Ukraine is exhausted. But it’s still determined to resist Russia.

|
Scott Peterson/Getty Images/The Christian Science Monitor
Ukrainian widow Olena Panchenko, in beige jacket, mourns the death of her soldier husband, Serhii Oksenych, at a memorial for fallen soldiers in Bohodkhiv, Ukraine, Jan. 16, 2025. “At this point I am not sure why my husband gave his life,” she says.

Three years since Russia’s all-out invasion, Ukraine’s growing war fatigue groans from cities and villages subjected to daily bombardment, rolling blackouts, and grim news from the front lines.

Far from the front, at an artists café in Lviv, Oleksandr grows visibly more stressed with every word he speaks about the depth of his exhaustion.

His mind is at “1% charge, and it’s not charging. It’s like a broken battery,” says Oleksandr, who hails from Sieverodonetsk, a city in Ukraine’s industrial far east that fell to Russian forces within months of the invasion. (Like some others interviewed, Oleksandr gave only one name.)

“We see the rhetoric of [U.S. President Donald] Trump and some others, saying, ‘You need to negotiate,’” he says. “Russians say they are ready to talk, but they don’t care about this. They need to destroy Ukraine. ... It’s simple.

“All this is very depressing; that’s why people are tired.”

But then the young artist catches himself, and puts his depression – and the nation’s fatigue – into a broader context. As a student in the relative safety of Lviv, he has little right to be exhausted, he says, compared with soldiers in ice- and mud-bound trenches.

“When you hear this phrase, ‘Ukrainians are tired of war,’ it is information warfare, because for Russians, it is important to create the impression that Ukrainians will not continue to fight, that we will not resist,” Oleksandr says.

Until now, the United States and European countries have spearheaded efforts to enable Ukraine to push Russian forces out. But their tens of billions of dollars’ worth of weapons and financial aid have shown mixed results. Russia now occupies some 20% of Ukraine’s territory.

“Nobody wants to give up territory and the people who are now under occupation,” Oleksandr adds.

Yet Ukraine’s narrowing options came into sharp focus Feb. 12, when President Trump announced that during a 90-minute call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, he had started negotiations with Russia to end the war.

The phone call put an end to Washington’s three-year refusal to deal with Mr. Putin – the target of an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for war crimes. Mr. Trump said the two had discussed the “great benefit that we will someday have in working together.”

The same day, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth appeared to endorse two key Russian demands. He told a gathering of Ukraine allies in Brussels that it was “unrealistic” for the country to envision restoring its 2014 borders or joining the NATO alliance.

Ukrainians voice concern that any White House plan will simply freeze the conflict, after they expended so much blood and treasure to regain their land.

A shift in opinion

A poll by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology found last December that 38% of Ukrainians are ready to make territorial concessions in exchange for peace, up from 32% in October. Yet it also found that 51% of Ukrainians rejected the idea of giving up any land to Russia, ever.

Maria Avdeeva, a security analyst with the Foreign Policy Research Institute, says she has noted a “very clear shift” in public opinion over the past year. While Ukrainians still define victory as recapturing all the country’s land, she says, many now believe that this will not be possible in the short term.

“It’s not that Ukraine is ready to give up territory to Russia,” says Ms. Avdeeva. “But more people are ready to say, ‘OK, we stop now and get more resources, get more prepared, and then get back what is ours.’”

Addressing the issue of fatigue, she recalls that early in the war, Ukrainians had “hope that we would be able to end the war soon.”

“It would have been very difficult to fight as hard if people had known the war would last for years,” she says.

Yet today Ukrainians are still pushing back, in ways large and small.

In Ukraine’s second-largest city, Kharkiv, for example, less than 20 miles from the Russian border and subjected to frequent attack, a new apartment block rises defiantly amid the ruins of the Saltivka District.

“This project brings me a lot of joy; I’m very happy,” says Nelly Kazanzhieva, head of the district administration, breathing in the strong scent of fresh paint in the near-finished building – one of 24 rebuilt in 2024.

“I can imagine when they clean this place, and put up paintings and flowers, it will be beautiful,” Ms. Kazanzhieva says over the sound of distant artillery. “We love Ukraine and love our city. People should not be left without hope.”

Debate in the trenches

For the Ukrainian crews of U.S.-made Stryker fighting vehicles, dug deeply into the frozen front line, the question of whether and how to carry on is hotly debated.

“If the U.S. stops supplies, we are [in trouble],” says Mykola Onyschenko, a Stryker gunner. “It is better to stop the war – we are tired; we want to go home finally, after three years.”

Retorts driver Marin Bruzha, in the same bunker, “It’s not a good idea, because what else are we fighting for, if not for our land?”

“I don’t think we have enough arms, resources, and human power to recover our territory occupied by Russians,” replies Mr. Onyschenko. “It’s just not possible now.”

The continuing cost is clear in Bohodukhiv, where a woman stands before a memorial to dozens of fallen soldiers, tenderly stroking one portrait.

“I am upset – at this point I am not sure why my husband gave his life,” says Olena Panchenko. Her husband, Serhii Oksenych, was conscripted last July and sent to the front with little training.

Russia “can take Donbas; I have never been to Crimea,” says Ms. Panchenko. “I don’t care. Just stop people dying.”

“We are still here”

The high price of resistance is also obvious in Ukraine’s cemeteries, where blue-and-yellow flags mark soldiers’ graves.

“Every Sunday we have a funeral. A lot of young guys are dying,” says municipal worker Volodymyr, whose team tends a frigid, windblown cemetery in Pyriatyn, east of Kyiv. “Every day it is getting harder and harder.”

Still, many Ukrainians are proud of how they have survived since February 2022, when many in the West – and many Ukrainians – expected a swift Russian victory.

“Every time I say people are exhausted ... I see something like a missile hit, and see how people are reacting,” says Kira Rudik, a Ukrainian member of parliament: “People coming together as one.”

“No matter how hard everyday life, and no matter how hard the news that we are receiving, we have not fallen. We are still fighting every day,” says Ms. Rudik.

No matter the dark mood, she says, “We are still here.”

Oleksandr Naselenko supported reporting for this story.

You've read 3 of 3 free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Ukraine is exhausted. But it’s still determined to resist Russia.
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2025/0214/ukraine-fatigue-russia-war
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe
CSM logo

Why is Christian Science in our name?

Our name is about honesty. The Monitor is owned by The Christian Science Church, and we’ve always been transparent about that.

The Church publishes the Monitor because it sees good journalism as vital to progress in the world. Since 1908, we’ve aimed “to injure no man, but to bless all mankind,” as our founder, Mary Baker Eddy, put it.

Here, you’ll find award-winning journalism not driven by commercial influences – a news organization that takes seriously its mission to uplift the world by seeking solutions and finding reasons for credible hope.

Explore values journalism About us