The War in Ukraine: "official" casualty figures, doubts and... bro-science
This post may come as a bit of a backtrack, as I should have addressed casualty stats for the war in Ukraine in a year-end roundup.
But I do have an explanation--in that I mulled over said “official” stats, as, frankly speaking...
I had my doubts.
Which does not mean that my hunch is right (or any of my hunches, in fact), but they seemed oddly low at that time, and in hindsight, they still do.
And I mean Russian casualty stats released by Ukraine, in fact, which might just trike you as odd.
But yes, likely (or most likely anyway) to no one’s surprise, Yours Truly still has his doubts.
The stats…
So allow me to explain (and be warned, this will be a long post. Official casualty stats regarding the war since the invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, were released in December of last year by a multitude of sources, including the Armed Forces of Ukraine. But the first caveat is that yes, I am going to completely ignore Russian stats provided by Russian sources, as, frankly speaking, none are believable. At all. They are far too low, far too biased, and hey, veracity has never been Russia’s strong point.
The second caveat is that, yes, the first casualty of war is indeed truth.
Now with said caveats out of the way, understand that the so-called official stats I am referring to do vary, but as far as the Armed Forces of Ukraine’s estimates go, they are as follows:
- With regard to Russian casualties, Ukraine estimated a total of 753,370 total casualties, with approximately 198,000 killed. (Although it should be noted that the Ukrainian General Staff had already previously claimed this figure was in the 790,000 range).
- Somewhat surprisingly, Kyiv finally came out with casualty figures for Ukrainian troops, stating that some 370,000 had been wounded, with 43,000 killed, according to a Politico report.
The report did not exactly raise eyebrows, as similar estimates regarding Russian casualties had previously been released by other sources. And the range was approximately the same.
- By July of last year the Economist had put its higher estimate in the same range (although, to be fair, the lower estimate came to just 462,000).
- That said, by Nov. 10, the UK estimate had already placed Russian casualties as coming in at 700,000. Just as had the US.
Now for Ukrainian casualties, although 370,000 wounded with 43,000 killed is no small number, put simply, past stats have been all over the place. Six months ago the New York times estimated that 70,000 Ukrainians had been killed, but only about a third of the current estimate had been wounded. At various times, US officials have come in with higher than the current estimates, and back in November of last year, The Economist put total casualty stats at possibly as high as 500,000 with up to 100,000 of those killed.
But honestly, at least deep in my guts, none of those numbers, Russian or Ukrainian ring completely true.
Scanning headlines…
As longtime readers of The Corners may note, I have been documenting the war since 2022, typically with maps (some of which now have disappeared, due to how I, amateurishly, saved them for the site), battle updates, predictions and a bit of news and politics thrown in. What even longtime readers likely do not know is that there practically has not been a day that I have not scanned military updates, press releases, news reports and blogs in order to stay atop the war. Add to that repeated conversations with refugees and soldiers having returned from the front (sometimes injured), and the anecdotal evidence often seems at odds with published statistics.
Yes, I can hear it now: “This is normal,” (says you). “The traumatized exaggerate. Blogs exaggerate. Everyone has an angle.”
And undoubtedly, this is true. That said, I’ve been around for quite some time, and I’ve followed the region for even longer than I’ve lived in Central Europe (which already comes to three decades). And certain facts regarding Ukraine create skepticism if not doubt. In truth, facts about Ukraine have too often been at the time or even historically covered up, downplayed or outright distorted. This ranges from the full extent of Stalin’s attempted starvation of the entire nation to the massacre of Jews during the Second World War, to the extent of pogroms and cross-border guerilla warfare after the war to the attempt to cover up Chernobyl during the first days of the meltdown nd to what I do fully believe was the intentional under-reporting of total incidence of illness and death following that tragedy.
And on that final point, some of the lowest estimates, yes, did come from the West.
Such as the UN’s estimate in 2006, which came to… 4,000.
That’s right. Four-thousand.
Then there were the Wild East years (and the Viktor Yanukovych years were not the only ones I mean).
So let’s just say that realistic reports out of Ukraine, about Ukraine or even tangential to Ukraine have never quite been the norm.
(And no, I’m not saying the current government is any more about spin than any other government in the West—so before you write me, read the above statement again and calm down).
But I digress.
So back to the point. This being... the headlines and daily reported "facts" regarding the war.
But first yet another caveat. This war (as all wars do) has fluctuated. There have been ebbs and flows. There have been offensives, counteroffensives, lightning operations and grind-it-out campaigns that have left many (if not all of us) wondering just how long Russia… and Ukraine can continue.
But the total casualty figures?
I dunno.
So let me explain (finally) just why I do have my doubts. Jumping back to 2022, it is very, very difficult to remember a single day when estimates of Russian casualties did not exceed 600. And when I consider 2023, likewise, I find it difficult to remember days when Russian casualties came in at less than 900 in a day—and very often they were at least twice that high.
