The approaching winter promises to put immense strain on Ukraine’s already weary population, now enduring its third year of war.

Russia has systematically undermined Ukraine’s energy framework, targeting power stations, electrical substations, and storage facilities in a deliberate assault.

Winter in Ukraine sees temperatures routinely dip below freezing, placing extraordinary demand on an already weakened power grid.

Cities near the frontlines, like Kharkiv, will especially suffer; since March, two main power plants serving the city have been destroyed.

Russia has keenly exploited this vulnerability in Ukraine’s infrastructure. The sprawling energy grid is difficult to defend, and Ukraine’s limited air defenses further hamper protection efforts.

The gradual erosion of Ukraine’s capacity to generate sufficient electricity for its population and industries has left nuclear power as the nation’s primary energy source.

Concerns about potential nuclear disasters have kept Russia from targeting the nuclear plants still under Ukraine's control, leaving them largely intact.

However, Ukraine now relies significantly on nuclear energy, which accounts for 70 percent of its electricity—one of the highest global percentages, even surpassing France's 65 percent.

Though direct attacks on nuclear plants are improbable, the substations and electrical switchyards critical to delivering their power remain vulnerable and challenging to repair under wartime conditions.

While rolling blackouts occurred throughout the summer, the onset of winter will amplify the hardship, not only due to heating shortages, but also as Ukraine struggles to power its growing defense industry.

The continued output of this sector is essential to supply the armed forces, particularly amid waning support from the United States.

The looming US election

The upcoming November 5th election in the United States could present a decisive shift for Ukraine—and its supporters are diminishing, even if political backing remains.

Rising domestic economic concerns, fatigue with the conflict, and the reallocation of military resources—especially due to escalating tensions in Israel—have sapped the earlier surge of global goodwill sent to Ukraine.

If current Vice President and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris claims the presidency, her administration would likely aim to maintain existing levels of aid for Ukraine.

However, the potential combination of a Republican-controlled Senate paired with a faction of Democrats focused on internal affairs might stifle her efforts to sustain substantial support.

Though monetary and military assistance will likely continue, it will likely be reduced—just as Ukraine faces the critical juncture of overcoming a military standstill with Russia, which continues to garner solid backing from its allies.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump, the Republican candidate and former president, has voiced confidence in his ability to reach a swift resolution to the war.

However, any peace deal Trump might broker would likely leave the conflict frozen at its current boundaries, ceding significant chunks of eastern Ukraine—a resource-rich region—to Russian control.

A reduction in US aid could force Kyiv to settle on such terms, essentially freezing the conflict without resolving it.

Pausing the war would offer Russia the opportunity to rearm and replenish its forces while preventing Ukraine from joining NATO, a critical issue for Kyiv.

Although a temporary ceasefire may allow Ukraine to fortify its military capabilities, it would fall short of the security guarantees President Volodymyr Zelenskyy urgently needs to avoid a future resumption of hostilities from Russia.

The United States, having successfully delegated more military responsibility to Europe, also provides the majority of venture capital for its nascent defense startups, leaving Europe with hard decisions.

Europe beckons, maybe

The European Union, with many of its members part of NATO, has reiterated its commitment to supporting Ukraine, especially after Russia’s invasion shifted the alliance’s defence priorities.

However, should US aid falter, Europe’s military industries are still in the early phases of ramping up production. Concerns abound that the time needed to scale up capacity could be too slow, with a peace agreement possibly preempting further military action.

In addition to economic challenges, the EU faces political divisions.

Recent electoral shifts to the right across Europe could affect individual countries’ contributions to Ukraine’s cause.

Germany, the second-largest donor after the US, has already announced plans to halve its military support for Ukraine next year, and Hungary’s leader Viktor Orban has publicly stated that military victory is unattainable, insisting diplomatic talks should begin.

As for future EU membership, many Ukrainians regard it as a natural reward for defeating Russia. On the other hand, many EU members view Ukraine's membership as part of a larger peace settlement.

Although Europe’s support for Ukraine remains high, an increasing number of Europeans advocate using military aid to strengthen Ukraine’s position at future peace negotiations rather than pursuing an outright victory.

In contrast, most Ukrainians harbor no illusions about settling for less than total victory, underscoring their hope of reclaiming all lands occupied by Russia.

This belief stems from an expectation of a decisive victory on the battlefield, though this optimism may not align with reality.

Breaking the deadlock

Even with Ukraine’s surprise raid into Russia’s Kursk region over the summer, the broader conflict remains a battle of attrition marked by heavy losses on both sides.

Western intelligence estimates indicate Russia is suffering approximately 1,200 casualties daily between dead and wounded. Yet, despite this staggering loss of life, Russian forces have managed to advance incrementally, particularly in the Donetsk region, where they edge closer to the strategic city of Pokrovsk.

In the south, Russia's capture of Vuhledar has stoked fears, with Ukrainian intelligence citing a massive build-up of Russian forces preparing for a potential new offensive towards Zaporizhzhia.

Success in this southern thrust, combined with Russia securing Donetsk in the east, would reshape the war.

Encircled on multiple fronts, Ukraine would struggle to hold positions east of the Dnipro River. Earlier attempts at breakthroughs, such as in the failed riverine assault and the stalled advance at Kursk, suggest increasingly difficult odds.

Furthermore, Russian gains toward Kupiansk in the northeast have compounded Ukrainian defensive woes.

In response, Ukraine has accelerated its recruitment efforts, urgently looking to replenish its resources to stop Russia’s advances.

Nonetheless, it will be a significant challenge for President Zelenskyy to mount the kind of offensive needed to decisively turn the tide in Ukraine’s favor. Despite overwhelming national support for military victory, it’s becoming increasingly possible that the coming breakthrough may favor Russia rather than Ukraine.