It’s the question everyone asks, but nobody can answer with a single word. Honestly, if someone tells you there is a clear "winner" right now, they’re probably selling you something or haven't looked at a map in six months.
Wars aren't football games. There is no scoreboard in the corner of the screen telling you the final tally. Instead, there's mud. There’s the constant hum of low-cost drones. There is the terrifying reality of attrition. When we talk about who is winning the war in Ukraine, we’re really talking about a brutal math problem involving artillery shells, demographic collapse, and the political willpower of countries thousands of miles away from the Donbas.
Right now, the front lines look like a jagged scar across the east and south. It barely moves. One week, Russia takes a few hundred meters near Pokrovsk. The next, Ukraine holds firm or pushes back in a localized counter-attack. It’s a grind. A slow, bloody, agonizing grind that feels more like 1916 than 2026.
The territory trap and the maps that lie
If you look strictly at the map, Russia holds about 18% of Ukrainian territory. They have a "land bridge" to Crimea. They’ve pulverized cities like Mariupol and Bakhmut into dust and then claimed them. In the eyes of the Kremlin, that’s winning. They’ve expanded their borders. They’ve shown they can endure thousands of sanctions.
But map-gazing is a trap.
Ukraine’s success isn't always measured in square kilometers. Think about the Black Sea. Ukraine basically has no navy—at least not a traditional one with big, expensive ships. Yet, they’ve managed to sink or disable a significant portion of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet using sea drones and missiles. They forced the Russian Navy to retreat from Sevastopol. That’s a massive win that doesn't change a single line on a land map. It kept the grain corridors open. It kept the Ukrainian economy breathing.
Then there’s the Kursk incursion. In August 2024, Ukraine did the unthinkable and invaded Russia. It was a bold, risky move. They took Russian soil, took prisoners, and embarrassed Putin. Does it mean they’re winning the whole war? No. But it changed the narrative. It proved that Russia’s "red lines" are often made of tissue paper. It forced Russia to divert troops, though perhaps not as many as Kyiv had hoped.
The brutal reality of attrition
Russia is betting on time. They have more people. They have a "war economy" that is currently outproducing the West in terms of basic artillery shells. According to various intelligence reports from the Kusti Salm era at the Estonian Ministry of Defence, Russia can churn out millions of rounds while Europe struggles to hit its targets.
✨ Don't miss: Why Every Tornado Warning MN Now Live Alert Demands Your Immediate Attention
This is the "meat grinder" strategy.
Russia is willing to lose 1,000 men a day to take a village that no longer exists. It sounds insane to a Western audience. To the Kremlin, it’s just the cost of doing business. They are gambling that the West will get bored, or distracted by elections, or simply run out of money to keep the lights on in Kyiv.
Ukraine, meanwhile, is fighting a high-tech defensive war. They are using Palantir-driven targeting and FPV drones to make every Russian advance as expensive as possible. They aren't trying to match Russia man-for-man. They can’t. They are trying to make the cost of the war so high that the Russian system eventually snaps.
Logistics and the shell hunger
You can't talk about who is winning the war in Ukraine without talking about logistics. It’s the least sexy part of war, but it’s the only part that matters.
In 2024, the delay in US aid created a massive "shell gap." For every one shell Ukraine fired, Russia fired five or six. You can’t win a war like that. You can only survive it. When the aid finally flowed again, the gap narrowed, but the vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is dependent on the political whims of Washington and Brussels. Russia is dependent on North Korea and Iran.
Which supply chain is more reliable? That’s the scary question.
North Korea has reportedly sent over 5 million artillery shells to Russia. Think about that number. It’s staggering. While the quality might be hit-or-miss, quantity has a quality of its own in a war of attrition. Ukraine is countering this by hitting Russian ammo depots deep inside their territory using homegrown long-range drones, like the Palianytsia.
