
Nearly 1 million Russian troops killed or injured in meat grinder Ukraine war: study
Russia's invasion force is expected to suffer more than 1 million casualties by the summer as a result of the Ukraine war, with around 250,000 troops already confirmed dead, according to a new study.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a Washington-based think tank, found that despite Russian President Vladimir Putin's boasts that he is winning the war, 'Russia has largely failed to achieve its primary objectives and has suffered high costs.'
'Russia will likely hit the 1 million casualty mark in the summer of 2025 — a stunning and grizzly milestone,' the CSIS concluded in their Tuesday report.
4 The Russian military is expected to suffer 1 million casualties by the summer.
Sputnik via AP
4 Ukraine has been able to slow Russia's invasion force to a near halt across the frontlines, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
REUTERS
The invasion of Ukraine has effectively served as a meat grinder for Russia's forces over the last three years, with the cost of life showing 'Putin's blatant disregard for his soldiers,' the analysts said.
The death toll alone currently stands as five times as many deaths as all Soviet and Russian wars combined since World War II.
The fighting has also taken its toll on Ukraine, with about 60,000 to 100,000 soldiers believed to have been killed since the Russian invasion started in February 2022, according to the CSIS.
Ukraine's population, however, is about one-fourth of Russia's — meaning those casualties have also been devastating.
Not only has the war claimed more Russian soldiers, but Moscow has also suffered around five times more losses in terms of military equipment losses, the study found.
4 Ukraine is estimated to have lost 60,000 to 100,000 soldiers since the war began.
AFP via Getty Images
Since January 2024, the CSIS confirmed that Moscow has lost 1,150 armored fighting vehicles, 3,100 infantry fighting vehicles, 300 self-propelled artillery and 1,900 tanks.
'Russia has lost substantial quantities of equipment across the land, air, and sea domains, highlighting the sharp matériel toll of its attrition campaign,' the analysts wrote.
Russia's losses have been further amplified by how the war has slowed to a grind, with Moscow's soldiers making only 'marginal gains' along the frontlines since the start of 2024, according to the CSIS.
4 Ukraine has been able to utilize is arms well enough to keep their casualties and equipment losses at a fraction of what Moscow is losing.
REUTERS
While Moscow is estimated to be occupying 20% of Ukraine, its troops have found trouble advancing further in the face of Kyiv's defenses.
In most areas along the frontlines, analysts found that Moscow is only advancing a few hundred feet per day, a rate that is 'remarkably slow' compared to the first year of the invasion.
While Russia and Ukraine do not publicly announce their losses, the CSIS's estimates fall in line with the figures produced by other experts in the US and UK.
The report comes after Moscow suffered its latest high-level loss over the weekend during Ukraine's Operation Spider Web' attack on Russian air bases.
