As freezing temperatures grip Ukraine this winter, Russian missiles and drones systematically target the power grid that keeps millions of civilians warm, while Kremlin-backed media work overtime to justify attacks that break international law.
The human cost of Russia’s strategy became brutally clear over the past three months. In December 2025 alone, at least 157 civilians were killed and 888 injured, a 66 percent increase compared to December 2024, according to the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine. The mission documented that 96 percent of casualties occurred in Ukrainian government-controlled territory. The year’s total reached 2,514 killed and 12,142 injured, representing a 31 percent increase from 2024 and a 70 percent increase from 2023. The vast majority of these casualties, 97 percent, occurred in government-controlled territory from attacks launched by Russian armed forces.
Long-range strikes with missiles and loitering munitions by Russian armed forces accounted for 33 percent of all civilian casualties in December, killing 34 and injuring 308, primarily hitting urban centers far from the frontline. Near frontline areas, 67 percent of civilian casualties occurred, with short-range drones, predominantly first-person-view models, causing 58 deaths and 256 injuries. Civilian casualties from short-range drones increased by 120 percent in 2025, resulting in 577 civilians killed and 3,288 injured.
The attacks continued with deadly precision into the new year. On January 7-8, Russian forces launched a combined strike with ballistic missiles and attack drones on civilian infrastructure in the Odesa region, according to the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office. Port and industrial facilities were damaged, killing two people and injuring 11, with four in serious condition. The same night, Russian forces attacked the Dnipropetrovsk region with strike drones, damaging critical infrastructure in the Dnipro, Kryvyi Rih, and Pavlohrad districts, leaving part of the region without electricity.
On January 24, Russian attacks damaged a hospital and residential homes in Kharkiv, according to the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine. In Kyiv, thousands of apartment buildings that had been gradually reconnected to essential services following attacks on January 9 and 20 lost access again in sub-zero temperatures. The entire city of Chernihiv and hundreds of thousands of families across the Chernihiv region were left without electricity.
The violence extends even to individual civilians on roads far from any military activity. On February 3, Russians attacked civilian infrastructure in Zaporizhzhia with a drone, killing a boy, according to the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office. Days later, on February 8, a Russian drone attacked a civilian car in the region, injuring a 19-year-old driver and a 16-year-old passenger who were hospitalized, Pravda reports. Ukrainian journalist Andrii Tsaplienko shared video footage of Russian drones hunting civilians in Sumy, documenting the terror of these attacks on ordinary people going about their daily lives.
While these attacks devastated Ukrainian cities and terrorized civilians, Russian state media and a coordinated network of pro-Russian outlets across Europe worked systematically to justify the carnage. Their propaganda operates on four main narratives, each a deliberate distortion designed to obscure war crimes and shift blame to Ukraine.
The most common reason for Russian strikes is the fact that they are seen as proportional responses to Ukrainian attacks on Russian land. This narrative casts Ukraine’s self-defense as “terrorism” requiring Russian retaliation.
Russian state media set the template. Russia Today stated after the February 7 strikes that “the Russian military has conducted a large-scale missile and drone strike on Ukraine in response to ‘terrorist attacks’ by Kiev on civilian infrastructure in Russia.”
This framing spread rapidly across Europe. After the alleged drone attack on Putin’s residence in late December, Czech outlet CZ24.news published the Russian Defense Ministry’s warning that “no terrorist act of the criminal Ukrainian regime will remain without a response.”
Slovak site Slovanské Noviny took an enthusiastic approach. In an article titled “No more pampering!” the outlet celebrated Putin’s statement that “you have to meet threats with force” and presented strikes on Odesa as justified retaliation. The article stated that “Russia has stopped pampering and is taking tough steps,” framing the destruction as a long-overdue show of strength.
Another article from Slovanské Noviny described the January 2 strikes this way: “In response to the terrorist attack yesterday, more than 200 Russian unmanned aerial vehicles hit objects throughout Ukraine.”
Slovak outlet Hlavný Denník created inflammatory framing with the headline “MASSACRE during New Year’s Eve! UKRAINE attacked civilians, they burned alive! HERE is RUSSIA’s response,” explicitly justifying Russian strikes as retaliation.
Spanish outlet Diario-octubre.com framed the January 24 strikes as justified retaliation. The article stated: “The Russian Ministry of Defense reported that, in response to Kiev’s terrorist aggressions against Russian civilian targets, its Armed Forces launched a massive attack.” It went on to accuse Ukraine of hypocrisy: “While the Zelenskyy regime blames Russia for this in international forums, it omits its own attacks on Russian energy infrastructure and the fact that Moscow avoided doing the same for a long time.”
