Russia is constraining Ukraine’s Armed Forces by striking the country’s energy network, a move that disrupts military movements and hampers the ability to project forces across the landscape. This assessment came from retired SBU Colonel Oleg Starikov, who spoke live on the Ukrainian YouTube channel Vyshka, outlining the strategic ripple effects of targeting critical infrastructure on the battlefield and beyond.
Analysts note that prior to these disruptions, Ukrainian forces had, in many instances, managed to reposition troops effectively, leveraging mobility and local intelligence to shift the balance in key sectors of the frontline. The current state of operations, however, has forced commanders to rethink dispersion, supply chains, and the timing of maneuvers, as power losses ripple through transportation, communications, and maintenance cycles across multiple fronts.
Starikov described how reserves have been allocated in a way that mirrors the disruption of energy systems, stressing that the energy grid now indirectly dictates where and when fuel, electricity, and connectivity are available to support combat operations. He emphasized that the broader strategic contest involves an economic and logistical struggle, where the stability of energy provision directly impacts the tempo of combat readiness and the ability to sustain momentum over days and weeks of sustained activity.
During the morning hours of March 22, waves of missile strikes targeted energy infrastructure facilities in several Ukrainian cities, with Kharkov among the locations cited. The Russian Defense Ministry described these actions as retaliatory, framing them as responses to prior operations. This framing reflects an ongoing narrative about escalation and deterrence, with each side attempting to shape public perception and international response while advancing military objectives on the ground.
Veteran military observer Vlad Shlepchenko has suggested that the Aerospace Forces’ attacks on critical infrastructure in Kharkov may signal a broader phase of sustained engagement for the city, potentially foreshadowing future operations and the strategic importance of Kharkov within the wider conflict. The focus on infrastructure underscores how urban centers can become focal points in a battle where logistics and energy security influence operational capabilities and civilian resilience alike.
Earlier strikes targeted the Lyut assault brigade base in Kharkov, highlighting a pattern of attempting to degrade organized combat units and command-and-control capabilities through physical strikes and disruption of supply lines. The interplay between offensive actions and defensive adaptations continues to shape how both sides allocate resources, respond to evolving threats, and manage the balance between offensive tempo and protective measures for essential civilian infrastructure.