Despite perceived advantages, Russia's military performance in 2025 was poor. It achieved only incremental gains at the cost of soaring casualties, pushing their manpower losses beyond recruitment rates. This trend suggests that time is increasingly working against Moscow's ability to sustain offensive operations.
Related Insights
Contrary to popular hope, a scenario where Ukraine fully expels Russia and regains all territory is a 'total fantasy.' Based on historical precedent, the war has only two realistic outcomes: a Ukrainian collapse under sustained pressure or a compromise peace that grants Russia de facto control of some territory.
Alexander Stubb outlines a threefold failure for Putin: strategically, he pushed Finland into NATO; militarily, he’s achieved minimal gains at catastrophic cost (e.g., 34,000 Russian soldiers killed in Dec.); and economically, Russia is crippled. Putin continues the war not to win, but to avoid the domestic fallout of admitting defeat.
Recognizing Russia's high tolerance for military casualties, Ukraine has shifted its strategy to asymmetric economic warfare. By systematically using long-range drones to attack Russian oil refineries and tankers, Ukraine aims to inflict financial pain where the human cost of war has failed to be a deterrent, creating what they call "the real sanctions."
Ukraine's most realistic theory of success is not reclaiming all territory militarily, but leveraging its advantages to stabilize the front and inflict unsustainable casualties and economic costs on Russia. This strategy aims to make the war so futile for Moscow that it forces a favorable negotiated settlement.
Putin's desire to continue the war outweighs any potential benefits offered in negotiations. This persistence is not based on a reasonable assessment of the situation but on sunk costs, personal legacy, and a belief that Russia's sheer will can outlast Western support.
The idea that Ukraine must accept a peace deal because the war is "unwinnable" is a flawed narrative that mirrors Russian propaganda. This perspective overlooks Russia's massive daily casualties and straining wartime economy. The war is unsustainable, but arguably more so for Russia than for Ukraine.
Contrary to the notion of automated warfare, the proliferation of drones is highly manpower-intensive. It requires dedicated units for operation, maintenance, and countering enemy drones. Relying solely on technology creates a single point of failure and doesn't eliminate the need for robust force generation and management.
Russian forces are employing a specific two-stage tactic to cripple Ukrainian cities. First, a missile punches a hole in the roof of a major power substation, followed by drones that destroy the internal equipment. This methodical approach is designed to completely disconnect urban centers from power and water, creating a long-term humanitarian crisis.
By committing to a multi-year, ~$400 billion funding plan, Europe can turn Ukraine's financial weakness into a strategic advantage. This sustained support would exacerbate Russia's already high financial burden, potentially triggering a banking or inflation crisis and crippling its war machine.
Before the 2022 invasion, Russia seemed invincible after small-scale successes. However, the large-scale Ukraine war revealed a critical weakness: a complete lack of logistics. As military professionals know, logistics—maintenance, supply lines, support crews—are what enable major wars. Russia's failure in this area proved its military is not a true great power machine.