And 2024? Most days—literally almost every day that I checked, Russian casualties were in the 1200 to 1800 range (with most reports highlighting casualties of 1500 a day).
But that’s just of the top of my head. And if we are going to play the skeptic game (and I’m assuming that if you are still reading, you are at least somewhat willing to play nicely), let’s bro-science this out. That's right. I said it.
Bro-science the numbers. Primarily because (as I think you will see), this has also become the norm with regard to the numbers that are currently being handed down.
Bro-science it is…
Now understand that no, I am not (in this case anyway) going to be so arrogant as to claim that my figures are right and the official figures are wrong. Just take the following as an expression of doubt—focusing ironically on Russian casualty figures provided by the West, as these were what initially caught my eye.
Which does bring yet another caveat. The Ukrainian angle would typically be assumed to be that of constant exaggeration of Russian casualties. After all, the more Russians killed and wounded, the more effective the Ukrainian effort will be seen--as theoretically, this would mean the more likely Russia comes to the table to negotiate a treaty (well, knowing Putin, that may not be true, but you get where I am going). So this means that Ukrainians stats should be, if anything, high.
Correct?
Hmmm. Maybe. Maybe not. High daily reports have in the past drawn criticism that Ukraine is indeed exaggerating; that it cannot be trusted, and anything along those lines has the potential to feed into MAGA Republican bases that are opposed to the war. And in fact, fear of fueling further opposition may be the primary guarantor as to why current Ukrainian stats are to be believed.
Yet, ironically, when it comes to total Russian casualties, they still may well be quite under-reported.
First, Russia is not transparent. And as good as the SBU has been in the past, I actually do NOT believe it (or even Russia itself) has the ability to fully tally injuries and deaths among Russian army, navy and aviation enlisted men, much less among officers and special forces, private army (the Wagners), GRU and FSB personnel. Throw in foreign “volunteers,” cons and ex-cons, wounded returned to the front and random conscripts, and let's just say it’s a mess.
Add to this a system that takes lying even about corn shipments to phenomenal heights and…
Well, the word "mess" just does not do the system justice.
Then we do have to consider not only front-line news reports of “meat waves” but also Ukrainian military personnel who have been seriously shocked (and here I mean to PTSD) levels by Russian carnage. Tales of zombie waves—of leaving dead on the field of battle to the point that Russian soldiers have had difficult crawling over piles of bodies to advance—have happened far too often to be completely disbelieved.
Sure, it’s anecdotal. We already mentioned that. But speak to Ukrainian vets on the front lines. Any of them. And the uncensored, direct takes will shake you to the core.
But now let’s get into the real bro-science, and maybe I can finally get across from where I’m coming—and just where I’m going with this.
The 2022 invasion began on Feb. 24. This means this chapter of the war (keep in mind that it actually did begin in 2014) has now continued for no less than 1046 days.
This also means that from the beginning of the war Russia would need to average approximately 720 casualties per day to arrive at the current Ukrainian estimate of Russian war casualties en total.
Which is, of course, believable… if only just.
But still it seems low. Here is why:
- According to one of the more reliable organizations reporting on Ukraine early in the war, Media Zone, Ukraine claimed to have killed 45,000 Russians six months into the war. In other words by August of 2022. That estimate may well be high, but it would put total killed at approximately 250 per day. But let’s assume for the moment that they are at least somewhat accurate (and remember, the fighting in the first six months was indeed incredibly vicious).
- If we go by the “official stats” and consider that the number of killed out of total casualties in in the 22 to 25 percent range (roughly speaking, an estimate of total casualties for this period could quite easily be ramped up to 1,000 per day. True, if we are skeptical (and I am), it pays to handicap said numbers. So let’s put them at 150 killed per day with this being 25 percent of the total. This would bring daily casualties in the first six months of the war to approximately to… 600 per day.
Which is about what I remember as the minimum per day for 2022.
But keep in mind that in August of that same year the nightmarish battle of Bakhmut began. And the Ukrainians also launched the wildly successful Kharkhiv counter offensive that left Russian troops scattered in the best cases and obliterated in the worst (for the Russians, obviously). To give a better idea of just how obliterated, Russia’s 144th Guards Motor Rifle division, estimated to have had more than 12,000 troops was at best rendered combat ineffective at this time. At worst (for the Russians) and far more realistic… it was smashed.
And it was not the only one.
This makes it quite difficult to believe that the daily Russian casualty rate truly came in at 600 per day for the year. So let’s divide this up. We will still go conservative and leave the rate at 600 for the 188 days between Feb. 24, 2022 and Aug. 31, 2022 (in other words 112,800 casualties), but we will push this up to 900 (hardly an overreach) for the remaining 122 days of that year (or 109,800 casualties) Which means that by the end of 2022 we would be (theoretically) at 222,600 Russian casualties for 2022 alone. If we use just a 22 percent death rate, this puts total Russian killed by the end of that year at 48,972.