Italian site Contropiano.org argued that Russian retaliation was inevitable after the alleged attack on Putin’s residence. “Trying to decapitate the political leadership of a nuclear power with 6,000 warheads ready is not something that can pass as ‘normal,'” the outlet wrote, suggesting Russia had no choice but to respond with force.
Slovak outlet Oral.sk reported Lavrov’s statements without critique: “Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accused Ukraine of a ‘terrorist attack’ using 91 long-range drones on the state residence of President Vladimir Putin. Lavrov called the action ‘state terrorism’ by the Kiev regime and declared that Russia has already selected targets and timing for retaliatory strikes.”
French outlet Réseau International described the strikes as an “immediate response” to Ukrainian provocations. The article warned that “Russia may be tempted to test this next, if Zelenskyy or the West persist in their inappropriate provocations.”
The “justified retaliation” narrative serves a crucial function. By characterizing Ukrainian defensive strikes as “terrorism” and Russian offensive strikes as “responses,” it inverts aggressor and defender, allowing pro-Russian outlets to present the systematic destruction of Ukrainian civilian infrastructure as defensive and proportional.
The second major propaganda line acknowledges that Russia targets energy infrastructure but claims this is legally justified because such facilities support Ukraine’s military operations.
Sputnik reported the Russian Ministry of Defense claiming that “in response to the massive attacks by Ukrainian UAVs in the regions of Russia, the Russian army is striking exclusively at military facilities and enterprises of the military-industrial complex of Ukraine.”
Slovanské Noviny listed targets to justify attacks: “Ukrainian military-industrial enterprises, energy complex facilities that ensured their operation, and transport and port infrastructure used in the interests of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.”
Slovak outlet Infovojna.com‘s article about the Oreshnik missile strike quoted the Russian Defense Ministry: “The targets were drone production facilities used in the terrorist attack on Putin’s residence, as well as energy infrastructure supporting the operation of the Ukrainian military-industrial complex.”
Dutch outlet Frontnieuws.com described Russia’s systematic destruction as a “new tactic” targeting “both generation facilities and distribution systems.” The article noted that “all thermal power plants of the company ‘Centrenergo’ have stopped generating electricity,” presenting this as military strategy rather than potential war crimes.
Russia Today emphasized in February 2025: “Moscow has for months launched long-range strikes on Ukrainian military installations and energy infrastructure linked to defense operations,” stating that these attacks never target civilians.
This narrative attempts to exploit ambiguities in international humanitarian law. The propaganda version ignores crucial legal requirements. Even if some energy facilities could theoretically qualify as military objectives, attacks must still distinguish between civilian and military elements, be proportional to the concrete military advantage gained, and take precautions to minimize civilian harm. When Russian strikes systematically knock out power to entire cities in freezing temperatures, killing civilians and disrupting hospitals, water treatment, and heating for millions, any claimed military advantage is far outweighed by the civilian cost.
Russian state media maintains the flat assertion that Russia never targets civilians, despite overwhelming evidence of strikes on hospitals, schools, and residential areas.
Sputnik stated on December 31, 2025 that “the ministry noted that in response to Kiev’s attacks on civilian targets, Russian troops regularly strike personnel, equipment, and infrastructure.” The article emphasized that “Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov reiterated that the Russian military does not target residential buildings or social institutions.”
Russia Today repeated this claim in its February 7 article, stating that Russia “maintains that it never targets civilians.”
This narrative spreads through European outlets that directly translate Russian statements without analysis. Both Hungarian site Oroszhírek.hu and Czech outlet CZ24.news published nearly identical translations of the Russian statement: “Russia has been attacking Ukrainian defense facilities, including power plants, for months; it claims it never targets civilians.”
The claim persists despite documented strikes on clearly civilian targets.
The fourth propaganda narrative doesn’t deny the strikes but dismisses reports of civilian casualties and infrastructure damage as unreliable or exaggerated, insisting that Russia carefully avoids civilian targets.
Russia Today has repeatedly emphasized this line. In one article, RT stated: “Moscow has repeatedly stressed that its attacks are only aimed at Ukrainian facilities that support military operations and not at the civilian population.”
Another RT article reinforced the message: “Russia insists that its strikes never target Ukrainian civilians.”
Hungarian outlet Oroszhirek.hu amplified this narrative by translating Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov’s assertions: “Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov emphasized that the army does not attack residential buildings and social facilities in battles with the Ukrainian armed forces.”