The attack saw Kyiv deploy 117 drones to attack five Russian military bases, striking 41 Russian warplanes and causing an eye-watering $7 billion in damage, Ukrainian officials said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Latest Escalation Between Russia and Ukraine Isn't Changing the Course of the War
The empire strikes back. Last week, Ukrainian spies destroyed a large chunk of Russia's fearsome nuclear bomber fleet using small, smuggled drones. On Friday, Russia retaliated with some of the largest air raids against Ukraine to date. The Russian air raids killed eight Ukrainians and wounded 46. They also sent the message that, as Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday, the current round of peace talks is over. On the whole, however, neither the Ukrainian guerrilla operation nor the old-fashioned Russian retaliation changed the course of the war. Russia has a slight, but not decisive, advantage. Russian forces have been gaining ground in Ukraine at a slow rate and high cost. Although they have continued to suffer from manpower shortages, Ukrainian forces have managed to inflict greater losses on the Russian side. The human butchery on the front lines can continue for the time being. Of course, the attack on the Russian nuclear bomber fleet matters a lot for the global balance of power. And Ukraine has grown quite bold at attacking Russian interests outside of Ukraine. Ukrainian operatives have reportedly blown up the Nord Stream pipeline in the Baltic Sea, captured Russian mercenaries in Sudan, enabled Tuareg rebels to kill dozens more Russian mercenaries in Mali, and trained Syrian rebels to use drones against the former government of Bashar Assad, a Russian ally. Rather than changing the balance of forces on the battlefield, these moves serve two psychological purposes. On one hand, they blunt Putin's confidence that he can simply wait Ukraine out. U.S. President Donald Trump reportedly told European leaders last month that Putin doesn't want to end the war because he believes Russia is winning. On the other hand, Ukrainian operations help demonstrate Ukraine's usefulness to its foreign backers. Even more than having to justify the financial cost of U.S. aid, over $128 billion in total, Ukraine has to compete for scarce physical resources with other theaters of war. (Late last month, the U.S. military decided to move anti-drone proximity fuzes from Ukraine to American forces in the Middle East.) And Trump has made no secret of his belief that Ukraine is a freeloader that doesn't "have the cards." After the drone attack, Ukrainian spokespeople bragged that they do, in fact, hold "the cards." The Trump administration was reportedly very impressed by the "badass" Ukrainian attack. As one White House adviser told Axios, "you've got a chihuahua inflicting some real damage on a much bigger dog." Feats of reckless defiance might prove more effective than the half-baked scheme to market Ukraine's non-existent mineral wealth to Trump. Many political figures have misread Trump as someone who enjoys flattery. But he does not necessarily respect those who grovel before him, whether it's domestic politicians or allied heads of state, and he does enjoy winning over adversaries. Congress is also getting ready to impose new economic sanctions on Russia, something that Trump has threatened to do over the past few months. The Wall Street Journal reports that the White House is fighting to "water down" the legislation, but the dispute seems to be more about keeping the president's options open to lifting sanctions than the strength of the pressure. Unlike in the Middle East, where U.S. enemies are relatively weak and American partners are extremely reliant on U.S. support, the United States does not have an easy "off" switch for the Russian-Ukraine war. Europe provides Ukraine with slightly more aid than the United States. Although U.S. aid to Ukraine has been massive—and irreplaceable in the areas of air defense and intelligence—Ukraine can fight on for quite a while with European support and its own domestic capabilities. "Both sides are suffering before you pull them apart, before they're able to be pulled apart," Trump told reporters at the White House on Tuesday. "You see in hockey, you see it in sports. The referees let them go for a couple of seconds, let them go for a little while before you pull them apart." That's a lot of suffering in the meantime. A recent estimate put overall casualties of the war—which includes both wounded and killed—at 1.2 million troops since 2022. And the United Nations has recorded 45,000 civilian casualties in Ukraine throughout the war. Each of those numbers represents a family torn apart forever. However depressing the situation sounds, the fact that neither side has a clear path to victory means that they will both have to come back to the negotiating table. It's in America's interest for this war to end as quickly as possible, and as other conflicts show, the U.S. can do a lot of good as a distant but powerful mediator. The post The Latest Escalation Between Russia and Ukraine Isn't Changing the Course of the War appeared first on

Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DOGE can access sensitive Social Security records, Supreme Court rules
