Collective West Press Starting to Acknowledge Ukraine’s Untenable Position and Inevitable Loss

Yours truly was about to post on how the media, largely following European and NATO officials, had gone uncharacteristically quiet about Project Ukraine even as the Russia electricity war was pushing much of the country into a humanitarian crisis. But just as I was starting to write this post, as we will soon discuss, the New York Times and CNN published new stories that effectively admit that Ukraine’s prospects are not too hot.

Aside from being able to hide behind continued Trump whipsaws and violence, and the new distraction of the latest Epstein files release, perhaps these generally sociopathic Western leaders are chagrined, or at least embarrassed, as they ought to be. They sabotaged the Istanbul talks, promised they would “whatever it takes” for Ukraine to win, pressed Ukraine to fight to the last Ukrainians, with the result that Russia is now taking Ukraine apart. War is a deadly, destructive business. Unless the weaker side knuckles under when it still has that option, the stronger combatant will subjugate its opponent. That results in massive harm to civilians.

And even though the Europeans have kept pushing Ukraine on, as if patching up a badly battered boxer to go back into the ring for more punishment, don’t kid yourself about massive US culpability. The US was behind the Maidan coup. Biden provided an enormous amount of funding and browbeat allies, even ones in Asia, to deplete their weapons stocks to help arm Ukraine. Trump could have pulled the plug at any time by cutting off intelligence support but was too afraid of Lindsay Graham to do so.

As those who have been following the war know, Ukraine’s electricity system is close to collapse. We had pointed out early on that high loading, as cold weather will produce, will lead to further damage due to surges and difficulty in load balancing. So not only are Russian strikes further degrading the power system, but it is also coming apart due to the severity of damage it has suffered, just as someone trying to walk on a broken leg will do himself further harm. But have no doubt that the Russian missile and drone strikes are the biggest factor in the worsening electrical system emergency. From Aljazeera:

• Russia launched an overnight attack described as the “most powerful” this year on Ukraine’s battered energy facilities, officials in Kyiv said, leaving hundreds of thousands of people without heating amid glacial winter temperatures and in advance of talks to end the four-year war.

• The latest Russian operation against Ukraine’s energy sector was the biggest since the start of 2026, Ukraine’s leading private energy company DTEK said on Telegram.

• A power plant in Ukraine’s second-largest city of Kharkiv was also badly damaged in the Russian attack, Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov said. The attack on Kharkiv also injured at least five people, according to officials…

• A power plant in Kyiv’s eastern Darnytskyi district was seriously damaged in the Russian attack, Ukrainian Energy Minister Denys Shmyhal said on Telegram, prompting officials to redirect resources to restoring heating to thousands of residents in the city.

• At least 1,142 high-rise apartment blocks have been left without heating in the Ukrainian capital following the Russian attacks, Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Kuleba said.

This snapshot understates how bad things are. Ukraine has been diverting power from less heavily populated areas to the big cities. Even so, there has been a 24 hour blackout of the entire country, plus protracted outages every day in Kiev, Kharviv, Dnipro, and other large centers, which also means no heat and no water/sewage pumping. Russia has been striking the substations that handle power from Ukraine’s three nuclear plants, as well as hitting thermal stations.

More detail:

🇺🇦 Ukraine’s energy grid is in agony. Russia’s largest strike of 2026 hammered critical infrastructure with 70+ missiles and 450 drones overnight Feb 2–3. Power is failing in Kiev, Kharkiv, and Odesa. The aim: cripple military logistics and deepen the winter crisis. DTEK warns of… pic.twitter.com/n797T2LUlX

— 🅰pocalypsis 🅰pocalypseos 🇷🇺 🇨🇳 🅉 (@apocalypseos) February 4, 2026

The city of Kiev enjoys just under 12 hours of electricity per day.

