Russians actions in Ukraine came as a chock to the west, who have been striving to conceptualize Russian warfare since. This has resulted in several conflicting definitions involving different means and methods. This might be problematic, both for a country and its military, in trying to define and counter the threat of Russian warfare. It might also be problematic for scientific enquiry, since the definitions might become too broad and neglect vital aspects of Russian warfare. This study there-fore compare and test two rivalling theories about Russian warfare, New-Generation Warfare (NGW) and Full-Spectrum Conflict (FSC), by analysing Russia’s actions in the Ukrainian conflict. By doing so it aims to shed light on which of the two theories offers the best approach to analysing the case. The study uses a qualitative text research method to examine secondary sources describing the conflict and transliterations of Putin’s speeches. Several indicators for each theoretical framework are confirmed and made the analysis possible. The results of this analysis show that Russia in Ukraine used their means and methods synchronously rather than applying a diachronic course of action as advocated by NGW. Results therefore suggest that FSC and its mix of means and methods better describes Russia’s actions in Ukraine.