Remember, this is just bro-science, but are those figures believable?
Well, let’s use the battle of Bakhmut as a gauge. Remember that Russian 144th regiment? Which was decimated in 2022. The battle of Bakhmut began in August 2022. That regiment was actually decimated and combat ineffective by… September.
And that was before the suicidal Russian meat waves of November and December.
So yes, those figures could well be on the mark.
Now let’s jump to 2023...
Harking back to the beginning of this exceptionally long blog post, you may remember that my own memory of Russian casualty figures came in at pretty much never less than 900 per day. But in reality, my memory sees this as a very low figure. And again, we’ll use Bakhmut as a measuring stick.
In order to keep this simple, I’m going to simply cite Wikipedia on stats. And here are a few quotes, as early as December 2022 it was estimated that “hundreds of military personnel from both sides ere killed and wounded each day.” No news there. Neither are quotes that compared that period to conditions and frontal attacks undertaken during the First World War. That said Russian losses were considered “disproportionate” and between Jan. 6 and Jan. 31 Ukrainians claimed that 17,000 Russians died at Bakhmut alone.
That’s died. If we use a simple 25 percent stat ratio (bumping it up from 22, as Russians were by now famous for leaving wounded and dying on the field), this means that total casualties on the Russian side would indeed be high indeed—which would put Russian total casualties at 68,000 or approximately a whopping 2,700 per day.
For some this may seem to be heresy. Not for yours truly. (I mean… have you actually seen what is left of Bakhmut). But let’s go further.
On Feb. 24,US general Mark Milley “claimed that the Russians had lost between 1,100 and 1,200 soldiers killed ‘down around’ Bakhmut the previous day alone, a death toll he compared with the battles of Iwo Jima and Shilo. [...]
“Two days later Ukrainian Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov stated that the Russians were losing 500 men killed and another 900 wounded in action every day fighting for Bakhmut,” and on March 20, described the reportedly high Russian casualties as a ‘slaughter fest.’”
More spot checks—in mid March Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy “claimed that another 1,100 Russians had been killed and 1,500 wounded over the past week.” Concurrently, NATO estimated that the Russians were suffering 1,500 casualties per day, mainly from the fighting around Bakhmut
“By May, the US National Security Council Spokesman John Kirby said Russia had suffered more than 20,000 soldiers killed in combat and 80,000 wounded on the Bakhmut front since December 2022. He also said that half of these losses were from the Wagner Group,” which put Bakhmut in Battle of the Bulge territory with regard to comparisons of past wars.
Shortly there after, the Biden administration stated that Russian had suffered more than 100,000 casualties at Bakhmut—a figure that, somewhat oddly, matched claims by the late Russian Wagner commander, Yevgeny Prigozhin, who stated that by late may Wagner had seen 20,000 of its fighters killed. (And if we fall back on the 25 percent stat ratio, that’s 80,000 casualties.
Yet at the same time, former Russian officer (of some infamy, admittedly), Igor Girkin, claimed that Wagner had actually had 40,000 killed in action (15,000 mercs and 25,000 prisoners).
Girkin’s claim, incidentally, does have some logic, considering that practically no prisoners survived that period in the war. Which means this is quite possibly true.
At any rate, Ukraine offered (surprisingly) somewhat lower figures in the form of 81,000 casualties during the battle with 21,000 killed.
In short, these are eye-opening stats. But let's play it conservative and just bro-science a guess-timate of of 1,500 a day in terms of casualties over the first 150 days of 2023. This would come to 225,000 for that period. This is a figure much higher than those posted above for the battle of Bakhmut… unless… Girkin was right. True, this is too many Wagnerites—i.e. 40,000 killed x 4 or a total of 160,000 casualties for Wagnerites alone—which could mean Girkin’s theory was completely off. Or it could mean a much higher fatality rate for Russians in the field.
Which does, actually, make a bit of sense.
At any rate, if we backtrack and work on a 100,000 casualty rate for the first 150 days of 2023 for Bakhmut and it’s immediate surroundings alone, we get into a devilishly believable 666 per day casualty rate for the Russians.
But that is just from Bakhmut.
And Bakhmut was certainly not the only front during the first half of 2023.
For example, what else happened in that same period? In January, fighting “intensified” in Zaporizhzhia, with high casualties. Russia attempted to take the sector surrounding Vuhledar, with that attempt turning into the largest tank battle of the war. This resulted in 130 tanks and armored personnel carries lost and “and entire Russian brigade effectively annihilated, according to the British Ministry of Defense.”