Poltava oblast is somewhat of a black hole, never rising above 4 hours for 2 weeks. https://t.co/ukvomdR3RH pic.twitter.com/WLYKdAZehU

— darko (@darko31414) February 4, 2026

The West is impotent. It does not have enough weapons to make a difference, and even if it did, Ukraine is running out of men. The EU is not delivering on its promise to somehow cobble together a €90 billion funding package to keep Ukraine on life support. Trump is playing stupid games to pretend that he has a say in what is happening. He announced that Russia had agreed to a one-week grid attack ceasefire. As Alexander Mercouris explained at length, the Russia long silence before responding suggested there was no such deal or at best it had been discussed privately.¹ Russia made it seem as if it was already underway, set to finish two days later.

Trump was not about to admit he had been outmaneuvered:

🇷🇺🇺🇸🇺🇦 It was Sunday to Sunday the energy ceasefire lasted, 7 days, Putin kept his words — Trump

Meanwhile, western media and Zelensky were crying Russia broke its promise. This just puts them all to shame how they manipulate people to believing lies.pic.twitter.com/8IT4PFpWTx

— Spetsnaℤ 007 🇷🇺 (@Alex_Oloyede2) February 3, 2026

Finger-wagging is another sign of weakness, even before getting to the inconvenient fact that NATO bombed energy infrastructure in Kosovo:

During my visit to Kyiv today I saw a civilian heating plant targeted by Russian missiles.

No military value whatsoever – attacks meant only to make people suffer.

But Ukraine stands strong. And NATO stands with you. pic.twitter.com/XWoX11xfEv

— Mark Rutte (@SecGenNATO) February 3, 2026

The immediate triggers for the latest bout of coverage are Russia resuming its energy strikes when the “ceasefire” ended (bad Putin!) and the new round of discussions in Abu Dhabi. These talks are a sham. Russia’s position is non-negotiable. Putin had warned early on that the longer the war went on, the harder it would become to negotiate with them. Russia has signaled it will increase its demands in the wake of the Ukraine attack on Putin’s Valdai residence. Mercouris’ reading of the latest statements from Russia is they now want regime change, as in Zelensky and his merry band sent packing. But as of now, Ukraine still has agency. Zelensky is not only ferociously rejecting giving up land but has cheekily upped his ante by demanding NATO-level security guarantees from the US when no NATO/Ukraine neutrality are principal Russian demands. Yet US in typical Trump misdirection is pretending that a deal is nigh, with “territory” the only sticking point. Help me.

So now to the increasing signs that the press is starting to prepare the public for a Ukraine defeat. However, as we will also see, the media is still way behind the state of play. Even as it describes increasingly desperate conditions, the New York Times weirdly talks about territorial concessions in Donbass. Earth to Gray Lady: Russia holds nearly all of it now, and its minimum ask includes all of Kherson and Zaporzhizhia oblasts, which it only partially controls now. However, in the opening paragraphs of For Peace, More Ukrainians Consider the Once Unthinkable: Surrendering Land, which explicitly mentions only giving up the Donbass, the New York Times indirectly acknowledges the Russian principle (emphasis ours):

Ms. [Khrystyna] Yurchenko is among a growing number of Ukrainians who say they would hand over the part of the Donbas still controlled by Ukraine to Russia if that would end the war.

This represents a notable shift for a war-weary Ukrainian population. Giving up territory that Russia has been unable to capture has long been considered a red line. But what once seemed impossible now appears less so, as the Kremlin insists that U.S.-backed peace negotiations will advance only if Ukraine agrees to walk away from the Donbas.