The Department of Government Efficiency can have unimpeded access to sensitive Social Security records for millions of people, the Supreme Court ruled Friday. The justices granted the Trump administration's emergency request to lift a lower-court order that had blocked a DOGE team assigned to the Social Security Administration from viewing or obtaining personal information in the agency's systems. The court's majority provided no detailed explanation for its ruling, but in a three-paragraph unsigned order, the majority wrote: 'We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work.' The three liberal justices dissented. In a 10-page dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that the decision creates 'grave privacy risks for millions of Americans.' Trump administration lawyers claimed the DOGE team members needed unfettered access to Social Security's data in order to detect and halt fraudulent payments, but a federal judge in Maryland ruled that the breadth of DOGE's access violated federal law and put the data at risk of intentional or unintentional disclosure. The legal fight over DOGE's access to Social Security data is one of several that broke out in the early weeks of Trump's second term as the budget-slashing team overseen by Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk fanned out across the federal government. In response to lawsuits, federal judges also limited DOGE access to sensitive databases at the Treasury and Education departments, as well as the Office of Personnel Management. Some of the restrictions have been eased over time as the Trump administration convinced the judges that adequate safeguards were in place to avoid disclosure of personal information. U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, a Baltimore-based Obama appointee, blocked DOGE's access to Social Security's databases, which include tax and wage reports as well as retirement and disability payments. In her March ruling, she concluded that the access granted to the cost-cutting team violated the Privacy Act because agency officials did not show that it was necessary to include identifying information in order to carry out the search for fraudulent payments. Justice Department lawyers defending the move offered only 'cursory, circular statements' to justify the DOGE team's access, the judge said. However, Solicitor General John Sauer told the Supreme Court that the limits Hollander imposed interfered with President Donald Trump's ability to carry out his 'critically important' agenda to eliminate wasteful spending and update archaic systems at federal agencies. 'Employees charged with modernizing government information systems and routing [sic] out fraud, waste, and abuse in data systems plainly need access to those systems,' Sauer wrote. 'District courts should not be able to wield the Privacy Act to substitute their own view of the government's 'needs' for that of the President and agency heads.' In her dissent Friday, Jackson said the government had presented 'next to nothing' to explain what harm the DOGE operation or the Social Security Administration would suffer if the limits the lower-court ordered remained in place. The Biden-appointed justice also contended that her conservative colleagues were bending the court's usual standards to allow the Trump administration to pursue its favored course of action. 'It seems as if the Court has truly lost its moorings,' Jackson wrote, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. 'The Court is … unfortunately, suggesting that what would be an extraordinary request for everyone else is nothing more than an ordinary day on the docket for this Administration.' Justice Elena Kagan also dissented from the court's order, but did not provide any explanation of her views. Among the projects DOGE staffers were working on at Social Security was one targeting improper payments to dead people. Trump has frequently falsely claimed that large numbers of deceased people receive Social Security checks, including earlier this year during a high-profile address in March to a joint session of Congress. 'One person is listed at 360 years of age … More than 100 years older than our country,' Trump said. 'But we're going to find out where that money is going, and it's not going to be pretty.' Musk also made staggering claims, suggesting in a social media post that 20 million people over 100 years of age were receiving Social Security. However, computer experts said most of the outlandishly implausible ages were the product of a default setting in the 60-year-old COBOL programming language, which interprets incomplete or missing age data as the system's oldest possible date in 1875. Musk's term as a special government employee ended last week with Trump hosting an Oval Office send-off for the tech entrepreneur. While the pair were upbeat and complimentary there, Musk's escalating attacks on Trump's budget bill currently before Congress led to a spectacular flame-out of the relationship in recent days, with Trump threatening to cut government contracts to Musk's businesses and Musk accusing Trump of delaying the release of FBI records that could be embarrassing to him.


