attack
36. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, January 17, 2026 | Critical Threats, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-17-2026
37. French navy intercepts suspected Russian ‘shadow fleet’ tanker in Mediterranean, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/22/french-navy-intercepts-suspected-russian-shadow-fleet-tanker-mediterranean
38. French Navy Seizes Russian Shadow Fleet Tanker in Western Mediterranean – Naval News, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2026/01/french-navy-seizes-russian-shadow-fleet-tanker-in-western-mediterranean/
39. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, January 17, 2025 | Critical Threats, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-17-2025-678b0d4c6edca