The Times focuses on the fact that more Ukrainians are willing to consider ceding part of Ukraine to end the conflict. While it blathers unduly about security guarantees, it eventually admits that Russia accept them since they are Trojan horses for stationing Western forces in Ukraine. It seems that Russia has to keep hammering on this point, since European leaders keep acting as if their face-saving peacekeeping/reassurance force scheme might happen if they keep talking it up:

Deployment of 'Coalition of the willing' (UK, France, Germany) troops in Ukraine unacceptable for Russia — Foreign Ministry spokeswoman

'These troops will be considered as a LEGITIMATE MILITARY TARGET' pic.twitter.com/QnTJPbwJyl

— RT (@RT_com) February 4, 2026

Nevertheless, the Times surprisingly notes: “While European nations have vowed to station troops in Ukraine after any cease-fire, it remains unclear whether they would agree to actually fight Russia in defense of Ukraine.”

There is no mention whatsoever of the usual tropes of Russia taking presumed unsustainably high military or economic losses. It does hints that Zelensky’s position is becoming difficult:

In May 2022, two months after Ukrainian forces repelled the Russian Army around the capital, Kyiv, a poll by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology found that 82 percent of Ukrainians believed that the country should not surrender territory under any circumstances.

In the institute’s most recent survey, published on Monday, 40 percent of respondents said they would support giving up the Donbas in exchange for security guarantees.

The two figures are not directly comparable, because earlier polls did not attach security guarantees to the question about ceding territory. But the finding tracked with other survey data showing a rising acceptance of territorial concessions.
Still, a majority of Ukrainians remain opposed. Many say they are prepared to continue enduring hardships, including Russia’s campaign to knock out the country’s energy infrastructure during a bitterly cold winter.

Relinquishing the Donbas could fracture Ukrainian society, analysts said. It could also recast the legacy of Mr. Zelensky from a heroic leader who defended the state to one who allowed a Russian occupation of Ukrainian-controlled territory where about 190,000 people now live. Many would presumably move to areas still held by Ukraine rather than live under Russian rule.

Next to CNN, in Ukraine’s strategy is to kill 50,000 Russian soldiers a month. A sign of confidence or an indicator of weakness?:

The suggestion that Russia is suffering heavy losses is not new. A new report last week estimated that 1.2 million Russians have either been killed, wounded or are missing since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine almost four years ago – the highest casualty figure suffered by a major military power since World War II. The report put the number of Ukrainian casualties between 500,000 and 600,000.

“The data suggests Russia is hardly winning,” the report’s authors wrote.

Maybe not, but as senior officials from Ukraine, Russia and the United States prepare for the next round of direct talks in Abu Dhabi on Wednesday, it would be a mistake for Ukraine’s supporters to get carried away.

Even this mild-throat clearing is unusual for a Western outlet. From later in the article:

The logic behind Kyiv’s position is simple: Very few Ukrainians believe Putin has any goal other than the total subjugation of their country. So, why hand over territory for nothing if Ukraine can expect to kill hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers while Moscow keeps trying to capture Donetsk by force?…

But if there is no confidence that negotiations are headed anywhere, what about Ukraine’s battlefield strategy? Is piling up the other side’s body bags the best way forward?

An American former fighter, Ryan O’Leary, who led an international volunteer unit called Chosen Company, believes not, triggering a vigorous debate after he laid out his arguments in a social media post.

He took issue with the much vaunted “e-points” scheme, whereby Ukraine’s units earn points for each Russian soldier killed or piece of materiel destroyed. The points are exchanged for new equipment, and the Defense Ministry says the scheme provides a wealth of data that helps shape future plans.

But O’Leary suggested they create the wrong incentives, causing Ukrainian commanders to prioritize more straightforward drone strikes against infantry targets around the line of combat, rather than tougher but more significant deep strikes against Russian logistics – like vehicles and communication hubs, as well as Russian drone crews operating from rear positions.

One has to note that in the fabulously corrupt Ukraine, where it has been reported that commanders are not reporting deaths of their own soldiers in order to collect their pay, that the incentives are obvious: over-report Russian deaths.

