A pair of reports were released this week providing analyses of Russia’s current fighting capabilities in Ukraine and prospects for the outcome of this illegal invasion. Each of these reports comes to the same conclusion: Fighting may continue for years before either Ukraine or Russia can reach anything like victory.
Something could happen at any time to change the status of the war in Ukraine. A new technology may make the use of FPV drones in defense less powerful. A new strategy might turn those same drones into a key part of a successful advance. But at the moment, the combination of drones, artillery, and minefields is making any attempt to advance into a scrapyard of smoldering steel and torn flesh.
Russia has lost an entire Russian army’s worth of men and machines. But that still may not be enough to keep them from capturing Ukraine if Western aid falters.
Reuters has information from the latest version of the IISS Military Balance estimate of weapons available to each of the world’s militaries. That estimate suggests that Russia has lost more than 3,000 tanks, “the equivalent of its entire pre-war active inventory.” That number is about half the losses estimated by Ukraine’s general staff, but in line with the numbers of verified losses collected from videos and photographs.
In addition to those tanks, Russia has lost thousands of armored transports, supply trucks, engineering vehicles, and artillery guns. It continues to lose dozens more every day.
In addition to all that gear, Russia has lost an army’s worth of soldiers. U.S. intelligence indicated that as of December, Russia had lost 87% of the forces it started with, and that was before another month of lopsided slaughter at Avdiivka.
Any nation that charges into an invasion of its neighbor only to lose its entire military force would seem to fall solidly into the category of “loser.” However, IISS indicates that Russia has so far been able to replace its tank fleet.
Production of new tanks is a relative trickle, but Russia has “enough lower-quality armored vehicles in storage” to last them years. That’s why lists of Russian losses now include things like venerable T-62 tanks and other pieces of decrepit hardware that were not part of Russia’s armory when Vladimir Putin first sent Russian tanks rolling into Ukraine.
On the other hand, the quality of Ukraine’s equipment has actually improved over the courts of the war thanks to Western shipments of more up-to-date tanks, armor, artillery, and other gear.
Almost two years into the war, Russia has lost the army it brought to Ukraine and is instead fighting with a military utilizing archaic tanks and rusty transports hauled in from storage and hastily refitted. Ukraine is fighting with an army that is better trained, better equipped, and which—while suffering horrible losses—has not faced anything near the losses of Russia.
However, IISS estimates that Russia is still able to put twice as many tanks on the field as Ukraine. And Russia is still willing to advance, even though drones, minefields, and artillery mean that each attempt to move forward only extends its horrible losses.
Russia has lost one army. They’re willing to lose another because Putin believes that between the thousands of moldering hulks on Russia’s storage field and the millions of men that can still be dragged in from the countryside, there is always another army to be found.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is unwilling to destroy his army. In part because unlike Putin, he seems to care about the lives of his soldiers. In part because, unlike Putin, he doesn’t have a spare.
That difference plays a role in why a second report from Rusi.org says that Russia “now believes that is winning.” This perception, that with the expenditure of enough men and enough military hardware, they can still capture all of Ukraine and get Putin his long-desired triumph through the streets of Kyiv has hardened Russian thinking about any negotiated peace.
Russia is so convinced that this strategy will lead to victory that it is now reportedly unwilling to settle for an arrangement that gives them anything less than complete control of every oblast where they now have partial control. That includes not just all of Donetsk, but also Kharkiv and Kherson. Some of the suggested plans would require Ukraine to toss in the city of Odesa if they want to achieve peace.
Except Russia isn’t really calling these terms for peace. They’re calling it “surrender terms.”
And again, what happens from here is more likely to be determined in Washington, D.C., than on the muddy front lines south of Bakhmut.
The Russian theory of victory is plausible if Ukraine's international partners fail to properly resource the AFU. However, if Ukraine's partners continue to provide sufficient ammunition and training support to the AFU to enable the blunting of Russian attacks in 2024, then Russia is unlikely to achieve significant gains in 2025.
Rusi.org estimates that if Ukraine is well-supplied enough to carry this fight into 2025, the tide is likely to turn as Russia’s supply of men and material dries up. Each month of fighting that goes on after that increases the chance of a Ukrainian victory.
Fighting another two years or more is a huge thing to ask of Ukraine. But it’s better than surrendering to Putin, and it’s only possible if we give them the help they need.
The situation at Avdiivka is becoming ever more dire.
There are conflicting reports over whether Ukraine has sent reinforcements into the city. Local commanders insist reinforcements have arrived, but Russian positions make sending more troops beyond the industrial complex at the city’s northern edge something that can generously be called problematic, and would more accurately seem to be a death trap.
Ukraine has cost Russia enormous losses at Avdiivka while suffering relatively few losses of its own. Whatever happens next, we can only pray it stays that way.
Campaign Action
