Posted on 04/07/2022 5:48:06 AM PDT by Red Badger
In four weeks of combat, Russia may have lost 25 percent of its initial attacking force. These casualties are not on the scale of World War II but are large compared with the relatively small size of the Russian military today. Although reinforcements and replacements can offset some of these casualties, the loss of trained troops will impair military operations and eventually have a political effect.
Russian losses to date are high. NATO estimates that Russia has lost between 7,000 and 15,000 soldiers. Wounded who cannot rapidly return to duty generally number about twice the number of dead. That would mean that Russia has lost between 21,000 and 45,000 troops in four weeks of conflict. To put that into perspective, Russia reported 14,400 killed through 10 years of war in Afghanistan.
The initial invasion force numbered about 190,000 troops. However, that included militias in the Donbas and security forces (Rosgvardiya) for occupation. Ground combat troops numbered about 140,000. Thus, Russia may have lost about a quarter of its initial combat force.
Russia has moved reinforcements and replacements into Ukraine to compensate for these losses, which will offset them to some degree. However, these reinforcements and replacements likely lack the training and experience of the early deployers, especially elite units like paratroopers. The loss of skilled troops and leaders will be felt in the conduct of tactical operations.
Russian forces are not large. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union maintained a military of about 3.5 million. That military is long gone. Today, Russia maintains a total military of about 900,000, of which 280,000 are in the army, according to the latest figures from the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. Russia reformed its military after poor operational performance in the 2008 invasion of Georgia, where Russia won but with many tactical shortcomings that showed a lack of skill and training. The downsized military increased the proportion of volunteers (called “contract soldiers” in Russia) to about two-thirds, improved training, and streamlined the bloated officer corps.
Russia lacks a strong reserve force. In theory, former soldiers could be recalled to service, and Russia is likely doing some of that, but these soldiers receive no training or follow-up after their active service. Russia has tried to create reserve forces like those in NATO, where reservists are organized into units that train regularly, but such efforts have not made much headway.
To put the Russian force into perspective, the United States has an active-duty force of 1.3 million and organized, trained reserves of 800,000. Thus, the United States has about twice the trained personnel that Russia does.
To further put the Russian force into perspective, the United States sent about 540,000 troops to Saudi Arabia in 1991 to liberate Kuwait from Iraq. Total coalition forces numbered about 750,000. Russia is conducting this invasion on a shoestring.
Russia is sensitive to losses. Russia today is not the country of World War II (called the Great Patriotic War in Russia) that marched to victory over the bodies of its dead. In that conflict, the Soviet Union lost an estimated 10 million soldiers and another 14 million civilians but persevered through terrible losses and repeated battlefield setbacks to achieve ultimate victory. Today, an engaged public and organized mothers groups make casualties highly visible. The use of conscripts is particularly controversial because they are, in theory, not supposed to fight outside Russia proper. Russia may be an authoritarian regime, but it cannot suppress all dissent, just as the Soviet Union could not suppress discontent with the war in Afghanistan. Casualties will increase opposition to the war.
Commentators suspect that Putin is not getting objective advice about the war and thus may not fully appreciate the difficulty his forces are in. This is a common problem in authoritarian regimes where officials do not want to bring bad news to an all-powerful leader. However, eventually, battlefield realities will assert themselves. Likely a group of generals will agree among themselves that Putin must be made aware of battlefield circumstances before the army breaks from continuing casualties, physical exhaustion, dwindling supplies and munitions, and sinking morale. Bringing that message forward may be the push that convinces Putin to get serious about negotiations.
Mark F. Cancian is a senior adviser with the International Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
Commentary is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).
Russia is a vast country, it is very difficult to organize an effective reserve system.
Complicating this is the decentralized nature and the corruption of the military. They don’t want to spend money on remote reserve training centers and supplies. They don’t even supply conscripts well.
US intelligence has admitted they make chit up on a daily basis...why is this any different?
