As Russia's war in Ukraine enters its fifth year, growing signs of frustration are beginning to emerge from within the establishment itself.
What was once presented by the Kremlin as a campaign destined for success is increasingly being questioned by figures who have long supported Moscow's objectives.
The concerns are no longer limited to business circles or more moderate voices seeking stability. Some of Russia's most recognisable hardliners are now openly acknowledging what many had previously avoided saying in public: that Russia has been unable to secure a decisive victory and may lack the means to do so.
Despite those concerns, there is little evidence that President Vladimir Putin is prepared to abandon the goals that shaped the invasion. While some members of the elite are calling for a more pragmatic approach, Putin has instead intensified military pressure on Ukraine. The divide between those urging realism and those demanding further escalation is becoming increasingly visible as the conflict drags on without a clear resolution.
Prominent Kremlin Voices Question Path To Victory
Among the figures openly expressing doubts is Oleg Tsaryov, the former Ukrainian lawmaker who fled to Russia in 2014 and was once viewed as a leading candidate to head a pro-Russian administration in Kyiv following Moscow's planned takeover of the Ukrainian capital in 2022.
According to reports, Tsaryov argued that Russian propaganda had created a false sense of certainty about victory. 'The professionals in creating an alternative reality have convinced not just the population, but also themselves, that the illusion that they have invented is in fact reality,' he said. 'Sooner or later, these worlds of illusion and reality must clash. And now it is happening in the most painful form.'
Similar concerns have been voiced by Aleksey Chadaev, a historian and former Kremlin official who now runs the Ushkuynik Drone Warfare Research Centre. Chadaev warned that continuing along the current path was 'not just a path to "non-victory", but to a full-scale defeat'. Rather than pressing ahead unchanged, he argued that Russia should pause and reorganise itself before any future phase of conflict.
Vasily Kashin, Director of the Centre for Comprehensive European and International Studies at Moscow's Higher School of Economics, has also challenged one of Putin's central war aims.
In a widely discussed article, Kashin argued that Ukraine would remain an anti-Russian and pro-Western country regardless of Moscow's efforts. He said the goal of installing a friendly government in Kyiv was no longer realistic after the scale of destruction and casualties caused by the war.
Kashin argued that even a dramatic escalation would not achieve Russia's objectives. Referring to the possibility of targeting Ukraine's leadership, he suggested such actions would likely produce a 'more active, ambitious and radical' generation of Ukrainian leaders rather than a government willing to align with Moscow.
He also warned against sacrificing Russia's resources while 'pursuing imaginary objectives' around places such as Mala Tokmachka, a location that has come to symbolise Russia's inability to make meaningful advances on the battlefield.
Escalation Continues Despite Calls For Pragmatism
Although a growing number of influential figures appear willing to discuss the limits of Russian military power, there is little indication that those arguments are changing Kremlin policy.
Alexander Gabuev, Director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Centre in Berlin, said a shift in elite discussion is becoming increasingly noticeable. 'It seems that in the fifth year of the war, some people are starting to realise that continuing the war for another year or two doesn't seriously improve Russia's negotiating position. It is becoming clearer and clearer to them that it's time to wrap it up,' he said.
Gabuev said that conversations previously considered politically risky are becoming more normalised within elite circles. Yet he also questioned whether Putin shares that assessment. 'But does Putin realise that he is in a dead end, and that the war now has diminishing returns? This we don't know. Nothing shows that he has changed his mind.'
Pavlo Klimkin, Ukraine's former foreign minister, believes the structure of the Russian system itself makes a change of direction unlikely. 'War is the modus vivendi of this regime; it's like riding a bicycle, if they stop, they fall,' he said.
Recent developments on the battlefield may be adding to the pressure. Ukrainian drone operations have reportedly disrupted Russian logistics across occupied territories, targeting fuel trucks and military convoys connecting Russia with Crimea and front-line positions. Fuel rationing has been introduced in parts of Luhansk and Donetsk, while supplies have reportedly run out in Crimea.
Russian military commentators have also warned of a possible Ukrainian offensive, while Kyiv has continued conducting long-range strikes deep inside Russia. One such strike targeted an oil terminal in St. Petersburg during the opening of a major economic conference in Putin's hometown.
Despite those setbacks, Putin has chosen to escalate. Following a Ukrainian drone strike in Starobilsk, Russia launched heavy missile attacks on Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities.
The overnight barrage killed 22 people and injured more than 100 others, making it one of the deadliest attacks of the war. Hours earlier, Putin had told security officials that Ukraine would have to endure 'the new quality of the entire conflict'.
Meanwhile, those advocating a more pragmatic approach continue to face resistance. A Russian newspaper removed a widely discussed article that drew parallels between military defeats and periods of reform in Russian history. Separately, retired General Andrey Gurulyov appeared to criticise the stalemate in Ukraine and the optimism of military commanders wearing 'rose-colored glasses'. The comments were later disowned after he claimed his account had been hacked, a claim that many Russian commentators reportedly viewed with scepticism.
