Pace, Effectiveness of Russian Assaults In January Was Half of December's

Analysis of Russian offensive operations in the first month of 2026 reveals that even though the number of assaults did not decrease, their pace and effectiveness in achieving goals was half that of December 2025.

What this suggests is that Russian frontline units are exhausted materially and psychologically, lacking equipment, food, warm clothing and reinforcements, all essential to successful war fighting but evidently beyond the capability of the Kremlin to provide. JL

Denys Popovych reports in New Voice of Ukraine:

The pace of Russian offensive operations in January is actually half of December’s level, even though the number of assaults carried out by the Russian army in January did not decrease. Their activity has not declined, but their offensive capabilities have weakened; they have become twice as ineffective. This indicates that the Russian army is currently exhausted and needs regrouping and reinforcements. 

"Skin and Bones:" Hunger Is Ravaging Russian Frontline Units in Ukraine

The ongoing dysfunction of Russian logistics has apparently gotten so bad that intercepted radio and phone calls reveal widespread reports of hunger and, in some cases, starvation among Russian units on the front lines in Ukraine. 

Though not good for already questionable morale, Russian troops are accustomed to a level of deprivation that would be inconceivable for western forces, so the question is to what degree this is contributing to the Russian military's continued underperformance as the fifth year of the war approaches. JL

Julia Struck reports in the Kyiv Post:

Russian soldiers are complaining that they are starving on the front lines in Ukraine, according to an intercepted phone call obtained by Ukrainian military intelligence.  “Military intelligence has received further confirmation of the collapse of the Russian army’s logistics system: infantry units have been left without proper food and supplies for a long time. I saw five comrades starving to death in a nearby forest.” 

Buying Shares In Hot Pre-IPO AI Companies Is Complex, Risky, Very Expensive

Everyone would love to get in on the hot private AI companies that are making pre-IPO noises. 

The problem is that it is very hard to do - cuz who really really wants to share their potential windfall with you or me? - and if you can find access, the associated fees may end up costing more than the expected profits. But in an industry where FOMO rules, demand continues to surge. JL

Jason Zweig reports in the Wall Street Journal:

Who wouldn’t want to get an early stake in the companies creating the future like OpenAI, SpaceX or Anthropic? But you're more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to buy shares directly in most pre-IPO companies. Regulations discourage private companies from taking on more than 2,000 shareholders of record. And you have to be an accredited investor with $1 million in net assets, excluding your primary residence, or at least $200,000 in individual or $300,000 in joint income. The most common form of access is often called a special-purpose vehicle with upfront fees that could be 5% to 12% or more. Some also charge performance fees that take 10% to 30% of any gains. The promise of this market is great. So far, the perils are even greater.

Wall Street Journal Feb. 3rd Editorial: "Vladimir Putin Isn't Winning In Ukraine"

In a lead editorial dated February 3, 2026, the Wall Street Journal's editorial board torched Vladimir Putin - whom it referred to as 'the Russian dictator' - for his failing invasion in Ukraine and chided President Trump for not doing more to pressure 'a weakened' Putin into ending the conflict. 

The editorial quotes frequently from the recent Center For Strategic and International Studies report released last week (several aspects of which have been covered in this blog), that revealed, in devastating detail, the breadth and depth of the Kremlin's military and economic shortcomings. The reason for the the Journal, owned by Rupert Murdoch, to be sending this message clearly aimed at Trump, may simply be that the global oligarchical elite are beginning to feel this conflict has gone on too long, is advantaging China while beginning to hurt too many others, and that it is past time to put an end to it. The Murdoch media were early supporters of Trump and remain largely so, but have been increasingly critical of late. This is evidently part of that wave of warnings. If so, it is an interesting development. JL

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board comments:

Mr Putin isn’t the unstoppable man he wants Mr. Trump to think he is. Mr Putin isn't winning and isn't making territorial gains commensurate with his losses. Consider Mr. Putin’s struggle to take the city of Pokrovsk. Russian forces have advanced in the area on average 70 meters a day from late February 2024 to January of this year. That’s like starting the day on 42nd street in Manhattan and ending up on 43rd street. (And) Moscow doesn’t have the economic growth or dynamism to keep underwriting the misadventure for the long haul.  The Russian dictator is in a weakened position that Mr Trump could exploit. 

