Is russia winning?
Executive summary
Russia has recently made measurable territorial gains and pressed diplomatic leverage, but it has paid very high human and materiel costs and still faces resilient Ukrainian resistance and persistent Western political and intelligence pressure (see ISW, Reuters, U.K. MoD estimates) [1] [2] [3]. Open-source analysts and Western intelligence say Russia gained hundreds of square miles in recent weeks, while U.K. and U.S. estimates put Russian casualty and equipment losses at very high levels, undercutting any simple “winning” narrative [3] [4] [5].
1. Battlefield picture: incremental gains, not a decisive victory
Multiple trackers and reporting show Russia has increased territorial control in recent months — for example, independent assessments report several hundred square kilometres gained in November — but most analysts describe the fighting as positional and attritional rather than a rapid collapse of Ukrainian lines [5] [1]. The Institute for the Study of War and open-source analysts note Russian forces retain initiative in some sectors but continue to fight costly, grinding offensives rather than delivering a knockout blow [1] [6].
2. Losses and sustainability: heavy costs that weaken the victory claim
Western intelligence and data aggregators document very large Russian equipment and personnel losses: U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency estimates since 2022 include at least 10,000 ground combat vehicles lost and thousands of aircraft, while other tallies report hundreds of thousands of Russian casualties wounded or killed — figures that erode Russia’s long-term sustainability even as it seizes ground [3] [4]. Independent monitors stress Russia is advancing at “high personnel and materiel costs,” an important qualifier when assessing whether gains constitute “winning” [1].
3. Political narrative: Kremlin claims versus independent analysis
The Kremlin’s messaging portrays recent advances as proof of inevitable victory and uses battlefield gains to justify hardline peace terms, but Western analysts and some open-source commentators say Moscow is amplifying modest advances to extract concessions and shape diplomacy [7] [6]. U.S. and European officials continue to frame the conflict as uncertain and warn against assuming an outright Russian win; Russian leaders publicly reject peace plans that do not meet maximal demands [7] [8].
4. Ukrainian resilience and counterpressure remain material
Ukrainian forces continue to defend, counterattack in key sectors such as Kharkiv Oblast and resist in areas like Kupyansk and Pokrovsk, according to ISW and other observers; these actions constrain Russia’s ability to translate local gains into strategic collapse of Ukrainian defense [1] [9]. Open-source analysts and Ukrainian reporting show Ukraine has liberated significant territory in past counteroffensives, demonstrating the front remains contested [6].
5. Civilian cost and strategic effects beyond territory
Civilian casualties and attacks on infrastructure are intensifying: ACLED recorded over 1,900 civilian fatalities from Russian strikes in the first 11 months of 2025, and strike campaigns on energy and transport continue to shape the war’s humanitarian and political dimensions [10]. These wider effects complicate a narrow military “win” metric because strategic success also depends on governance, occupation costs, and international backlash [10].
6. Diplomacy and leverage: battlefield gains as bargaining chips
Moscow is using battlefield progress to harden negotiating positions and reject compromise proposals; Kremlin officials and pro-war commentators say Russia will press its advantages and avoid concessions, making diplomacy contingent on what they portray as continued military progress [7] [6]. Western diplomatic efforts and proposed peace frameworks remain active, and officials warn Russia’s narrative of inevitable victory is part political strategy [7].
7. Competing interpretations and how to weigh them
Sources differ: Russian official statements and pro-Kremlin commentary claim decisive momentum, while ISW, ACLED, BBC and Western intelligence emphasize costly advances, contested front lines, and continued Ukrainian resistance [1] [10] [9] [3]. Analysts who argue Russia is “winning” point to recent territorial gains and political leverage; those who disagree point to the rate of Russian casualties, equipment losses, and continued Ukrainian counteractions [5] [3].
8. Bottom line: “winning” is conditional and multidimensional
Available reporting shows Russia is making important—but limited and costly—gains that improve its bargaining position; those gains do not equate to an uncontested, sustainable victory because of heavy losses, ongoing Ukrainian resistance, and persistent international opposition [1] [3] [10]. Whether Moscow is “winning” depends on the metric: territory gained (yes, recently), human and materiel cost (no, unsustainably high), and long-term political control and legitimacy (not yet determined in available reporting) [5] [4].
Limitations: this analysis relies solely on the provided sources; matters not mentioned in those documents are not evaluated here (for example, detailed internal Russian logistics or classified intelligence assessments not in these sources are not included).