Russia’s larger population, deeper industrial base, greater energy resources and superior capacity in missiles, aircraft, air defence and large-scale weapons production are steadily widening the imbalance with Ukraine. As the war moves from the front line into cities, infrastructure and the machinery of the state, the underlying balance increasingly points towards a Russian victory.
A Ukrainian drone has killed an Iranian sailor in the Caspian, Russia has paralysed Ukraine’s Black Sea corridor, and the Iran war is consuming missiles and fuel needed in Europe. The conflicts remain separate in command, but their targets, weapons, shipping routes and retaliations are rapidly converging.
For more than a decade Ukraine transformed the Donbas into one of Europe’s most formidable defensive systems, binding cities, mines, railways and roads into a single fortress. Russia’s campaign has become the slow dismantling of that military landscape, where the decisive battle is no longer only for cities, but for the roads and connections that keep the fortress alive.
Russia’s latest mass strike on Kyiv was not merely another barrage. It marked a darker stage in the war: a widening campaign of missiles, drones, energy attacks and retaliation. Moscow calls it pressure on Ukraine’s war machine. Kyiv experiences it as mass punishment of the capital.
Russia now controls most of Donbas. What remains is a fortified Ukrainian army compressed into Kramatorsk and Sloviansk and sustained by just two vulnerable supply routes. Rather than storming these fortresses, Russian forces are methodically degrading the roads and rail lines that keep them alive. The decisive question is no longer territory, but whether Ukraine withdraws in time.
This report is written by a journalist and former Russian army officer with direct experience of frontline operations. The account is based on first hand observation and conversations along the active front, reflecting conditions and perceptions from the Russian side of the conflict. B y mid winter, the war in Ukraine no longer moves in […]
The war in Ukraine did not create Western misjudgment about Russia. It exposed it. From officer culture and battlefield adaptation to industrial capacity and social endurance, assumptions formed after 1991 collapsed under the pressure of industrial war.
Drone warfare did not begin in Ukraine. It began in Nagorno Karabakh and evolved into industrial attrition powered by civilian supply chains. This article explains how modern war shifted from weapons to components, why China’s dominance in drone manufacturing and sourcing makes sanctions structurally weak, and why today’s decisive battlefield runs through factories, logistics hubs, and payment systems far from the front line.
As Ukraine’s cities go dark, Vladimir Putin has hardened Russia’s war aims. Moscow now ties any peace in Ukraine to a broader demand that NATO retreat to its pre-expansion footprint, effectively back to West Germany as it stood in 1998. This is no longer a war over territory. It is a campaign to force a renegotiation of Europe’s security order.
In the early hours of a freezing January night, Ukraine’s war was felt not through explosions but through failing boilers and cold radiators. Russia’s latest strike targeted the systems that turn energy into daily life, revealing why winter infrastructure has become a weapon.
As 2026 opens, the war in Ukraine is no longer defined by headlines or symbolic victories. It is being shaped by attrition on the battlefield, mounting financial strain in Europe, and institutional contradictions in the West. This long read examines how those pressures are converging — and whether they point toward an endgame, or a more dangerous phase ahead.
War is no longer disrupting global trade. It is being written into the contracts and insurance frameworks that make trade possible. As war risk pricing, listed areas, and standard charterparty clauses harden into routine procedure, conflict becomes a toll. Watch the insurance market, not the speeches. It signals what the world is normalising.
Britain’s push to force the release of £2.5bn from Roman Abramovich’s Chelsea sale tests a principle older than sanctions or war: that property rights in English law are protected from political seizure. The outcome will shape trust in London itself.
The Berlin talks produced an “Article 5 like” security offer for Ukraine that sounds historic but collapses under scrutiny. Europe and the United States are negotiating posture and optics among themselves, while Russia rejects the core premises. This is war management dressed up as peace.
This capstone article, the fourth in Telegraph Online’s series on frozen Russian assets, explains why banks and financial institutions in the City of London are pushing back against plans to use frozen Russian state money to fund loans for Ukraine. The dispute is not about morality or support for Ukraine. It is about legal ownership, court enforceability, retaliation risk, and who pays if the plan triggers lawsuits or financial instability.
Zelensky spent the day shuttling between Downing Street and Brussels begging for unity while Trump mocked him for not reading a peace plan that barely exists. Behind the stagecraft, Washington has written a strategy that pushes the war bill onto Europe and steps back. The fighting will end on Russian terms. The question is whether Europe will admit it in time.
Ukraine’s front line is breaking, Europe is talking itself into wars it cannot fight, and Brussels is trying to turn Russian reserves into a permanent war chest. This long read ties the military endgame to the legal and financial tricks around frozen assets, drawing on earlier Telegraph Online (telegraph.com) investigations
Ukraine’s front is no longer holding, Kiev’s power networks are held together by generators, and Europe is speaking loudly about a war it has neither the army nor the public to fight. Drawing on Telegraph Online’s own investigative sources, this long read examines the military collapse, the managed corruption in Kiev, the Black Sea tanker attacks and what a settlement on Russian terms really means for NATO.
