Can Kyiv and the West force Russia to the negotiating table? Ukraine’s winter of truth

As the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine nears its fourth year, the battle for towns like Pokrovsk in Donetsk underscores a stark reality: the war shows no signs of abating, yet the costs are mounting for both sides. Foreign Affairs’ reporting highlights the tense calculus shaping the conflict, from Ukraine’s front-line heroism to the Kremlin’s overextended ambitions, and the critical role that international partners play—or fail to play—in determining the next phase of the war.

Russian forces, initially aiming to capture Pokrovsk by November 2024, are a year behind schedule. Ukrainian defenders, vastly outnumbered, have inflicted severe losses on Russian troops—estimated at over 20,000 killed per month—while holding the Donbas line. Yet, Russia continues to press forward, using long-range drones, glide bombs, and concentrated infantry assaults to depopulate towns and encircle Ukrainian positions. The fall of Donbas would not only threaten cities like Kharkiv but could signal a broader campaign of coercion aimed at reshaping Ukraine’s territorial and economic integrity.

At the strategic level, Moscow’s war plan now unfolds in three phases. The first is battlefield domination: occupying or destroying enough territory to leave Ukraine economically dependent on Russia. The second would leverage economic pressure and political warfare to manipulate Kyiv, while the third envisages fully integrating Ukraine into Russia’s orbit—effectively replicating Belarus’s model. Yet Russian progress remains constrained by logistics, manpower, and economic pressure. Despite mass recruitment, including large bonuses to volunteers, the Kremlin faces declining enlistment and mounting casualties. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s long-range strikes on oil refineries, combined with sanctions targeting Russia’s “shadow fleet” of tanker ships, threaten to constrain Moscow’s funding for sustained military operations.

For Ukraine, survival hinges on three pillars: materiel, manpower, and will. European partners are finally ramping up defense production, expanding munitions, cruise missiles, drones, and subsystems, while U.S. support has largely ceased, leaving gaps in specialized capabilities. Meanwhile, the quality and integration of Ukrainian infantry remains a pressing challenge. Establishing brigade rotations, in-country European training, and coherent command structures could sustain combat readiness through the winter—a season likely to be pivotal as Russia leverages missile strikes against energy infrastructure and freezing temperatures strain civilian resilience.

Foreign Affairs emphasizes that international action—or inaction—directly shapes the war’s trajectory. Symbolic pledges and postwar security guarantees have failed to deter Moscow; only real pressure on Russian energy exports, infrastructure, and finances could compel a reassessment. Coordinated European measures against the shadow fleet and strategic strikes on oil facilities, combined with enhanced in-country training, would strengthen Ukraine’s defense while signaling to Russia that prolonging the war comes at prohibitive cost.

Ultimately, the coming months could determine whether Ukraine consolidates its front lines or faces accelerated Russian coercion. Foreign Affairs’ analysis underscores a simple truth: Kyiv’s capacity to resist is intertwined with Western resolve. Winter 2025–26 may prove decisive—not merely in battles over towns like Pokrovsk, but in defining whether Russia can be forced to negotiate on terms respectful of Ukraine’s sovereignty. Without decisive, coordinated action, the conflict risks drifting into a prolonged stalemate that benefits Moscow, even as it erodes the resilience of Ukraine’s people and military.

By Vugar Khalilov