Since the beginning of October 2025, a so-called infrastructure war has intensified between Ukraine and Russia with mutual strikes taking place against energy facilities (power plants, gas, and oil refining infrastructure). Due to the initial inequality in the scale of their economies, territories, and forces needed to protect facilities, Russia is winning this war that it never invited. Ukraine risks being left with sharply reduced natural gas and electricity supplies this coming winter due to its provocative actions initiating this phase of the war.

The war, beginning in February 2022 between the Russian Federation and post-coup Ukraine began in the Donbass region in April 2014 with a more limited war at the initiative of Kiev. The 2014 coup and the war begun in Donbass by Kiev in April 2014 remain the immediate origin of the present conflict.

Last year, Ukrainian authorities reported to the country that all energy facilities had received protective covers, claiming to have spent billions in Western aid for this purpose. This year, it turns out that this promise was fiction; energy production and transmission facilities remain unprotected and are hardly a wise choice by Kiev for new wartime terrain.

Ukrainian energy facilities have not been properly protected, wrote legislator Oleksiy Kucherenko on October 3. He claims that none of the shelter structures to protect a total of 21 energy infrastructure facilities that were talked up by Kiev have been completed. The funds, he writes, were simply “buried in the ground”.

Former spokesperson for the army of the Lugansk People's Republic, Lieutenant Colonel Andrei Marochko, claims that the corruption of Ukrainian officials is one of the reasons for Russia’s seemingly slow war of attrition, despite the attacks being waged against Russian territory. "Many Ukrainian officials perform positive functions, resulting in achieving our victory sooner than we might otherwise. The officials embezzle funds intended for the Armed Forces of Ukraine; in particular, there is currently a financial scandal involving the supply of drones. The question then arises of why we should eliminate such ‘useful’ people whose actions, in fact, have a positive impact for Russia by weakening the defense capabilities of the Ukrainian regime?" he asks. Marochko became the spokesperson for the army of the breakaway Donbass republic of Lugansk in 2014.

In fact, Kiev ‘needs’ an infrastructure war to demonstrate its usefulness to Western imperialism by reducing sales of Russia’s energy resources in foreign markets and correspondingly increasing sales for Western energy corporations. This new phase of the war prompts a need by Russia to further complicate the logistics of Western arms deliveries to Ukraine and continue to damage or destroy arms production proper on Ukrainian territory.

The Ukrainian Telegram channel ‘Media Post’ writes on October 6 about the new round of the infrastructure war: “Philosophically speaking, we can talk about a return to the world of geopolitical materialism, of energy, metals and transport. These are once again becoming a decisive factor of power, not simple declarations and vacuous statements of values. A civilization based on the post-industrial dogmas of ‘green’ energy and ‘soft’ power is facing a reality where heating and natural gas supplies are becoming the new language of power. Russia, acting through energy, is not destroying the old structure of the world, it is restoring it.”

As the founders of Marxism explained nearly two centuries ago, the real structure and foundational base of the world is not merely ideological; it builds upon material foundations.

Ukraine renews its threats against nuclear energy facilities

The onset of October is bringing worsening weather and increased electricity consumption to Ukraine. Kiev and its Western allies are voicing once again ‘concerns’ about the fate of the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP), controlled by the Russian Federation since early 2022. The plant was previously the largest source of energy production in Ukraine and one of the 10 largest nuclear generation plants in the world. It is located on the eastern bank of the Dnieper River, less than 50 km from the city of Zaporizhzhya, sixth largest in Ukraine.

On September 19, the International Energy Agency (AEA) adopted a resolution calling on Russia to return the ZNPP to Ukrainian control. The resolution was initiated by Ukraine and its Western partners. Then, on September 23, the ZNPP was attacked by Ukraine, causing the last of its ‘live’ power lines to fail and prompting a switch to a backup generator power.

On September 27, Yuri Chernichuk, the Russian director of the ZNPP, announced that there is enough diesel fuel for the backup generators to keep running for a long time. Nevertheless, on September 30, Zelensky again warned of an undefined, potential ‘nuclear disaster’ at the plant, this time to the UN Secretary-General.

Zelensky’s words implied that the Russians themselves intend to damage the station and its power lines, which could then cause a nuclear disaster resembling the Chernobyl nuclear disaster of 1986. But it is obvious that any accident or sabotage at the plant would be dangerous first and foremost for the Russian Federation, which is now claiming the territory on which the plant sits. We are to believe, contrary to all logic, that the Russian military and government are preparing to strike their own nuclear facility and thereby place in grave danger the lives of citizens, nuclear technicians and soldiers working at the plant or protecting it and living around it. No one serious can believe such a story.