Lieutenant General Apti Alaudinov, a Chechen commander at the heart of Moscow’s war machine, says Russia is winning a deliberate slow grind in Ukraine with drones, attrition and hypersonic missiles. He claims Ukraine is bleeding faster than it can mobilise while Russian forces preserve manpower and hold back tanks. This article unpacks his story using Russian official figures and doctrine as the reference frame.
Russia now chooses where the war is intense and where it is merely noisy. Ukraine still holds its big cities, but the front is tilting. Village by village, the line moves around Siversk, Pokrovsk and Huliaipole, while exhausted brigades try to plug every gap at once. The real question is no longer rhetoric. It is whether Kyiv can hold these hinges or trade them away.
There was a moment when the Ukraine war could have been frozen where it actually stood. Anchorage produced a twenty eight point plan that acknowledged lost territory, capped Ukraine’s army and barred NATO bases. Moscow signalled conditional acceptance. Kyiv, Europe and parts of Washington then tore it apart with rewrites and leaks. The plan did not fail. It was prevented.
The comforting script that runs through recent commentary says Russia is bleeding and a little more resolve will hand victory back to Kyiv. The numbers say something colder. Russia is winning slowly and expensively. Ukraine is losing slowly and bravely. Western policy is buying time, not changing the destination.
Ukraine is being boxed in by three forces at once: a corruption scandal that reaches into Zelensky’s old circle, a peace plan drafted between Washington and Moscow, and a frontline that is creeping the wrong way. Trump’s deadline does not solve any of this. It exposes the fact that Kyiv’s choices are now about managing different forms of defeat, not choosing victory.
The twenty eight point peace plan now on the table does not end the Ukraine war on Western terms. It writes into law what the battlefield has already decided. Ukraine is pushed out of NATO, loses more land, and becomes a neutral buffer, while Europe discovers it was collateral in a project that overreached from the start.
Ukraine was sold to Western publics as a clean moral war: brave defenders, honest aid, a shattered Russia at the end of it. What emerges instead is a corrupt and exhausted client state, a Russia that chooses when and where to advance, and a Germany hollowed out by lost energy and bad bets
For two years Western governments and media promised victory in Ukraine, portraying Russia as weak and isolated. That narrative has collapsed. Sanctions failed, NATO’s industrial base faltered, and the battlefield turned. Europe faces de-industrialisation while Russia’s economy and army expand. The press that once sold triumph now prepares audiences for retreat, conditioning the public for a negotiated peace — one dictated on Moscow’s terms, not Washington’s.
THE TELEGRAPH.COM LONG READ — Europe no longer wages war only on the battlefield. It wages it in language, in narrative, and in the stories it tells itself. A generation of leaders has replaced strategy with moral theatre, diplomacy with slogans, and truth with propaganda and now the bill for that self-deception is coming due.
The alleged violation was sensationalised and given wall-to-wall coverage in Western media. What was not mentioned is that in April 2025 Estonia passed a law expanding its military authority over its exclusive economic zone, blurring the line between territorial waters and international airspace. Embedded video under YouTube license. The autumn of 2025 has been marked […]
Video from Radio Free Europe. The situation on September 24 has become more difficult for the Ukrainians, with the Russians making major gains. Embedded under YouTube license. Russian forces in eastern Ukraine say they have turned a corner. After months of grinding attrition, Moscow’s troops are presenting a story of momentum: the isolation of a […]
Within the first six months, the outcome was already a foregone conclusion. Russia had shifted to a war of attrition, sanctions had failed, and Ukraine’s manpower was collapsing. Yet the West continued to encourage Kyiv to fight — not to secure victory, but to weaken Russia. What followed was a proxy war: tens of thousands […]
Four days on, the framing remains deliberate: a narrative of escalation, not the forensic reality of decoys that drifted across the border. WARSAW, LVIV, BERLIN European leaders continue to build the narrative as Russian escalation. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz condemned it as “a reckless assault on NATO territory by armed Russian drones.” The BBC has […]
KYIV — The claim landed like a hammer blow in a war already defined by attrition and exhaustion: “142,000 servicemen deserted.” In a few words it compressed two and a half years of fear, flight and discipline into a single number large enough to bend the narrative. It ricocheted through Telegram channels and regional outlets, […]
Russian accounts describe custom malware, a OneDrive trove and a casualty ledger; Kyiv rejects the story as information warfare NY-Style Enhanced — Excerpt (No Headline) MOSCOW — The story began with a single post on a Telegram channel, buried in a feed of battlefield footage and provincial news. But within hours, it had been transformed […]
PARIS — When Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer convened a “coalition of the willing” in Paris to discuss security guarantees for Ukraine, they were not speaking from a position of strength. Twenty-six capitals signed the communiqués. None could answer the basic question: what can Europe actually guarantee? The answer lies on the battlefield. Russia dictates […]
By Jaffa Levy — 27 August 2025 Kyiv continues to press Western capitals for “security guarantees.” President Zelensky has raised the issue repeatedly in Washington, insisting that without binding assurances Ukraine will face another war. Yet talk of guarantees is premature: no guarantee can exist until hostilities end, and Moscow has made it plain that […]