Scientific American
38 minutes ago
- Scientific American
The Trump-Musk Fight Could Have Huge Consequences for U.S. Space Programs
For several hours yesterday, an explosively escalating social media confrontation between arguably the world's richest man, Elon Musk, and the world's most powerful, President Donald Trump, shook U.S. spaceflight to its core. The pair had been bosom-buddy allies ever since Musk's fateful endorsement of Trump last July—an event that helped propel Trump to an electoral victory and his second presidential term. But on May 28 Musk announced his departure from his official role overseeing the U.S. DOGE Service. And on May 31 the White House announced that it was withdrawing Trump's nomination of Musk's close associate Jared Isaacman to lead NASA. Musk abruptly went on the attack against the Trump administration, criticizing the budget-busting One Big Beautiful Bill Act, now navigating through Congress, as ' a disgusting abomination.' Things got worse from there as the blowup descended deeper into threats and insults. On June 5 Trump suggested on his own social-media platform, Truth Social, that he could terminate U.S. government contracts with Musk's companies, such as SpaceX and Tesla. Less than an hour later, the conflict suddenly grew more personal, with Musk taking to X, the social media platform he owns, to accuse Trump —without evidence—of being incriminated by as-yet-unreleased government documents related to the illegal activities of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. Musk upped the ante further in follow-up posts in which he endorsed a suggestion for impeaching Trump and, separately, declared in a now deleted post that because of the president's threat, SpaceX 'will begin decommissioning its Dragon spacecraft immediately.' (Some five hours after his decommissioning comment, tempers had apparently cooled enough for Musk to walk back the remark in another X post: 'Ok, we won't decommission Dragon.') Dragon is a crucial workhorse of U.S. human spaceflight. It's the main way NASA's astronauts get to and from the International Space Station (ISS) and also a key component of a contract between NASA and SpaceX to safely deorbit the ISS in 2031. If Dragon were to be no longer be available, NASA would, in the near term, have to rely on either Russian Soyuz vehicles or on Boeing's glitch-plagued Starliner spacecraft for its crew transport—and the space agency's plans for deorbiting the ISS would essentially go back to the drawing board. More broadly, NASA uses SpaceX rockets to launch many of its science missions, and the company is contracted to ferry astronauts to and from the surface of the moon as part of the space agency's Artemis III mission. Trump's and Musk's retaliatory tit for tat also raises the disconcerting possibility of disrupting other SpaceX-centric parts of U.S. space plans, many of which are seen as critical for national security. Thanks to its wildly successful reusable Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets, the company presently provides the vast majority of space launches for the Department of Defense. And SpaceX's constellation of more than 7,000 Starlink communications satellites has become vitally important to war fighters in the ongoing conflict between Russia and U.S.-allied Ukraine. SpaceX is also contracted to build a massive constellation of spy satellites for the DOD and is considered a leading candidate for launching space-based interceptors envisioned as part of Trump's 'Golden Dome' missile-defense plan. Among the avalanche of reactions to the incendiary spectacle unfolding in real time, one of the most extreme was from Trump's influential former adviser Steve Bannon, who called on the president to seize and nationalize SpaceX. And in an interview with the New York Times, Bannon, without evidence, accused Musk, a naturalized U.S. citizen, of being an 'illegal alien' who 'should be deported from the country immediately.' NASA, for its part, attempted to stay above the fray via a carefully worded late-afternoon statement from the space agency's press secretary Bethany Stevens: 'NASA will continue to execute upon the President's vision for the future of space,' Stevens wrote. 'We will continue to work with our industry partners to ensure the President's objectives in space are met.' The response from the stock market was, in its own way, much less muted. SpaceX is not a publicly traded company. But Musk's electric car company Tesla is. And it experienced a massive sell-off at the end of June 5's trading day: Tesla's share price fell down by 14 percent, losing the company a whopping $152 billion of its market value. Today a rumored détente phone conversation between the two men has apparently been called off, and Trump has reportedly said he now intends to sell the Tesla he purchased in March in what was then a gesture of support for Musk. But there are some signs the rift may yet heal: Musk has yet to be deported; SpaceX has not been shut down; Tesla's stock price is surging back from its momentary heavy losses; and it seems NASA astronauts won't be stranded on Earth or on the ISS for the time being. Even so, the entire sordid episode—and the possibility of further messy clashes between Trump and Musk unfolding in public—highlights a fundamental vulnerability at the heart of the nation's deep reliance on SpaceX for access to space. Outsourcing huge swaths of civil and military space programs to a disruptively innovative private company effectively controlled by a single individual certainly has its rewards—but no shortage of risks, too.