Also on September 30, officials of the European Union called on Russia to immediately withdraw its forces from the ZNPP and return control of the plant to the Ukrainian authorities in order to “minimize the risks of a nuclear accident with global consequences”.

Media in Britain is fueling panic, warning of a “new Fukushima”, referring to the nuclear power plant disaster in Fukushima, Japan in March 2011. The disaster was caused by a tsunami sparked by an undersea earthquake.

In early October, Ukraine joined in stirring up the panic by distributing instructions to its citizens of what they should do in the event of an accident at the ZNPP. The instructions advise stocking up on water and sealing windows and doors. Residents within a 50-kilometer radius of the plant are advised to prepare for immediate, emergency evacuations.

On October 1, former Ukrainian Environment Minister Yuriy Kostenko alleged that Russia is deliberately bringing the ZNPP closer to a nuclear disaster of unprecedented proportions, “according to the Fukushima scenario”.

On October 1, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) followed the lead of the EU and Kiev by declaring there would be a nuclear disaster at the ZNPP if the disruption of network power to the plant continued. He alleged that the diesel fuel in the backup generators might only last for ten days.

Related News

Suppression of local governance and official lies about Ukraine’s military situation

Will Damascus be willing to pay the price to restore relations with Moscow?

Grossi conveniently failed to mention what, exactly, might prevent diesel fuel from being delivered for the backup generators. According to him, a nuclear fuel meltdown could happen if backup generators were to completely shut down. In other words, systematic pressure is being exerted ‘on all diplomatic fronts’, including involvement of the United Nations, the IAEA, and the EU, in order to return control of the ZNPP to Kiev. This is happening at a time when virtually all energy industry spokespeople in Ukraine are scaring its citizens with the prospect of prolonged blackouts this winter.

Analysts at the Ukrainian Telegram channel ‘Analytical Eye’ note that some Ukrainian government spokespeople and media outlets are deliberately exaggerating the situation, especially in making comparisons to Chernobyl. "The most important and harmful fake news is that ‘the plant could explode like the Chernobyl nuclear power plant did’. This is absolute nonsense. There will most likely be no ‘second Chernobyl’ here, fortunately for all of us. So there is no need to storm pharmacies and buy up all the potassium iodide there," the channel writes.

Regarding the potassium iodide recommendations being issued by Kiev, the website of the Centers For Disease Control in the US recommends: ‘Do not take KI [potassium iodide] unless instructed by public health or emergency response officials, or by a healthcare provider,’ and, ‘KI is recommended only for people under 40 and women who are pregnant or breastfeeding.’

According to the authors of ‘Analytical Eye’, it was a reactor operating at full capacity which exploded at Chernobyl in 1986. Such an explosion cannot happen at the ZNPP because the plant needs to be in full operation conditions in order for a thermal explosion to occur. All six units of the plant have been shut down and out of operation for several years.

Nevertheless, the risks of an accident, albeit on a smaller scale, still remain, as fuel in a non-operating reactor can overheat. Water is needed to cool it, which is supplied by pumps, which in turn require electricity. At the moment, that electricity is sourced from the plant’s diesel-powered backup generators. “Let's acknowledge the obvious: the Russians, whoever and wherever they may be, are definitely not ‘nuclear suiciders’. It is highly doubtful that they are deliberately trying to cause a radiation accident,” concludes the channel.

Ukrainian energy expert Viktor Kurtev also wrote on October 2 that an accident similar to the one at Fukushima is impossible at the ZNPP because the power units at the plant are currently cooled. According to him, it would take at least two months for the units to heat up to a 350º threshold. “Then the cooling water would begin to evaporate, and if the temperature rises to 500 degrees, a dynamic balance would be reached. Even if nothing works, heat loss from the reactor will be balanced naturally. This temperature would not be enough to cause melting the of the body and fuel of the plant’s reactors,” the expert wrote.

Speaking at the annual Valdai Discussion Forum in Sochi, Russia on October 2, Russian President Vladimir Putin mentioned the recent shellings of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant by Ukrainian forces and said the IAEA can see everything clearly but does not want to say who, exactly, is shelling the nuclear power plant controlled by Russia. “[IAEA director] Grossi was there and IAEA employees are there, seeing everything, but they are silent, embarrassed by what is happening. Are we, Russia, striking ourselves? It's clear that this is nonsense,” said the Russian president.

