February 17, 2026

Institute for the Study of War: Major Russian attack on Ukraine energy supplies on eve of peace talks

Institute for the Study of War

Russian forces conducted another large, combined strike package against Ukrainian energy infrastructure overnight on February 16 to 17 — the eve of trilateral US-Ukrainian-Russian negotiations in Geneva. The Ukrainian Air Force reported that Russian forces launched 425 drones and missiles against Ukraine overnight.[1] The Ukrainian Air Forces reported that Russian forces launched 396 Shahed-type, Gerbera-type, Italmas-type, and other strike drone types — of which roughly 250 were Shaheds — from the directions of Kursk, Oryol, and Bryansk cities; Millerovo, Rostov Oblast; Primorsko-Akhtarsk, Krasnodar Krai; Shatalovo, Smolensk Oblast; and occupied Hvardiiske, Crimea. The Ukrainian Air Force reported that Russian forces also launched 29 missiles, including four Iskander-M ballistic missiles from Rostov Oblast and occupied Crimea; 20 Kh-101 cruise missiles from the Caspian Sea; four Iskander-K cruise missiles from Kursk Oblast; and one Kh-59/69 cruise missile from the airspace over occupied Donetsk Oblast. The Ukrainian Air Force reported that Ukrainian forces downed 367 drones and 25 missiles, including all of the Iskander-K, Kh-101, and Kh-59/69 cruise missiles. The Ukrainian Air Force reported that the four ballistic missiles and 18 strike drones struck 13 locations and that falling debris fell at eight locations. Ukrainian officials reported that Russian forces struck energy and transport infrastructure in Sumy, Chernihiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Ivano-Frankivsk, Kharkiv, and Odesa oblasts.[2] Russian strikes caused power outages for at least 28,000 consumers in Kharkiv Oblast and tens of thousands of people in Odesa City.[3]

The ongoing talks in Geneva will reportedly discuss another possible short-term moratorium on energy strikes.[7] Russia used similar moratoriums in March-April 2025 and in January-February 2026 to claim it was interested in peace while stockpiling drones and missiles for subsequent devastating strikes after the moratorium lifted.[8] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned on the evening of February 16, citing Ukrainian intelligence, that Russian forces were preparing another large, combined missile and drone strike against Ukrainian energy infrastructure.[9] The Kremlin may seek to portray its compliance with another moratorium on energy strikes as a major Russian concession while preparing to launch another devastating strike against Ukraine in the near future.[10]

Russian strike packages against Ukraine are dangerous regardless of their size. Russian strike packages — even those below 500 drones and missiles — have inflicted devastating damage on Ukraine’s energy and civilian infrastructure.[11] Russian forces have been altering their strike tactics, warheads, and the composition of their strike packages in order to maximize damage and disproportionately impact civilians, especially as Russia has intensified its efforts in recent months to collapse the Ukrainian energy grid.[12] The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense (MoD) reported that Russian forces launched 96 ballistic missiles in January 2026 — the largest number of ballistic missiles that Russian forces have launched during a single month of the war thus far.[13] Ukraine has adapted its air defense to down many but not all the Russian drones and missiles in a strike package, and Russian forces have concentrated their fire on targets for devastating effects. Ukrainian Air Force Spokesperson Colonel Yuriy Ihnat reported that Ukrainian forces downed all the cruise missiles that Russia launched on February 16 to 17, mostly with Ukrainian F-16 and Mirage fighter jets.[14] Ihnat noted that Ukrainian forces did not down any of the ballistic missiles overnight. Ukraine requires advanced Western-provided air defense systems to down ballistic missiles, forcing Ukraine to husband Western-provided systems and missiles, which remain in very short supply.[15]

Russian ultranationalist television network Tsargrad published an op-ed by a Russian journalist that claimed that Russia is trying to use ongoing negotiations to “create the impression” that Russia seriously desires to resolve the most complex issues in the war.[21] The journalist claimed that Russia will only be able to achieve peace on its terms when the Ukrainian frontlines collapse, which the article claimed is “still a long way off.” The journalist claimed that the Russian delegation must not give Ukraine and the West any reason to blame Russia for the lack of progress in the negotiations. Kremlin-affiliated Russian oligarch and Orthodox nationalist Konstantin Malofeev founded Tsargrad, which serves an informational role of conditioning the Russian nationalist community to support the Kremlin’s war effort.[22] Malofeev often appeals to Russian nationalists to convince them that Russia has no other choice but to fight against Ukraine and NATO. The op-ed in Tsargrad likely aims to condition Russian ultranationalists — a key constituency of Putin — to believe that Russia has no intention of abandoning its original war aims or of compromising to end Russia’s war. ISW continues to assess that the Kremlin has not prepared Russian society for the idea of possible Russian concessions and compromises to end the war.[23]

Key Takeaways

  1. Russian forces conducted another large, combined strike package against Ukrainian energy infrastructure overnight on February 16 to 17 — the eve of trilateral US-Ukrainian-Russian negotiations in Geneva.
  2. Russian forces have been launching large strike packages in recent months in the days before and after bilateral and trilateral negotiations but are likely refraining from fully maximizing Russia’s strike capabilities in order to avoid upsetting US President Donald Trump.
  3. Russian strike packages against Ukraine are dangerous regardless of their size.
  4. Kremlin officials and Kremlin-affiliated media sources reaffirmed Russia’s unwillingness to compromise as trilateral talks started in Geneva on February 17.
  5. Russian Presidential Aide and former Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev used escalatory language to try to push the West to stop the seizures of Russian shadow fleet tankers.
  6. ·Patrushev baselessly criticized Finland for preparing to attack Russia.
  7. Russian forces recently advanced near Borova, in the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area, and near Pokrovsk.
Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.