Resilience and cohesion of Ukrainian society during the war

This report was drafted by the team of the Ukrainian Independent Center for Political Research (UCIPR) as part of the activities of the National Platform for Resilience and Social Cohesion (National Platform). This civic initiative was launched in February 2018 (formerly known as the National Platform ‘Dialogue on Peace and Secure Reintegration’).

The report is based on data on events in 12 oblasts of Ukraine which are important for shaping a policy of national resilience. The project’s target oblasts were selected based on analysis of changes in cohesion of local populations due to the outbreak of military operations and include Vinnytsia, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk, Zakarpattia, Zaporizhzhia, Lviv, Mykolaiv, Odesa, Kharkiv, Kherson, Chernivtsi, and Chernihiv oblasts. For data collection, we distinguish between the temporarily occupied areas, frontline and deoccupied areas, and relatively rear areas.

UCIPR is grateful for the materials supplied by participants of the Regional Network of National Platform for Resilience and Social Cohesion, Volodymyr Merezhko, Denys Hrechko, Andrii Romanenko, Mykola Yatskiv, Dmytro Arabadzhyiev, Oksana Ivasiv, Viktoriia Demchenko, Tamara Astakhova, Diana Barynova, Dementii Bielyi, Nataliia Nechaieva-Yuriichuk, Liubov Muliovana. 

SUMMARY 

The situation at the front line.

In January–February 2026, the situation at the front was marked by the continued high intensity of hostilities and a further deterioration in security in a number of areas. Although in some sections Russian troops advanced more slowly than in the previous few months, the overall level of threat remained high, grey zones continued to expand, the front line moved closer to large population centres, and Russia systematically carried out devastating strikes against civilian infrastructure across the territory of Ukraine, particularly in the capital.

The situation remained most tense in Donetsk oblast, where active hostilities continued along almost the entire front line. Russian troops were moving through the Kramatorsk–Sloviansk agglomeration towards key defensive lines. Regular strikes were carried out against residential neighbourhoods, transport, commercial and public utility infrastructure, expanding the area of direct danger for the civilian population.

In the southern sector, in Zaporizhzhia oblast, the situation remained unstable. In Kherson oblast, the key challenge was not so much movement of the front line as sustained artillery and drone pressure on right-bank populated areas. Russian troops carried out deliberate strikes against civilians, residential development, energy and water infrastructure facilities, and used remote mining tactics. This maintained a situation of chronic danger even in the absence of significant changes directly along the line of combat contact.

Along Ukraine’s north-eastern lines, enemy activity remained high in Kharkiv oblast, primarily on the Southern Slobozhanskyi and Kupiansk axes. Regular assault operations and the high number of combat engagements placed constant pressure on the Ukrainian defence, seeking to exhaust Ukrainian forces and maintain sustained tension in this section of the front.

In Dnipropetrovsk oblast, attacks by drones, missiles and aircraft on residential buildings, transport infrastructure, and industrial enterprises continued. In Odesa oblast, pressure on port, logistics, and energy infrastructure persisted, posing both security and economic risks. In the border areas of Vinnytsia oblast, engineering fortifications were being set up in response to risks associated with the Transnistrian direction.

Overall, this indicates that the zone of direct military threat continued to expand in January and February 2026, despite the relatively slower pace of enemy advances in some sections, while the burden on governance, life-support systems and the civilian resilience of communities increased.

You can get acquainted with the text by following the link