At any rate, my memory of no less than 900 casualties reported per day for the first half of 2023 seems quite likely on the mark. No less. As here an actual average of 1,500 per day feels about right.
Then came June and the ill-fated Ukrainians counter offensive, which saw near suicidal advances (with some gains) across the river in Kherson, at Robotyne, Staromayorske, at Andriivka and Klischiivka south of Bakhmut and attempts to take back ground at Bakhmut itself.
True, defenders (and here Russia was on the defense) do tend to lose less men than do those trying to advance, but still… losses were believed to be heavy on both sides. Sometimes extraordinarily so. Known is that Russia pulled both green troops and special forces away from a buildup in Kupiansk in order to reinforce Robotyne in Zaporizhzhia, for example.
And taking into account that the Ukrainian counter-offensive had burned out by end-October and that soon Russia was back countering the counter… well, you get where I am going.
So back to our overall bro-science estimates. Let's still keep it on the conservative end and go with an average of 1,350 a day for 2023. That may seem high to some, but most days the estimates were in the 1,500 range… so it's a compromise.
So there.
Which would mean 492,750 Russian casualties for that year alone. And using our 25 percent fatality rate, that puts us at… 123,187 Russian killed for the year.
Now lets turn to 2024...
And let’s just say this has been a bloody, bloody year.
But again, we’ll turn to Bakhmut. And Pokrovsk. And beyond.
For 2024 was the year that Russia turned up the heat. Bakhmut became a thing of the past, and now, following endless Russian meat waves (admittedly proceeded by glide bombs) Russia has taken back hard won Ukrainian 2023 gains and more—including at the all locations mentioned.
Moreover, Bakhmut is now a distant memory. Russia is now knocking on the door of the entire Pokrovsk line (from Pokrovsk all the way to Kupiansk). It has intermittently attempted to reinvigorate its offensive in Kharkiv and it has also pushed hard south of Pokrovsk and is once again making gains even in Zaporizhzhia. Meanwhile, Ukraine launched not only the Kursk counteroffensive, but also counters within counters while refusing to abandon Kursk despite increasing Russian pressure.
To give an idea of just how much territory has been gained (and at what cost), have a look at the Donetsk-Pokrovsk front as of July 2024:
This is the current map:
That is a huge amount of territory, gained through meat waves, hard fighting and very significant Russian losses. (And yes, Russia also pushed hard past Bakmut, but was stalled by Ukrainians resistance at Chasiv Yar).
In short, reports (which I seemed to consistently see) of Russian losses in the 2,000-per-day range in 2024 are quite easy to believe.
But once again we will ramp these down to 1,500.
But honestly, if reporting is to be believe at all, I have a hard time understanding how they were less than that.
This however would put Russian losses in the range of 547,500 for the year, with possibly 136,875 killed using our trusty 25 percent of casualty attrition rate.
Which puts our bro-science grand total of Russian losses since Feb. 24, 2024 to Jan. 5, 2025 at: 1,262,850 wounded with a total of 309,035 killed.
Now yes, this is significantly higher than the early December “official” estimate of 753,370 total casualties, with approximately 198,000 killed, but bear the following in mind:
- This is ALL bro-science. And by that I also mean “official” Ukrainian, UK, US, NATO estimates… the lot. They have changed repeatedly, and day after day after day they have appeared often to have been simply, at best, illogical, and at worst, pulled out of a hat.
- Note that according to the official rates, Russian fatalities have actually come in higher than I estimated—at 26 percent.
- Just have a look at what is left of cities such as Bakhmut or Robotyne—or even tiny contested villages, such as Synkivka or Andriivka south of Bakhmut or the like.
- And finally, let’s be realistic. Ukraine does want to show that it is killing Russians, but posting the kinds of numbers I’ve mentioned are… scary. They could be deemed too stark and frightening by Old EU governments, as such numbers do indicate real commitment by Russian not only to taking back Ukraine, but to… the beginning of World War III. In short, nobody wants reporting in terms of millions. Then there are the MAGA Republicans (including Donald Trump) who do not want the US involved in conflicts of such magnitude (well, at least not outside of the Middle East).
Then again, I’m not actually going to accuse Ukraine of “spin” at this point. As I said earlier in this blog… I’m not convinced even the Russian FSB truly knows the extent of its own casualties (keeping in mind how Russian statistics work). The Ukrainian general staff and the SBU probably has a general idea, but always better to round down.
Way down, in fact.
But hey, this was bro-science to the nth degree. I’m not going to claim I’m right.
Only, it makes me wonder.
About the true extent of Ukrainian casualties.
And pray…
That somehow it’s not all as bad as I might think.
Preston Smith is a licensed investigator based in Gdansk, Poland. He can be reached at query@cddi.pl.
Maps, courtesy of Deepstate UA.
Photograph of Bakhmut, courtesy of Dpsu.gov.ua, CC BY 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.