There must be a way to ID the dead and let their mothers in Russia know.
I heard that the Russians had run out of bombs and food after a third day. Yet, they have enough to feed civilians and the bombing increases.
In fact DNR complains that they have thousands of the Ukrainian casualties the other side refuses to puck up.
Yep. Their conscript system shows why a kleptocracy is bad at war. It exists to collect bribes. Every recruiter accepts a fee to code someone as ineligible. Those fees gets passed up the ranks and pay for the grand dachas of each general.
For the military you are left with the dregs that are either too poor or too dumb to figure out the system.
War casualties have caused the fall of empires in this part of the world. WWI caused the end of Habsburg and Romanov dynasties. First usually comes the civil disobedience, in WWI the protesters burnt the records for conscription. There was already some disobedience in Belarus with workers sabotaging the trains. Expect more to follow as more body bags come home.
Morale
Morale of your troops is as important as having adequate supplies and good leadership. For the Russian Army to suffer this type of casualty and the loss of so much equipment can not help but affect troop morale, and not in a good way.
The primary goal of warfare is not to kill (or wound) the enemy but to break their will to fight. Once they no longer want to fight they lose.
The smart thing for the Russians to do is pull their troops back to a secure and defensive area and begin to rebuild their forces.
Allow them time to rest and re-group, get replacements, and supplies.
The smart thing for the Ukraines is not to give them time to rest and regroup.
Sun Tszu could not have said it better..................
Sounds like the Royal Navy conscript system and the Army that fought Napoleon under Wellington.
By using the same outdated armor vulnerable to shoulder fired and drone fired anti-tank weapons. Everyone needs to learn the lessons of this war, the US Army included.
There will be more to follow. History teaches that famine often follows war especially during times of political and economic instability. The lunatic greens currently have power in the EU and the US. Thanks to their aggressive assault on fossil fuels, natural gas, the core ingredient of fertilizer, is expensive and scarce. Diesel fuel, which is essential to farmers, is also very expensive. Farm yields will decrease around the world. If China and India due to weather or other factors, have a poor harvest, then overt famine will occur. As it is there will be severe food shortages in Africa and parts of Asia.
The lunatic greens in the EU and US will not starve but they will be responsible for the misery, starvation and hunger wars that will come. They ought to be held responsible.
“the loss of trained troops will impair military operations and eventually have a political effect.”
They didn’t let se any trained troops, they lost a bunch of 18 year old kids from rural Russia. They still have their killer hoard from Chechnya and Syria.
Compounding this is that the army in Russia has a very thin cadre of experienced, professional NCOs. Without that group of soldiers to provide consistency, discipline, and training...you have a mob, not an army.
This fact isn’t really disputed. Nor is it propaganda.
The Russian Military structure has been its biggest weakness, and this was true even in the Cold War era.
Its estimates, based on experience.
And certainly the US has experience in war over the past couple of decades.
Why would you think that applying the same metrics to a Russian war would be different?
If anything, these guys are basing their metrics on a US war. Do you think the Russian Army has demonstrated a more effective handling of the wounded, or provides better fighting conditions for their troops?
Some folks think in a war situation that the media should be handing out specific, detailed, and 100% accurate information. And they point that out as the reason to dismiss a report in its entirety. That opinion is kind of weak.
I’ll post this interesting take on Russia here:
https://ricochet.com/1214468/finnish-intelligence-officer-explains-the-russian-mindset/
So their original assessment of the Russian army's capabilities was completely incorrect. And they were right about Russia preparing for an invasion only because they consulted Captain Obvious.
The proof is in the pudding. The Kyiv junta stands. Putinist attempts to “denazify” Ukraine have failed.
Ironically, Putin could have rolled the Russian army all the way to Kyiv in 2014-15 because his stooge, Yanukovych, had made the Ukrainian army a corrupt shell. He chose not to and now is only able to mass murder civilians and destroy Ukraine with bombs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.