A Truce as a Weapon: Russia’s Energy Pause Explained

One of the largest missile attacks since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion hit Ukraine overnight on Tuesday, February 3. At least 15 ballistic missiles were launched toward the Dnipro River area alone, marking a record number of strikes on such targets.

It is worth noting that this shelling is not connected with the “energy ceasefire.”

This is primarily due to the negotiation process. Moreover, the Dnipropetrovsk region was chosen for a reason: the attack was carried out not only on Dnipro but also on Kryvyi Rih. This is part of the military-political pressure on the Ukrainian side. Just before the victory in the process, it was clear they were accepting a corresponding pause, which would be exploited.

On the one hand, as an element of negotiability, the United States made a satisfactory request, but further actions will indicate that the Russian side remains intransigent in its demands for territorial concessions.

In other words, by essentially bowing to the United States, Russia was attempting to compensate for its informational and political defeat. And to say they spent a week stockpiling them is utter nonsense, given that ballistic missiles, aer aeroballistic missiles, and cruise missiles are implied, and it’s impossible to produce them in a week. It takes quite a while. The same applies to drones.

I will point out another Russian objective related to the so-called “energy ceasefire”: it gave Ukraine a week to restore infrastructure damaged by previous strikes and to invest significant financial and material resources—including assistance from the EU and U.S. partners—into rebuilding these facilities.
And now they are striking the same energy facilities again. The tactic is quite clear: the pause was deliberate. It allowed limited restoration work to be carried out, only for the same facilities to be hit again afterward, effectively exhausting the capacity for further repairs. That is the tactic.

Besides, the shelling occurred on the eve of the NATO Secretary General’s visit to the capital, which is also a signal to Western countries.

They are trying to paralyze the lives of cities with populations exceeding one million. Kharkiv and Dnipro were not chosen at random. In the Vinnytsia region, the goal is to sever key links and undermine the integrity of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. That is why power facilities connecting the Rivne Nuclear Power Plant with Kyiv, the surrounding region, and other central parts of the country were targeted.

The targeted strike wasn’t even about the quantity of weapons—the Russians simultaneously wanted to “shut down” a significant portion of the territory, that is, create a blackout not only in the capital but also in other cities with a population of over a million.

Moscow’s main goal is to provoke social unrest and protests, similar to those previously seen in Kyiv.

The so-called ‘Iranian model,’ adjusted for Ukraine. They want to destabilize the internal situation in the country so that the population demands, “Better a bad peace than such a war.”

In doing so, the Russians are essentially copying the actions of NATO countries at the time of the overthrow of the Milosevic regime in Yugoslavia, and they are copying it virtually identically.

At the time, countries also targeted thermal power plants and energy infrastructure to create social chaos and clear the way for the fall of Milosevic’s government. And they’re repeating this, exactly. The reason the response to the event is so weak is that they understand perfectly well. They say they themselves opened Pandora’s box and essentially created this scenario, right?

I believe the Russians have changed tactics; now we’re talking about a long-distance war. They’ve realized there’s no tactical success on the front lines, so they’ve moved to drain Ukraine’s energy sector, infrastructure, and, consequently, the Ukrainian economy.