Home Business Recent analysis indicates Russia has a greater capacity to endure significant combat losses compared to Ukraine.

Recent analysis indicates Russia has a greater capacity to endure significant combat losses compared to Ukraine.

0

LONDON — The capability of Russia to endure substantial losses on the battlefield in Ukraine can be attributed to its considerable stockpiles of Cold War-era armaments and its larger population. This assessment is presented in an annual analysis of the global military landscape.

Despite losing around 1,400 tanks in the past year and facing approximately 800,000 casualties among its soldiers since the onset of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine nearly three years ago, Russia has managed to maintain its military strength. This information comes from the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), which published the report on Wednesday. In stark contrast, Ukraine has experienced significant depletion of its personnel, with precise casualty figures remaining elusive due to the sensitive political implications surrounding such data.

The IISS noted that the military assistance pledged by Western nations appears inadequate for enabling a persistent Ukrainian counteroffensive. Although Ukraine has demonstrated its capability to resist Russian aggression across air, land, and sea, it has struggled to mobilize enough troops to match its losses.

Some analysts, including former U.S. President Donald Trump, identify a potential opportunity for a peace settlement amidst the ongoing conflict, which is impacting Russia’s economy. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz remarked recently that Trump would implement measures like taxes, tariffs, and sanctions to prompt Russian President Vladimir Putin to engage in negotiations.

However, Nigel Gould-Davies, a senior fellow at the IISS and a former British ambassador to Belarus, rejected the notion of a ceasefire. He emphasized that the core issue remains Putin’s explicit commitment to continue the conflict. “Putin has consistently indicated his lack of interest in a ceasefire or in freezing the conflict,” Gould-Davies stated, pointing out that Putin’s focus lies solely on achieving a definitive conclusion to the war that addresses a multitude of complex international political, legal, and bureaucratic challenges.

As the conflict in Ukraine persists, tensions are simultaneously escalating in the Middle East and China is adopting a more aggressive posture in Asia. Consequently, nations globally are working to restore their military stockpiles that had declined in the aftermath of the Cold War.

Last year, global defense spending surged to $2.46 trillion, marking a 7.4% inflation-adjusted increase, according to IISS, a think tank that has compiled annual assessments of military power for over six decades.

Russia’s defense expenditure rose by an astonishing 41.9%, reaching approximately $145.9 billion, which far exceeds Ukraine’s $28.4 billion and is comparable to the total defense outlays of European nations. Presently, Russia devotes around 6.7% of its economic output to defense, a significant rise from the 3.6% allocated prior to the invasion of Ukraine.

While the existing inventories of tanks and artillery have enabled Russia to keep pace despite battlefield attrition, maintaining this might become increasingly challenging over time. Putin has limited the mobilization of troops to preserve public support for the war, a strategy that is now straining Russia’s economy by exacerbating inflation and diverting resources from essential social services such as healthcare and education, IISS reports. Additionally, leftover weapon stockpiles may soon require expensive refurbishments to be operational on the battlefield.

“The current trajectory is not sustainable,” Gould-Davies remarked, “but this does not imply that the situation is untenable in the short term.” Fear of Russian expansionism has prompted many NATO nations to bolster their defense capabilities.

European countries recorded an 11.7% increase in military spending last year, largely driven by a remarkable 23.2% rise in Germany. Despite this, Germany’s defense budget remains at only 1.8% of its GDP, still below NATO’s 2% expenditure benchmark for its member states.

Trump has frequently criticized other NATO members for not meeting their financial obligations regarding collective defense. Overall, NATO defense spending escalated to $1.44 trillion last year, with European members contributing less than a third, approximately $442 billion, to the total.