Alex Craiu, Russia’s 2025 Escalation in Ukraine: Energy Attacks, Frontline Pressure, and Civilian Resilience

Alex Craiu is a Romanian war correspondent based in Ukraine, reporting from the frontline and rear areas for international audiences. Trained in documentary and cinematography production, he studied in the United Kingdom and in California, United States. He works as an independent, freelance journalist and has produced short-form video reporting for social platforms as well as written analysis. In 2017, he completed an internship with the BBC in London, then expanded his field reporting during Russia’s full-scale invasion. Craiu has contributed to outlets including Veridica and In-Sight Publishing, focusing on civilian life, information warfare, battlefield realities, and humanitarian consequences under fire.

In this exchange, Scott Douglas Jacobsen asks Alex Craiu to assess the trends in Russia’s war on Ukraine for 2025. Craiu describes intensified missile and drone strikes, repeated attacks on energy infrastructure, and widening harm to civilians, alongside allegations of serious international-law violations. He notes that prolonged war also raises internal risks—detention abuses, coercive mobilization practices, and corruption—requiring oversight. On the battlefield, he stresses that pressure on key nodes matters more than raw kilometres, highlighting the Pokrovsk–Myrnohrad axis and disputed Russian claims about Kupiansk. He closes with a nuanced view of morale: resilient, but strained, with real war fatigue through winter blackouts.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What has been the trend in 2025 regarding Russian aggression against Ukraine? In addition, are there any concerning internal issues within Ukraine related to potential human rights abuses?

Alex Craiu: In 2025—especially into late 2025 and the winter period—Russia has continued and, in several phases, intensified large-scale missile and drone strikes across Ukraine. These strikes have repeatedly targeted energy infrastructure, along with logistics, municipal, and other civilian facilities, contributing to widespread hardship during cold-weather periods. Russia has been accused of serious violations of international humanitarian law, including unlawful attacks affecting civilians and civilian objects.

Regarding internal risks within Ukraine, any prolonged, high-intensity war increases the risk of rights abuses, including concerns related to detention practices, mobilization procedures, and corruption-linked coercion. These issues require sustained domestic oversight, judicial accountability, and continued international monitoring.

Jacobsen: How much territory has been taken in 2025? Along the 1,300-kilometre front line, how many kilometres have been gained?

Craiu: It is difficult to provide a precise figure in terms of kilometres gained without specifying the exact time frame and mapping methodology. Operationally, what has mattered more than raw territorial measurement is the pressure applied to key defensive nodes.

In the Donetsk direction, Russian forces have maintained sustained pressure in the Pokrovsk–Myrnohrad axis, attempting to stretch or encircle Ukrainian defensive lines. However, there has been no confirmed, full and stable capture of these cities.

There have also been instances in which Russian officials have claimed control over cities such as Kupyansk. These claims have been publicly disputed and contradicted by visual and open-source evidence. Such assertions appear intended to project momentum and readiness for continued operations.

Jacobsen: Have any political objectives of the Russian Federation been achieved?

Craiu: It is widely assessed that Russia has failed to achieve its primary political objectives. The initial aims—such as rapidly toppling the Ukrainian government, preventing Ukraine’s westward integration, and reshaping its geopolitical orientation—were not realized. Instead, Ukraine consolidated its national identity and strengthened its ties with the European Union and NATO.

Diplomatically, Russia has faced sustained isolation from much of the Western world and remains subject to extensive sanctions. While Russia has maintained or deepened relations with certain non-Western states, its broader global standing has been significantly constrained.

The narrative that the invasion was necessary to protect Russian-speaking populations has also had the opposite effect. Since 2022, Ukrainian civic identity has further consolidated, including among many Russian-speaking Ukrainians.

Claims that the war constitutes defensive action against hostile democratic regimes have not been broadly accepted internationally. Overall, Russia’s political objectives have largely not been met, and in several respects the outcome has run counter to its initial goals.

Jacobsen: What about Ukrainian morale? How are Ukrainians handling consistent bombardment, power shortages, power outages, increased attacks on civilians, and documented cases of torture and ill-treatment of prisoners of war and detainees? How is morale in 2025 amid expanded attacks affecting a broader segment of the population beyond military targets?

Craiu: Ukrainian morale has fluctuated over time but has remained resilient despite prolonged strain. Continuous missile and drone attacks, energy disruptions, and civilian casualties have created fatigue and psychological pressure. Power outages during winter periods and repeated attacks on infrastructure have imposed cumulative hardship.

At the same time, Ukrainian society has demonstrated sustained mobilization, including volunteer networks, civil defence adaptation, and local resilience measures. Public opinion surveys conducted since 2022 have generally shown continued support for resistance, though concerns about duration, economic cost, and human toll have increased.

Morale in 2025 reflects a combination of exhaustion and determination. The population is under significant stress, but broad support for sovereignty and territorial integrity remains a defining factor.

I would reference an opinion article published in Ukrainian media toward the end of 2025, arguing that Ukrainians should stop pretending they are fine. The argument suggested that Ukrainians have been strong, have compelled themselves to remain strong, and have presented a narrative of resilience to the outside world. Part of this presentation concerns wartime messaging—Ukraine has consistently emphasized its readiness to resist and its refusal to surrender to Russian occupation.

Psychologically, however, the situation is more complex. Therapists and mental health professionals report an increase in patients seeking support. While resilience remains visible, it is not as universal as often portrayed. Interviews with civilians following attacks may project normality, and morale remains broadly intact, but it fluctuates with each new escalation.

This winter has brought repeated blackouts and heating disruptions in many residential buildings. Ukrainians are adapting not only to war but also to severe seasonal hardship. Public sentiment today differs from that of last summer. War fatigue is real. Nevertheless, there is no clear indication that exhaustion has translated into a willingness to accept any settlement regardless of terms.

Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Alex.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen is a blogger on Vocal with over 120 posts on the platform. He is the publisher of In-Sight Publishing (ISBN: 978–1–0692343) and the Editor-in-Chief of In-Sight: Interviews (ISSN: 2369–6885). He writes for The Good Men Project, International Policy Digest (ISSN: 2332–9416), The Humanist (Print: ISSN 0018–7399; Online: ISSN 2163–3576), Basic Income Earth Network (UK Registered Charity 1177066), A Further Inquiry, The Washington Outsider, The Rabble, and The Washington Outsider, and other media. He is a member in good standing of numerous media associations/organizations.