Understanding the Significant Reasons Behind Russia's Defeats in Ukraine
Written on
The sheer scale of Russia's setbacks in Ukraine is astonishing. The failures of the Russian military are so pronounced that even many informed observers, including segments of the American press, find them hard to accept.
Like many others, I was taken aback by the Russian military's performance. At the onset of the conflict in February 2022, I anticipated a swift Russian victory over Ukraine. Instead, they suffered a catastrophic defeat near Kyiv, marking one of the most significant military collapses in recent history.
Since that initial failure, the magnitude of Russian losses has been staggering. While they have managed to thwart some Ukrainian offensives, the cost in casualties has been astronomical. Indeed, the Russian Army is experiencing the most severe military losses since the end of World War II.
So, what accounts for the dramatic failures of the Russian military in Ukraine? The answer is multifaceted and complex.
Key Factors Contributing to Russian Failures in Ukraine
- Dependence on Outdated Military Equipment (Tanks and Armored Vehicles)
Russian commanders made a critical error early in the conflict by relying heavily on outdated military hardware, particularly tanks and armored vehicles.
The war commenced with a tank offensive aimed at Kyiv, which turned out to be a dismal failure. Modern Ukrainian defenses, including Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 drones and infantry armed with anti-tank weapons like the U.S. Javelin missile, decimated the Russian tank formations.
This failure was exacerbated by the lack of support for the tanks, which operated in isolation without adequate infantry, artillery, or air cover. Consequently, images of burnt and abandoned tanks flooded online platforms.
As a direct result of these failures, many Russian soldiers abandoned their tanks, fleeing on foot or using stolen civilian vehicles, sometimes even bicycles, which were less susceptible to drone attacks.
According to Oryx, Russian forces have left behind approximately 910 tanks. However, the true number of abandoned tanks could be higher, considering the Ukrainian Army claims to have captured 2,910 tanks, many of which may have been abandoned by Russian troops.
The toll continues to rise, with Oryx estimating a total of 16,031 Russian tank losses, broken down as follows: - 11,486 tanks destroyed - 725 tanks damaged - 910 abandoned tanks - 2,910 captured tanks
Tank losses persist, with the General Staff of Ukraine reporting the destruction of 40 armored vehicles and 21 tanks on May 27, 2024. Cumulatively, they claim to have destroyed 7,713 tanks and 17,898 armored vehicles from February 24, 2022, to May 28, 2024.
A contributing factor to these losses is the Russian military's decision to deploy older tanks, such as the T-62 and T-54, which are more susceptible to contemporary weaponry. These antiquated vehicles are also prone to mechanical failures.
Relying heavily on tanks presents various challenges. For instance, the military invests substantial resources in training personnel to operate these aging machines, diverting funds that could be used for more effective weaponry like drones and missiles.
Russian officers persist in deploying tanks simply because they lack alternative options. Once the tanks are rendered ineffective, they have little else to offer.
Ukrainian tank offensives have similarly been met with limited success. Reports indicate that commanders withdrew U.S.-made M-1 Abrams tanks from the frontlines due to their ineffectiveness. Ukrainian soldiers have noted that these tanks made them prime targets for Russian attacks, mirroring the vulnerabilities faced by Russian forces.
- Blind Faith in Overwhelming Military Force
It appears that Russian commanders rely predominantly on one strategy in Ukraine: overwhelming military force. They attempt to outgun Ukrainian positions with extensive artillery, infantry, or armored assaults.
Such a strategy may succeed against weaker opponents but tends to falter against well-prepared adversaries. Historical precedents reveal that Russian assaults falter when Ukrainian forces efficiently neutralize their tanks.
There are two primary methods for achieving victory through overwhelming force. One is the "shock and awe" approach, characterized by rapid, high-intensity attacks to instill fear in the enemy. This tactic has proven effective in past conflicts, such as during the Iraq Wars or the early stages of World War II.
However, the tactic fails if the enemy is not intimidated. A significant issue for Russian strategists is that Ukrainian soldiers are not deterred; they understand that they can effectively destroy Russian tanks and eliminate infantry, motivating them to fight back.
This situation mirrors the experiences of German soldiers on the Eastern Front during World War II. Once Soviet troops realized their capacity to destroy German equipment, the effectiveness of the Blitzkrieg diminished.
The second avenue for success through overwhelming force involves saturating the battlefield with vast quantities of personnel and weaponry. This tactic was a cornerstone of the Allied victory in World War II, where they overwhelmed German and Japanese forces despite facing better-equipped adversaries.
However, overwhelming force can lead to failure if the enemy adopts effective countermeasures. This was evident during World War I battles, where German forces utilized machine guns to inflict heavy casualties on British and French troops.
