Russia has paid an enormous price for its invasion of Ukraine. Yet, it has secured very limited strategic gains and occupied far less territory than anticipated, especially when measured against the scale of human and material losses incurred over nearly four years of war.
Around one million Russian soldiers are estimated to have been killed or wounded in what has increasingly come to resemble a military quagmire, yielding only marginal tactical advantages on the battlefield. For instance, Russia has reportedly seized barely one per cent of Ukrainian territory through this year’s offensives, at the cost of more than 200,000 soldiers killed or wounded.
Moscow also faces mounting challenges in recruiting fresh volunteers, while war fatigue within Russian society is becoming increasingly visible. The prolonged and grinding nature of operations in Ukraine, coupled with an entrenched battlefield stalemate, has prevented Russia from diverting resources and attention towards the development of advanced technologies. As a result, it risks falling further behind major global competitors such as the United States and China.
With economic stagnation setting in, Russia is becoming acutely aware that the longer the war continues, the further it will lag behind other prominent actors in world politics. President Vladimir Putin had expected that his personal equation with President Donald Trump would tilt peace negotiations in Moscow’s favour, potentially legitimising Russia’s territorial claims over parts of Ukraine. However, the peace initiatives launched by President Trump have so far failed to gain traction, largely due to Ukraine’s resistance. Europe, meanwhile, has stepped in to reinforce Kyiv’s position and counter what it perceives as Russia’s imperial ambitions.
As a result, no substantive progress has been made on territorial or security issues. The core reason lies in the fundamental incompatibility between Russia’s conditions for peace and Ukraine’s requirements for survival as a sovereign state. Moscow’s demands effectively undermine the very guarantees Kyiv considers essential for its independence and long-term security.
Russian Withdrawal Without Tangible Gains Unthinkable
After years of heavy losses in lives and resources, Russia is now compelled to seek an exit strategy that allows President Putin to claim victory through tangible strategic gains. It is difficult to imagine Moscow agreeing to any peace settlement that does not secure concrete territorial or strategic concessions from Ukraine. A related concern driving Russia’s persistence is its desire to avoid being perceived as a declining power. Failure to extract gains from a smaller neighbour such as Ukraine would significantly damage Russia’s image as a formidable global actor.
At the same time, Russia remains unable to achieve decisive military success on Ukrainian territory as long as Kyiv continues to receive arms, ammunition, intelligence, and logistical support from Europe and the United States. President Trump has slowed American military assistance while emphasising diplomatic efforts, creating uncertainty on the battlefield. European countries, for their part, remain reluctant to engage directly in a war against a nuclear-armed power without unequivocal backing from Washington. Russia’s vast nuclear arsenal continues to deter Europe from extending all-out support to Ukraine.
Moscow also leverages its nuclear capabilities and energy resources to weaken European resolve. While sustained and robust American military support could potentially tilt the battlefield in Ukraine’s favour, such an escalation would come at the cost of massive devastation, heavy casualties, and the heightened risk of nuclear confrontation. President Trump, meanwhile, appears keen to secure political credit for brokering an end to this prolonged conflict, possibly as a defining achievement of his presidency and even as a pathway to international recognition.
Nevertheless, Russia is unlikely to accept any peace process unless it is assured of territorial gains in Donbas, Ukraine’s exclusion from future NATO membership, and a role for Moscow in any security guarantees extended to Kyiv. Ukraine, in contrast, is unwilling to surrender territory that Russia does not fully occupy or to permanently forswear NATO membership without strong and credible security assurances.
Given these irreconcilable positions, Russia is likely to keep its forces in Ukraine and continue offensive operations, despite minimal gains and heavy losses. It will persist until it can present some tangible strategic or territorial achievements—both to placate a restless domestic audience and to signal to the international community that it remains a power to be reckoned with.
---
*Senior Lecturer in Political Science, SVM Autonomous College, Jagatsinghpur, Odisha
Comments