As the war in Ukraine grinds into its fifth year, with casualty figures reminiscent of the Thirty Years’ War, a historical perspective on conflict and power dynamics emerges from an unlikely source: the spirit of Cardinal Richelieu, the 17th-century French statesman. The ongoing conflict, marked by intense fighting and significant losses on both sides, is prompting reflection on the enduring principles of realpolitik.
As of February 2026, the conflict continues with Russia making incremental gains, recently capturing the city of Pokrovsk, a former logistical hub with a pre-war population of 60,000. However, this victory came at a steep cost, described as a “Pyrrhic” one. Russian forces reportedly took two years to seize the city and are continuing to advance at a rate of 15 to 70 meters per day, sustaining losses exceeding one million casualties since 2022, combined with Ukrainian losses approaching two million by early spring. Despite these advances, Russia continues to launch missile and drone attacks on cities including Kharkiv, Zaporizhia, and Kyiv – with one recent night seeing 39 rockets and 420 drones launched, resulting in 25 injuries.
_e(‘Werbung’, ‘weltwoche’); ?>
Ukrainian forces are also engaging in counteroffensives, regaining 183 square kilometers near Kupyansk, and an additional 165 square kilometers in Oleksandrivka and Hulyaipole. The situation is not a stalemate, but rather an escalation of conflict. Russia is able to continue operations in 2026, but at a significant and mounting cost. Negotiations are currently underway in Geneva, mediated by the United States, with the possibility of a meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as former U.S. President Donald Trump. Zelenskyy has characterized the talks as the “beginning of the end,” even as Trump has stated his goal is to stop the “killing.”
_e(‘Werbung’, ‘weltwoche’); ?>
Reflecting on Russia’s position, the echoes of historical strategy are clear. Putin, according to the perspective offered, is pursuing a balance of power, seeking to avoid a NATO presence on Russia’s borders – a goal reminiscent of Richelieu’s own opposition to Habsburg dominance. Just as Richelieu supported Sweden and Protestant forces against Catholics for reasons of state, Russia is making gains slowly, but steadily, relying on a numerical advantage in manpower. However, a cautionary note is sounded: overextension, as experienced by the Habsburgs, should be avoided. Russia’s economy is showing strain, with growth at only 0.6 percent in 2025, and its reliance on China for drone technology is a critical dependency.
The role of the United States is also under scrutiny. With the return of a “America First” approach under Trump, a shift in U.S. Policy is apparent. Trump’s willingness to mediate and end the war, due to a perceived lack of strategic interests, is seen as a pragmatic move. The U.S. Is seen to have made a mistake in expanding NATO and provoking Russia, and is now seemingly withdrawing support, leaving Europe to navigate the situation independently. This mirrors Richelieu’s strategy of strengthening France by breaking alliances.
