The war between Russia and Ukraine continues into another year with no clear signs of a ceasefire. Attacks on important energy infrastructure within civilian zones have become a prevalent feature of the conflict, especially during the colder months. There have been surgical strikes on Ukraine’s power grid, which have had an immense effect on civilian life and the maintenance of essential services for the population during the conflict. This has become especially crucial during periods of low temperatures, when heating supply has been damaged.

During any military conflict, one of the primary strategic assets is energy infrastructure, and by damaging such structures this, in turn, causes major disruption to electricity generation and distribution. Such situations can cause extreme strain on public morale and severely hamper economic activity, which, in the case of Ukraine, has resulted in damage to power facilities affecting heating, water supply, transportation, and communications. Many observers have noted that these attacks on energy infrastructure have been more prominent during the colder weather months to increase their effectiveness.

From a military strategy perspective, there are multiple purposes behind these attacks, primarily to divert key resources away from frontline military operations toward damaged infrastructure. A secondary purpose is to impose pressure to undermine national resilience, which the Ukrainian government has specified as the primary reasoning behind the energy strikes. The Ukrainian government has stated that it believes the primary purpose behind the damage to energy infrastructure is to weaken public confidence and further strain the country’s ability to function properly during the war. The belief is that this will lead to internal pressure from citizens weary of the conflict to push their government toward some form of peace settlement. However, the Ukrainian government has repeatedly made statements condemning such strategies in an attempt to rally both domestic and foreign support.

The targeting of energy systems and infrastructure also highlights a new reality in modern conventional warfare. With higher levels of military technology, such as drones and other long-range systems, the ability to target infrastructure far from the front lines can be accomplished with relative ease. For example, Ukraine has demonstrated the ability to strike deep within Russia’s borders, far from the frontline. Therefore, it has become imperative to defend critical infrastructure that was once perceived as safe; however, this is becoming a much harder task given the realities of modern warfare.

The economic implications of damaged energy infrastructure cannot be ignored. The short-term complications related to industrial production are minor compared to the immense costs that will be required for reconstruction. It is clear that even long after a settlement is reached that brings an end to active conflict, the process of restoring and rebuilding reliable energy supplies will require substantial financial resources. This highlights how targeting energy infrastructure can definitively shape post-conflict outcomes.