by Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization
Russia reportedly operates hundreds of thousands more active duty soldiers compared to Ukraine, yet their military appears to have suffered twice as many casualties. Ukraine’s performance thus far is certainly well understood to a large degree, despite Russia’s massive size advantage. The most recent available casualty figures, which have increased dramatically since last Spring with the Ukrainian counteroffensive, indicate that Ukrainian forces seem to have killed twice as many Russian soldiers compared with the number of soldiers they have lost at the hands of Russian invaders.
Civilian casualties, however, is quite a different matter given Russia’s deliberate bombardment of Ukrainian neighborhoods, hospitals and civilian areas. Ukraine is reported to have experiences as many as 40,000 civilian casualties, according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
In pure military terms, however, the numbers are quite different as there appears to a massive kill ratio-discrepancy. A recent Aug 18, 2023 write up in the New York Times quotes unmanned US officials saying that Russia’s total military casualties are approaching 300,000, as compared to Ukraine’s 170,000. The nearly “double” discrepancy is also reported among actual numbers of soldiers “killed” in war; the New York Times article says as many as 120,000 Russian soldiers have been killed compared with roughly 70,000 Ukrainian soldiers killed.
“Russia’s military casualties, the officials said, are approaching 300,000. The number includes as many as 120,000 deaths and 170,000 to 180,000 injured troops. The Russian numbers dwarf the Ukrainian figures, which the officials put at close to 70,000 killed and 100,000 to 120,000 wounded,” the paper writes.
When it comes to countries at war, casualty compilations and figures are often distorted, minimized, exaggerated or inflated in wartime, as part of the well-known and time-honored reality of information warfare. The Ukrainian Ministry of Defence reports different numbers of Russian deaths than different independent assessments by massive amounts in the tens of thousands, and not surprisingly, official Russian sources appear to only recognized a fraction of its actual casualty number.
Force Discrepancy – Russia Has 3-Times as Many Soldiers
The size difference in terms of active duty forces is truly massive, according to GlobalFirepower.com, which sites that Russia operates 830,900 active duty soldiers compared to Ukraine’s 200,000. This glaring disparity, while slightly offset by each country operating an equal amount of reserve forces, can be difficult to understand given the success thus far of Ukrainian forces. Certainly the widely understood command and control, supply line and morale problems experienced by Russian soldiers appears to be having an impact.
Perhaps put simply, many Russian soldiers simply do not want to kill Ukrainians, a circumstance highlighted by anecdotal accounts of massive amounts of Russian soldiers abandoning their vehicles and refusing to fight. Also, numbers cited by GlobalFirepower.com may not account for the thousands of volunteers and ordinary Ukrainians who have decided to joint the war to defend their homeland. The reported disparity is also quite large regarding paramilitary forces as well, according to GlobalFirepower’s 2023 military force assessments, which shows Russia as operating 250,000 paramilitary forces compared with Ukraine’s 50,000.
The ground vehicle disparity is also shocking, when viewed in light of Ukraine’s success on the battlefield. Russia reportedly operates 151,641 vehicles compared with Ukraine’s 37,000, according to GlobalFirepower.com Russia is also reported to have six times as many Self-Propelled artillery and thousands more tanks; Russia reportedly has 12,566 tanks compared with Ukraine’s 1,890.
However, one critical element to bear in mind is that whatever sheer “numbers” of forces, weapons and armored vehicles Russia is cited to operate, that does not mean large percentages of their inventory are actually operational. Thousands of Russian armored vehicles are poorly maintained Soviet-era platforms and many Russian tanks destroyed in Ukraine are reportedly not well upgraded or maintained. Given this, while there is certain to bed a numbers deficit of great consequence, there may be a wide range of mitigating factors off-setting Russia’s ostensible numerical advantage. The actual number of operational Russian tanks is likely thousands less than the 12,566 cited, and even fewer are likely to have been effectively modernized. More than 2,300 tanks have been destroyed as well.
Will to Fight – Ukrainian Tactics
Ukrainian tenacity is yet another critical element, as fighters appear to have responded to a Russian invasion with a seemingly unparalleled resolve, a vigor and intensity of purpose which captured the world’s imagination following its initial successfully defense against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This willingness of thousands of Ukrainians to risk death fighting against a much larger invading Russian force has likely had an enormous and difficult to predict impact, and Ukraine’s successes have also been fortified by a widely observed tactical proficiency. Ukrainians used intersections, bridges and narrowly configured passageways to “ambush,” “kill,” and “destroy” massive numbers of invading Russian armored vehicles, using decentralized, dismounted yet highly-targeted anti-armor strikes.Certainly Russia was widely observed to execute poorly and display failing applications of Combined Arms Maneuver, yet Ukraine’s hit-and-run, ambush-style anti-armor tactics proved unexpectedly effective in destroying invading Russian units. Therefore, the actual number of operational Russian tanks is likely thousands less than the 12,566 cited, and even fewer are likely to have been effectively modernized.
What seems equally significant is that, despite a massive force number deficit, Ukrainian forces have only been successful “defending” a Russian invasion but also having some success in heavier engagements driven by rockets, artillery, mechanized forces and armored vehicles. One might be inclined to think that a massive numbers deficit might enable successful defense when it comes to anti-armor attacks yet prove quite vulnerable in any kind of major force-on-force engagement. However, in the case of Ukraine, armored vehicles, artillery and rockets continue to arrive and Ukrainian forces have been able to advance upon and gain territory from heavier, more fully armed Russian forces. This suggests effective Combined Arms Maneuver including an ability to integrate rocket and artillery attacks with mechanized armored and infantry advances. The presence of 186 Bradley Fighting Vehicles and impactful numbers of British and German-provided tanks are likely contributing substantially to some of Ukraine’s success gaining ground and steady advances in its slow-moving counteroffensive. The arrival of more armor, in the form of Abrams tanks and other heavier assets are likely to further reinforce Ukraine’s ability to close-with and destroy a seemingly larger force. All of these now broadly understood variables are supported by what could be described as a “massive” destruction of Russian forces. While precise specifics are likely difficult to discern or identify w
ith complete accuracy, an open source website called ORYX has been carefully and closely photographing and documenting Russian losses for months.
Massive Destruction of Russian Forces
Russia’s 12,064-strong force of armored vehicles has been decimated. The numbers are staggering, as ORYX reports that Russia has already lost 2,309 tanks, 2,760 Infantry Fighting Vehicles, 515 Self-Propelled Artillery Vehicles and 969 Armored Fighting Vehicles.
Kris Osborn is the President of Warrior Maven – the Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