Putin also recalled that there are other nuclear power plants in the territory controlled by Kiev, and none of these have been attacked. Ukraine quickly interpreted these words as a new and direct threat to strike other Ukrainian nuclear power plants, thereby causing a ‘nuclear apocalypse’ that would also affect neighboring European countries.

The new wave of panic surrounding the ZNPP indirectly indicates the growing supply crisis in the Ukrainian energy industry. At the same time, the ZNPP may be a kind of ‘bonus’ that Kiev wants to offer to the Trump administration and US investors as part of a natural resource deal over Ukraine that would draw the US government and military deeper into the conflict, in part through personal interest and stake.

New threats against Crimea

There is another important aspect to the Ukrainian interest in regaining control of the ZNPP. The plant is located on the left (east) bank of the Dnieper River, which is territory of the former Ukrainian oblast of Zaporizhzhia, now under the control of the Russian Federation. This new territory lies on the road to Crimea for Ukraine. It now sits behind robust lines of defense newly built by the Russian army.

In October, the Ukrainian army continues to retreat, losing territory every day. Nevertheless, ideologues and government spokespeople in the West are raising the specter of a suicidal storming of Crimea by Ukraine’s armed forces, weakened and battered as they are. These voices say that seizing territory in Crimea could disrupt important maritime trade routes of Russia and block its Black Sea navy fleet which harbors in the Crimean city of Sevastopol.

Recently, former British Defense Minister Ben Wallace called not only for the destruction of the Kerch (Crimea) Bridge (for which he has demanded that Germany supply Taurus missiles to Kiev) but also for the entire peninsula to be made “uninhabitable”. Such statements reveal the inhuman nature of Britain’s pro-war politicians, who do not blanche at the thought of making ‘enemy’ countries and territories “uninhabitable”.

Military analyst Michael Clarke of Britain’s Sky News is cited by the outlet on October 1 to the effect that Ukraine is preparing to launch a major attack on Crimea, trying to land troops and occupy territory, and striking the Kerch Bridge. According to him, this could affect how the West perceives Ukraine. Simply put, such advice and urgings by media and government spokespeople in the West are pressing the retreating Ukrainian army into an attack on Crimea for the sake of ‘improving the image’ of its armed forces, no matter how suicidal and obviously futile this step may be.

Previous attempts at a counteroffensive targeting Crimea have been repelled by Russian defenders and have cost Kiev many thousands of its soldiers, killed, captured or injured.

In an interview with the Unian media outlet on October 2, Ukrainian Navy spokesperson Dmitry Pletenchuk once again reflected on plans to cross the Dnieper River as part of a combined arms operation to storm Crimea. He calls this crazed proposal “a can opener for the Russian Empire”, that is, something which could lead to the collapse of the modern Russian Federation.

Ukrainian legislator Alexander Dubinsky emphasizes that an attack on Crimea is nonsense, since any landing operation in the Black Sea in the coming weeks or months will be impossible due to weather conditions. Storms typically rage in the waters surrounding the Crimea peninsula during the autumn and winter.

Even Ukrainian neo-Nazi Maxim Zhorin (a commander of one of the regiments of the neo-Nazi ‘Azov Battalion’ of the Armed Forces of Ukraine) is dissatisfied with the talk of storming Crimea once again being offered up to the Ukrainian public. “I have no idea what gives them reason to talk about any major offensive operations today, especially in Crimea. In terms of forces and resources, in terms of the moral and psychological state of society, we are not ready for such operations,” Zhorin insists, stressing that it is already difficult for Ukraine to maintain its defense lines, leave alone maintain lines to be further extended.

Ukrainian Armed Forces officer Anton Cherny says that Ukraine may send soldiers on a suicide mission to Crimea in order to cause an international sensation for a few days. Similar attempts to land small groups in Crimea were tried in 2023-2024 and failed. "Perhaps we will manage to land and hold out for some time, but as soon as such an action becomes uninteresting to the Western world and ceases to be a sensation, it will quickly come to an end," says the officer.

Cherny emphasizes that even in the event of a successful landing operation, Russia would quickly knock the landing force out of action. But such a futile action might nevertheless impress Kiev's Western pro-war donors enough to keep funds flowing.

For the sake of making such ‘impressions’, Kiev says it is ready to drown its servicemen in a futile operation in the Black Sea while risking the loss to the civilian population of the entire country of wintertime electricity and heating. Such is where the newfound ‘war on infrastructure’ may well end up.