Why Putin Cannot Afford A Peace Deal Now

Putin, all of his oligarchs and probably more of the Russian people than the Kremlin will ever acknowledge, know that the Russian military has failed in Ukraine. And not just failed, but embarrassed itself. 

The cost of continuing the war is far less to Putin than the likely personal cost of ending it without having achieved any of his stated goals. He has to keep fighting to survive in office. JL

Mick Ryan reports in Futura Doctrina:

There is no way the Russian president can afford to end the war now. It has been a catastrophe for Russia. It has suffered over 1.2 million casualties (the true figure is unlikely to ever be fully established). It has used up a large proportion of its Cold War legacy stocks of munitions and equipment - unlikely to ever be replenished. Its economy is in trouble, it has used up much of its treasury reserves, and has become a vassal state of China. Russia has also seen the emigration of 1.3 million citizens. And it has achieved none of its political objectives. In short, Putin has nothing to show for the massive costs of the war. Accepting a negotiated settlement now, where he cannot claim a clear ‘win’ for Russia and for the Russian people, would be a big problem domestically for Putin.

Russia's Ukraine Loss To Advance Ratio "Worst In Modern Military History"

The "Loss to Advance Ratio" calculates the cost in casualties and weaponry for territory or other objectives gained. Russia is breaking new ground - literally and figuratively - in Ukraine with the cost it has paid for its minimal achievements.

The issue is not how long the Kremlin can sustain this invasion, since it clearly could care less about the losses. JL

Phillips O'Brien reports in his substack:

Not only have the Russians gained little since the end of 2022, their loss to advance ratio has gotten to the point that it is arguably the worst in modern military history. Russian battlefield fatalities in Ukraine are more than 17 times greater than Soviet fatalities in Afghanistan during the 1980s, 11 times greater than during Russia’s First and Second Chechen Wars in the 1990s and 2000s, and over five times greater than all Russian and Soviet wars combined since World War II. How small the Russian advances in Ukraine have been (is exacerbated by the fact that) as the war goes on, the advances get smaller and smaller. The Russian offensive (which has failed) to take Chasiv Yar might be the most self-harming in military history.

Investors Demand AI Spending Look Less Like Faith, More Like Math

Last week was the first in 2026 when public companies reported their financial results and expectations. What became clear was a discernible separation between those companies which appear capable of monetizing their AI investments - or at least have a credible plan for doing so - and those asking for time - and belief. 

Neither Wall Street nor Silicon Valley have ever been particularly known for their spirituality, but the scale of investment required for AI has begun testing that secular tradition. Having emerged from the FOMO-driven 'new new thing' mania of the past two years, more investors are now demanding a path and a timetable. Those which appear able to do so - Apple and Meta, to name two, have fared somewhat better than those like Microsoft and Tesla which are still in 'look at my record, trust me' mode. Tesla's shotgun wedding yesterday with xAI is intended to push that narrative. But investors are clearly in 'show me' mode. JL

Shannon Carroll reports in Quartz:

Investors keep asking the same question in different tones: When does the spending stop looking like faith and start looking like math? The market wants to know how companies are going to monetize AI. A few quarters ago, “we’re investing aggressively” was a leadership signal. This week, it played more like a demand for a timetable and a profit story that reads like a plan instead of a prayer. The market has gotten better at separating companies that can fund an infrastructure cycle from cash they’re already printing from the ones that need the infrastructure cycle to start printing the cash. Apple's strong quarter gives it more time to figure out its AI strategy. Meta is earning just enough to keep trust. Microsoft has to prove it can build on a timeline investors can live with. Tesla is building first, persuading later.