Residents in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine face deteriorating living conditions as Moscow's occupation administrations prove incapable of maintaining basic infrastructure, creating a stark contrast with Ukrainian-controlled territories that illuminates the governance crisis behind Russia's territorial ambitions.
An Associated Press investigation documented systematic failures in water supply, heating, and housing across occupied regions nearly four years after Russia's full-scale invasion began. The infrastructure collapse exposes fundamental contradictions in Moscow's claims to be "liberating" these territories while systematically failing the civilians living under its control.
In occupied portions of Kherson region, water supply has become unreliable, with some areas experiencing service disruptions lasting weeks. Heating systems installed during Soviet times and maintained by Ukrainian authorities before occupation now fail regularly as Russian-appointed administrators lack technical expertise and spare parts. Housing damaged during combat operations remains unrepaired, forcing families into dangerous or uninhabitable structures.
The situation mirrors patterns observed across other occupied territories in Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Crimea. While Russian authorities stage propaganda events showing reconstruction efforts, ordinary residents report that actual infrastructure improvements rarely materialize beyond superficial repairs to prominent buildings in city centers.
Olena, a 54-year-old teacher from occupied Melitopol who recently fled to Ukrainian-controlled territory, described conditions that have steadily worsened. "They promised everything would improve under Russian administration," she said, requesting her last name be withheld for family safety. "Instead, everything is falling apart. Water comes for a few hours a day. Heating is unreliable. Garbage piles up because there's no organized collection."
In Ukraine, as across nations defending their sovereignty, resilience is not just survival—it's determination to build a better future. The contrast between Ukrainian and Russian governance becomes visible in how each side treats civilians under their control—Ukraine continuing reconstruction and service provision amid war, Russia allowing occupied areas to decay despite facing no comparable constraints.
The infrastructure failures reflect deeper administrative dysfunction. Russian occupation authorities rely heavily on collaborators who often lack professional qualifications for the positions they hold. Trained Ukrainian administrators either fled, were deported to Russia, or refuse to cooperate, leaving critical positions filled by politically loyal but technically incompetent appointees.
Economic collapse compounds infrastructure problems. Ukraine's pre-war economy was integrated through national supply chains, banking systems, and regulatory frameworks. Russian occupation severed those connections without establishing functional replacements. Businesses closed, unemployment soared, and tax revenue collapsed—starving occupation administrations of funds needed for infrastructure maintenance.
Russian authorities have attempted to impose rubles, Russian banking systems, and Moscow-based regulatory frameworks. But the transitions have been chaotic, with many residents unable to access savings, pensions, or wages for extended periods. Those who do receive payments find that prices for basic goods have increased far faster than income.
Education and healthcare face similar crises. Schools in occupied territories now teach Russian curricula that erase Ukrainian history and language. But teacher shortages plague many areas as qualified educators refuse to participate or flee. Healthcare facilities struggle with medicine shortages, equipment failures, and staff departures.
The humanitarian situation has prompted some international organizations to attempt providing assistance, but access remains severely restricted. Russian authorities tightly control which organizations can operate in occupied territories and what activities they can conduct, often preventing effective humanitarian response.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian authorities continue providing services in liberated territories despite enormous challenges. In areas recaptured during counteroffensive operations, reconstruction efforts have restored water, electricity, and heating to most civilians. The contrast demonstrates not merely differences in resources but in governance competence and commitment to civilian welfare.
Maksym, a 38-year-old engineer from Kherson city, experienced both Russian occupation and Ukrainian liberation. "Under occupation, nothing worked and nobody cared," he said. "After liberation, Ukrainian authorities immediately began repairing infrastructure despite ongoing shelling. The difference is night and day."
The infrastructure collapse also undermines Russia's political objectives. Moscow has staged referendums claiming overwhelming support for annexation in occupied territories—votes conducted under military occupation and universally rejected as fraudulent by international observers. But even residents who initially accepted or tolerated Russian control increasingly express frustration as living conditions deteriorate.
Russian state media rarely reports on infrastructure problems in occupied territories, instead broadcasting segments showing reconstruction projects and residents praising Russian administration. But the reality documented by journalists, humanitarian workers, and residents themselves tells a different story.
The situation raises difficult questions about post-war recovery. Even when Ukrainian forces liberate occupied territories, the infrastructure damage and administrative chaos left by Russian occupation will require years and billions of dollars to repair. International partners have pledged support for Ukraine's reconstruction, but the scale of needs continues growing.
For civilians trapped in occupied areas, the immediate concern is surviving deteriorating conditions while hoping for eventual liberation. Many lack resources to flee, face Russian restrictions on movement, or have elderly relatives who cannot travel. They endure infrastructure failures, economic hardship, and authoritarian control while waiting for circumstances to change.
The occupation governance crisis also exposes broader Russian state dysfunction. If Moscow cannot maintain basic services in territories under its military control and facing no resistance, its claims to offer superior governance to Ukrainian administration are demonstrably false. The propaganda may deceive distant audiences, but it cannot hide the reality from those living under occupation.
As the war continues, the infrastructure and governance gap between Ukrainian and Russian-controlled areas will likely widen further. Ukraine continues receiving international reconstruction assistance and maintains functioning administrative systems. Occupied territories face deepening decay under Russian authorities who prioritize political control over civilian welfare.