CNN acknowledges Ukraine’s manpower problems:

The infantry shortage is well known. Rob Lee of the Foreign Policy Research Institute estimates there are fewer than ten Ukrainian infantry soldiers per kilometer of front line. He also estimates that most brigades have at most 10% of their total personnel in the infantry. Traditionally, that number would be upwards of 30%…

But in a war where drones – not infantry – matter most, it is Ukraine’s shortfalls in drone crews that are most pressing, especially in the key battle for operational depth – the destruction of targets up to 25 miles (40 kilometers) behind the line of combat.

In a forthright defense of the fighters under his command, the head of Ukraine’s Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Forces, Robert Brovdi, said last week there needed to be a threefold increase in the number of drone operators. Just 30% of the frontline – which stretches 745 miles – is currently covered, he wrote on his Facebook page.

Fedorov, the new defense minister, acknowledges the scale of the problem, telling the Ukrainian parliament some 2 million people are ignoring their call-up papers, while 200,000 others have deserted.

Keep in mind that Russia, with some success, has been targeting drone operators.

Even with increasing glimmers of reality coming in press accounts, the level of denial about how fragile Ukraine has become still widespread. A few sightings and representative snippets:

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, in Vladimir Putin Isn’t Winning in Ukraine:

Russian forces have taken an astonishing 1.2 million casualties in Ukraine since 2022, according to estimates from Seth Jones and Riley McCabe of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The Russian death toll may be as high as 325,000—more than five times than in all Soviet and Russian conflicts combined since World War II. Some 36,000 Americans died in the grinding three-year Korean War.

The conventional wisdom is that Mr. Putin will eventually prevail because Russia is the larger power and Mr. Putin can keep throwing men into his human meat grinder. Yet Mr. Putin isn’t making territorial gains commensurate with his losses…

The Ukraine war draws comparisons to the trench warfare of World War I, but the Russian advance has been “slower than the most brutal offensive campaigns over the last century, including the notoriously bloody Battle of the Somme during World War I,” says the report. Ukraine has its own manpower shortages, but Russian casualties are two or 2.5 to one for Ukraine.

The Telegraph maintains that the problem is not Ukraine’s weakness but Trump’s, in Trump is sowing the seeds of the next Ukraine war:

Through four years of full-scale invasion and one brutal offensive after another, Russia has never managed to capture it. Ukraine’s soldiers have repulsed Vladimir Putin’s attacks and doggedly held the line at immense cost….

So Putin is trying to gain at the negotiating table what he has failed to seize on the battlefield…

The obvious way to break the deadlock and achieve an agreement would be for the US president to tell his Russian counterpart to drop this absurd demand for territory that Moscow’s forces have not captured.

Trump could back this with real pressure, for example by supplying Ukraine with Tomahawk cruise missiles to destroy Russian oil refineries, or by allowing the Senate to pass a bill – which has lain dormant for a year – to suffocate the Kremlin’s oil exports by imposing US tariffs of 500 per cent on any country that buys them.

And from Politico, The steel porcupine: How Ukraine plans to defend itself after the war, which of course presupposes that there will be a post-war Ukraine:

Ukraine fears it can’t rely on security guarantees from its allies in any potential peace deal, and so must be ready to stand alone as a “steel porcupine” to ensure that Russian dictator Vladimir Putin won’t return for another attack….

That means a permanent massive army, heavy investment in the latest drone and missile technology, and domestic arms production.

Erm, and how does that happen in a county with either no or a marginally operating grid, badly damaged rail lines, great depopulation, and huge budget deficits which will pretty much assure hyperinflation?

So Ukraine’s continuing success in the narrative war will simply result in even more devastation to the country and its people than might have happened otherwise. “Nicely played” even though true, sidesteps the issue: that extending the timetable to Ukraine’s defeat or capitulation has to be to facilitate yet more looting. Even the coked-up Zelensky cannot be blind to the horrific conditions around him and the cost to what is left of Ukraine.

______

¹ It is inconceivable that Russia agreed and then expected Trump not to tout it as a concession. If the Trump team indeed ran this by Russia in advance, it seems more likely that they made non-committal noises.