Ukrainian forces are employing drones, precision munitions, and artillery to mitigate the numerical advantage of the Russian military. Despite Russia deploying large numbers of tanks and troops against Ukrainian defenses, they continue to suffer significant losses.
Unfortunately, Russian strategists appear unable to employ tactics beyond sheer military might, contributing to their ongoing defeats.
- Inability to Adapt to Emerging Technologies (Drones)
One of the significant reasons for the catastrophic losses sustained by Russian forces is their failure to understand the impact of modern drone technology.
For instance, the deployment of Bayraktar TB2 drones caught Russian troops off guard. Presently, first-person-view (FPV) drones enable Ukrainian forces to locate and strike Russian assets in real-time. These drones provide immediate aerial reconnaissance, allowing artillery and missile units to quickly engage targets.
Moreover, it is straightforward for technicians to modify FPV drones into kamikaze drones by attaching munitions, enabling them to function as flying bombs. These drones can even be programmed with artificial intelligence to automatically identify and engage targets, circumventing traditional anti-drone defenses.
The advancement of drone technology is ongoing. Recent research by the U.S. Air Force indicates that troops could potentially fabricate and deploy new drones within 24 hours using 3D printing. Furthermore, the Pentagon is exploring the development of replicating drones capable of self-replication in the field.
Although drones are not a new concept—originating from Nikola Tesla's proposals in 1898 and seeing early military applications in World War I—they have become increasingly effective on the battlefield, surprising Russian forces.
This pattern of technological surprise has historical precedent. Machine guns were introduced during the American Civil War but caught commanders off guard in World War I. Similarly, the devastating potential of aircraft was recognized in 1941, yet Japan's surprise attack on Pearl Harbor demonstrated the effectiveness of air power.
The Russian military's failure to foresee the implications of drone technology stems from a lack of imagination, training, and education. Many Russian units did not receive their drones until months into the conflict, leading to speculation about whether they could have captured Kyiv in February 2022 had they utilized drones effectively.
- Deficiencies in Military Professionalism
A notable lack of professionalism, particularly in training and education, seems to pervade the Russian military. Many Russian officers appear to rely solely on the tactic of overwhelming force.
Although some highly capable and educated staff officers exist within the Russian Army, they struggle to implement effective tactics due to the overall lack of military professionalism.
The inability to execute these strategies arises from a shortage of professional non-commissioned officers (NCOs)—the sergeants who lead and train soldiers in the field. NCOs play a crucial role in modern warfare, as they are responsible for operating and maintaining advanced weaponry.
In contrast, militaries such as those of the U.S., U.K., India, and France excel because they have a robust corps of NCOs. The absence of NCOs in the Russian military means that officers are expected to manage small units and oversee operations without the necessary support.
Crucially, NCOs are integral to soldier training. Many popular war films emphasize the vital relationship between sergeants and recruits during boot camp.
Developing a professional NCO corps can be challenging. The U.S. Navy, for example, offers significant bonuses to retain skilled petty officers due to their essential roles in fleet operations.
Interestingly, the Chinese military is also seeking to cultivate its own NCO corps, recognizing its importance in modern warfare.
Unlike the U.S. and British militaries, Russia lacks a tradition of effective NCO training, resulting in recruits receiving minimal preparation before deployment, often leading to disastrous outcomes on the battlefield.
The absence of a professional military structure is one of the reasons behind Russia's failures. In contrast, the Ukrainian military has received extensive training from U.S. and European forces, contributing to their superior performance despite using similar Soviet-era equipment.
- Utilization of Low-Quality Troops (Mercenaries, Conscripts, Convicts, etc.)
The military's lack of professionalism leads to the recruitment of numerous low-quality soldiers, resulting in high casualty rates.
For example, President Vladimir Putin has the ability to conscript large numbers of men; a recent order mandated the drafting of 130,000 individuals in September 2023. However, the absence of NCOs means there are insufficient personnel to train or lead these conscripts, effectively transforming the military into an armed mob with predictable consequences.
The situation is exacerbated by the government's focus on drafting individuals from poorer backgrounds and minority groups, which limits dissent and helps maintain Putin's support. This strategy results in an army comprised of the least educated segments of society.
Additionally, both the Russian Army and the Wagner Group have been recruiting convicts, who often lack the training and discipline required for effective military service. While some mercenaries, particularly those from countries like Nepal, may be experienced soldiers, many are merely unemployed individuals seeking income.
The overwhelming presence of poorly trained soldiers leads to significant casualties during human wave or "meat grinder" assaults. Such tactics involve sending large numbers of infantry into enemy positions in hopes of overwhelming them, which predictably results in heavy losses for Russian forces.
Russian officers do not resort to these tactics out of malice or incompetence; rather, they are constrained by the limited capabilities of their available forces.
The reasons behind Russia's failures in Ukraine are evident. The critical question now is whether other nations and militaries can learn from these missteps.