The same outlet provided Russian justifications for the intensified attacks: “….the Ministry of Defense stated that these strikes were responses to Ukraine’s efforts to target Russian oil industry facilities, emphasizing that operations focus on sites supporting the Ukrainian defense industry and do not target civilian areas.”
This narrative serves a crucial function in the propaganda ecosystem. By repeatedly insisting that Russia doesn’t target civilians, these outlets attempt to discredit the extensive documentation by UN monitors, international humanitarian organizations, and Ukrainian authorities. When confronted with evidence of strikes on hospitals, schools, and residential buildings, the response is simply to deny that such targeting occurs, casting reports of civilian casualties as unreliable or politically motivated rather than addressing the documented facts.
Russia’s targeting of energy infrastructure violates international humanitarian law. Article 54 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions explicitly prohibits attacking, destroying, or rendering useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population.
The International Federation for Human Rights has analyzed whether energy infrastructure constitutes such protected objects under current conditions in Ukraine. The organization concluded that given freezing temperatures that drop to minus 20 degrees Celsius, “electricity for heating, as well as drinking water, become necessary for the survival of the Ukrainian civilian population.” The destruction of the energy grid “leads to starvation and can also force civilians to move, seeking refuge in other parts of the country or abroad.”
International humanitarian law also prohibits acts of violence whose primary purpose is to spread terror among the civilian population, particularly when providing no significant military advantage. FIDH notes that IHL forbids acts of violence whose primary purpose is spreading terror among civilians without providing significant military advantage.
UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Ukraine Matthias Schmale stated on January 24, 2026: “This systematic cycle of attacks on energy infrastructure violates international humanitarian law and must end. Civilians must be safe and warm in their homes and not live in fear of the losses the next round of destruction may bring.”
Russia’s propaganda serves multiple purposes. Domestically, it justifies escalation to a Russian population that might question attacks causing mass civilian suffering. By framing strikes as retaliation for Ukrainian terrorism, as targeting legitimate military objectives, and as normal military operations, the Kremlin maintains support for tactics that increasingly rely on terrorizing civilians.
Internationally, the propaganda creates ambiguity and slows response. When Russian state media and sympathetic outlets flood the information space with justifications and counter-accusations, they make it harder for international audiences to understand what’s actually happening.
The coordination is striking. Within hours of major strikes, the same core narratives appear across Russian state media: Sputnik, RT, RIA Novosti, TASS. These narratives then radiate outward through a network of outlets across Europe. Some publish direct translations of Russian Defense Ministry statements without analysis. Others amplify the message with varying degrees of original commentary. Still others contribute content that aligns with and reinforces these talking points, whether through technical analysis presenting strikes as military strategy or enthusiastic endorsement of Russian actions.
The message stays consistent across languages. Energy infrastructure becomes a “military-industrial complex.” Civilian casualties become unavoidable results of striking “legitimate targets.” Ukrainian self-defense becomes “terrorism” requiring Russian retaliation. And the systematic destruction of civilian infrastructure becomes just normal military practice.
This coordination reflects deliberate information operations designed to shape international perception. The result is a propaganda ecosystem that provides cover for war crimes. By creating the appearance of debate about basic facts, these outlets make it harder to build international consensus for action.
Russia claims to strike only military targets while its weapons kill children and target medical facilities. It claims to respond to Ukrainian terrorism while launching systematic attacks on civilians. It presents energy infrastructure as legitimate military objectives while millions freeze in the dark. And when confronted with evidence, it shrugs and suggests this is simply how war works.
For the people of Ukraine living through this winter under Russian bombardment, for the international humanitarian workers documenting violations, and for anyone examining the evidence, the truth is clear. Russia is waging a systematic campaign against Ukraine’s civilian population and infrastructure in violation of international humanitarian law, while lying about it through a coordinated network of state media and sympathetic outlets across Europe.
The world’s response will determine whether the principles that civilians must be protected in war and that those who commit war crimes must be held accountable still have meaning. The evidence is clear. The law is clear. What remains uncertain is whether there’s the political will to enforce either.
Polish prosecutors have charged a former serviceman with espionage for allegedly joining Russian forces and…
Russia's information operations against the West are not propaganda seeking to convince, but cognitive warfare…
Moscow has built a sophisticated four-tier propaganda ecosystem in occupied Kherson, where specialized local outlets,…
The European Union has targeted six Russian media personalities and cultural figures with sanctions for…
Before the 2026 elections, a network of Russian state media and pro-Kremlin outlets in Europe…
Russian state media and pro-Kremlin outlets across Europe exploited sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's released documents…