Sometimes the story is closer than it seems. Russian soldiers who have been wounded, captured or lost friends and colleagues in Ukraine have learned this very painful lesson in the last six weeks.
The losses suffered by the Russian army are extreme, not only by post-Cold War standards, but by all standards of the 19th and 20th centuries. Indeed, Russia’s military experience so far is perhaps more reminiscent of the mud and blood of the Battle of Soma in 1916 than any subsequent military confrontation.
According to my calculations, based on various public information, the Russians have lost approximately 30% of the forces they sent to Ukraine. This is a truly colossal figure, in fact higher than almost any commitment in modern military history from the US Civil War to the two world wars.
The US Civil War, often seen as the first war of the industrial era, has witnessed enormous devastating and combative losses on all sides. But even Robert E. Lee, the Confederate general who suffered the most casualties, lost nearly 20 percent of his army than 30 percent.
Moving on to World War II, Russian losses were already ahead of German losses in the infamous bloody battle of Kursk. This series of battles, perhaps the greatest battles in human history, resulted in heavy losses for the Germans in the war against the Stalinist Soviet Union. In fact, after Kursk, the Germans never again went on a major offensive on the Eastern Front. During the six weeks of the campaign, which took over the Germans’ initial offensive (known as Operation Citadel) and extended through Soviet counterattacks after the Citadel’s failure, the Germans lost somewhere between 160,000 and 200,000 of the 900,000 soldiers they carried out. This percentage of losses (between 17-22%) was almost unprecedented at the time, but is fading again compared to Russia’s expected losses today.
Now let’s look at the battle of Soma. The engagement is usually talked about mostly in connection with its extremely bloody first day, in which almost 20,000 British soldiers were killed. Then, although the British losses were considerable, they slowed down considerably as the British army learned and adjusted.
Knowing the exact victims throughout the battle is not easy and can provoke passionate debate today. However, based on the figures we have, we can roughly estimate that about 1.05 million soldiers were killed on all sides by about 3.5 million deployed in the area between the end of June and the end of September, approximately 30%.
However, these losses have been crucial for 12 weeks, and the conflict in Russia began just seven weeks ago.
What does this huge percentage of Russian losses mean for the next stage of the war? The first Russian forces across the country are suffering. Russia’s air force is still unable to gain supremacy in the air over the battlefields, and the Russian navy, which lost its flagship cruiser Moscow this week, has shown a need. There are signs that morale is low: among the units withdrawn from Kyiv, there are stories of soldiers refusing to return to battle. Russia, meanwhile, is taking serious steps to recruit new troops to join the ranks.
In military terms, the Russian army, which invaded Ukraine six weeks ago, may have another major effort – but based on historical evidence, that seems likely to be all. In other words, the battle for Donbass, if we will witness it, may be the last dice of Russia with this army.
Then Putin will need a whole new army if he wants to continue this war.
Phillips O’Brien is a historian and professor of strategic research at the University of St. Andrews
Add Comment