🔗 Read more: Brian Walshe Trial Date: What Really Happened with the Verdict
Why the "winning" narrative is shifting
- Strategic Depth: Russia has it; Ukraine is building it.
- Air Power: The arrival of F-16s provided a boost, but they aren't a magic wand. Russia’s glide bombs remain a devastating problem for Ukrainian frontline positions.
- Energy War: Russia spends all winter trying to freeze Ukrainians by hitting the power grid. Ukraine spends its time hitting Russian oil refineries to starve the Kremlin’s wallet.
It’s a see-saw.
The demographic cliff
Here is the thing nobody likes to talk about: both countries are facing a demographic nightmare. Ukraine was already shrinking before 2022. Now, millions are displaced, and thousands of young men—the future of the country—are dead or wounded.
Russia is in a similar boat, though their larger population masks the pain. They are burning through their future to pay for a reimagined past. Even if Russia "wins" by keeping some land, they may have broken their own back to get it. A country of aging people with a decimated workforce and a hollowed-out tech sector isn't exactly a winner in the 21st century.
The role of Western tech vs. Soviet mass
We’ve seen Leopard tanks and Bradleys in action. They are superior to the old T-72s. But a $5 million tank can be taken out by a $500 drone bought on a hobbyist website. This war has democratized destruction.
Ukraine has become a laboratory for modern warfare. They are using AI to sort through drone footage. They are using Starlink to maintain command and control when everything else is jammed. This tech edge is what allows Ukraine to stay in the fight against a much larger foe. If the tech edge disappears, the map starts moving west very quickly.
So, who is winning?
If winning means achieving your initial goals, Russia has already lost. They wanted Kyiv in three days. They wanted a puppet government. They wanted to stop NATO expansion. Instead, they got a quagmire, a rejuvenated NATO with Finland and Sweden as members, and a Ukraine that is more unified in its hatred of Moscow than ever before.
If winning means surviving and remaining a sovereign, democratic state, Ukraine is winning. They have defied every single prediction from February 2022.
💡 You might also like: How Old is CHRR? What People Get Wrong About the Ohio State Research Giant
But if winning means reclaiming every inch of 1991 territory, including Crimea, that path looks incredibly difficult right now. The Russian defenses—the "Surovikin lines"—are deep, mined, and reinforced. Breaking them requires a level of combined arms maneuver that is hard to pull off when you don't have total air superiority.
The current momentum
As of early 2026, the momentum is a muddy mess. Russia has the tactical initiative in the Donbas, slowly pushing toward strategic hubs. Ukraine has the strategic initiative in the Black Sea and is proving it can strike deep into the Russian heartland.
It's a stalemate, but it’s a "violent stalemate." It’s not static. It’s a constant evolution of tactics.
Actionable insights for following the conflict
To truly understand what's happening without the fluff of cable news, you need to look at specific indicators rather than just "land won."
- Watch the refinery strikes: Ukraine's ability to hit Russian oil infrastructure is their best lever for economic leverage. If Russian domestic gas prices spike, Putin feels the heat.
- Track the artillery ratios: Keep an eye on reports from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW). When the ratio gets closer to 1:1, Ukraine usually makes gains. When it slips to 1:5, they lose ground.
- Follow the "deep strikes": The use of ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles against Russian logistics hubs (bridges, rail lines) tells you more about the future of the front line than a daily map update.
- Monitor the mobilization: Watch the political discourse in both Moscow and Kyiv regarding new drafts. Both sides are terrified of the social unrest that comes with forced mobilization, but both sides desperately need more boots on the ground.
The reality of who is winning the war in Ukraine is that we are likely in the middle of a multi-year "Long War." Victory won't look like a parade. It will look like a side finally being unable to replace its losses—whether those losses are tanks, shells, or people.
Until that breaking point is reached, the "winner" is simply the side that refuses to quit. Right now, both sides are still standing, but both are bleeding heavily. Watch the endurance, not just the explosions.