(Actually) Russia is at it's Most Fragile, Right Now
By Benjamin Cook
The European military logistics and capability required to penetrate Russian lines and send them into chaos isn’t big. It’s the requirement for ‘leadership’ - which is immense. Remember, the EU (1993) is a post-Soviet (1991) organization built to foster compromise, not leadership and determination.
Russia's position in its ongoing war in Ukraine exhibits significant fragility across multiple critical dimensions, including severe military setbacks, deepening economic pressures, worsening demographic crisis, and unsustainable equipment losses. Despite evidence of Russian resilience—such as limited economic adaptation and persistent territorial control—these strengths are increasingly overshadowed by systemic vulnerabilities. A modestly sized but well-organized military coalition could exploit Russia's thinly stretched lines, triggering a prolonged military crisis. Recent history has repeatedly shown Russia's weaknesses in responding swiftly and effectively to unexpected offensives or deep penetrations of its defensive lines.
I. Military Setbacks
● Stalled Advances: Recent reports indicate Russian military progress has dramatically slowed. In early 2025, Russian forces required nearly six days to conquer an area equivalent to Manhattan, a significant deceleration due to increased casualties, recruitment challenges, and logistical issues. (The Times, 2025) Gen Ben Hodges has pointed out many times that in March of last year Russia was only 60 miles outside of Pokrovsk. A year later they are not inside Pokrovsk.
● Equipment and Manpower Constraints: Analysts emphasize Russia’s incremental gains have come at immense costs, highlighting severe constraints in equipment and personnel. (The Times, 2025)
● Reliance on Civilian Vehicles: Due to substantial losses of military hardware—over 20,000 units since February 2022—Russian troops increasingly resort to civilian vehicles on the front lines, underscoring critical shortages. (The Insider, 2024) There are areas of the zero-line where all of the Russian military vehicles around are burned and destroyed. The only operational vehicles are civilian.
● Equipment Churn vs. Production: Russia struggles significantly to replenish military hardware, losing equipment faster than it can be repaired or manufactured. For example, annual production of infantry fighting vehicles (around 200 units per year) and limited artillery production facilities starkly contrast against thousands lost on the battlefield. (Institute for the Study of War, 2024)
II. Economic Strains
● Impact of High Interest Rates: Russia's central bank maintains a high benchmark interest rate of 21% to combat inflation. This strategy, while stabilizing the currency, has increased borrowing costs, spurring a 20% rise in corporate bankruptcies and exacerbating liquidity shortages across multiple sectors. (The Moscow Times, 2024; Reuters, 2025)
● Decline in Entrepreneurship: The ongoing war and economic downturn have resulted in Russia losing approximately 1.4 million small and medium enterprises (42%) over five years. This reduction significantly weakens long-term economic prospects. (Arxiv, 2023)
III. Demographic Crisis
● Population Decline Accelerated by War: Russia’s demographic issues, characterized by declining birth rates and an aging population, have sharply worsened due to heavy military casualties. Estimates suggest Russia may lose up to 1.8 million troops to achieve its strategic goals in Ukraine, disproportionately affecting the working-age male population. (Wikipedia, 2024)
● Impact on Future Generations: The ongoing conflict, casualties, and resulting economic uncertainties further depress birth rates, intensify emigration, and threaten long-term economic stability.
IV. Internal Dissent and Social Stability
● Emergence of Opposition Movements: Internal dissent grows as opposition groups, such as the Freedom of Russia Legion led by Maximilian Andronnikov, actively seek regime change. These groups amplify internal tensions and instability. (The Sun, 2024) Not to mention growing instances of mutiny and desertion at the company level.
● Propaganda and Public Sentiment: The introduction of new school textbooks justifying the invasion reflects government anxiety about internal opposition and reveals ongoing concerns over public loyalty and national morale. (Reuters, 2025)
V. Counterarguments Highlighting Russia's Resilience
● Economic Adaptability: Despite sanctions, Russia’s economy has demonstrated some resilience, largely through trade relations and support from non-Western countries, partially mitigating anticipated economic collapse. (Financial Times, 2025)
● Territorial Control: Russia maintains significant territorial holdings in Ukraine, providing strategic leverage for potential future negotiations and long-term conflict management. (The Times, 2025)
● Military Revitalization Efforts: Russia’s ongoing military reconstitution aims to rebuild capabilities substantially by 2030, reflecting a long-term strategy for continued conflict or deterrence. (Financial Times, 2025)
***
Recap and Analysis:
Even considering Russia's points of resilience, its overall strategic position remains profoundly fragile. A well-coordinated, modest-sized military coalition could effectively penetrate Russian defenses, causing long-term disruptions to its military operations. Europe must urgently confront this reality and significantly upgrade its defensive/offensive capabilities. Yet, European leadership has consistently failed to act decisively, instead relying on American security assurances. (This is not a peacekeeping force I am suggesting. This is a pacification force. Make no mistake, Europeans would be killing Russians in Ukraine.)
While JD Vance’s speech in Munich may have lacked "diplomatic nuance", one of his core arguments holds truth: Europe's strategic vulnerability stems significantly from self-inflicted policy choices. Germany's abandonment of nuclear energy in favor of geopolitically risky and environmentally dirtier energy sources exemplifies how social ideologies have severely compromised Europe's strategic security. Such policies have inadvertently signaled to Russia clear vulnerabilities—effectively serving as a "green light" for aggression. Combined with Europe's chronic underinvestment in defense, these policy missteps have made the continent dangerously dependent and vulnerable. (The entire EU structure is a problem.)
In conclusion, Russia’s position, although superficially resilient in certain respects, is fundamentally fragile. Europe's continued inaction exacerbates these vulnerabilities. It is imperative that Europe demonstrates the leadership and courage required to assume responsibility for its own defense and to mitigate ongoing threats from Russia. It's time for Europe to grow up. Defend itself. No matter what you think of Trump, if Europe is motivated to spend 3% of GDP on defense and comes to Ukraine's DIRECT aid, his ridiculous words and actions will have a positive outcome. The icing on the cake is that he is counting on Europe to fail. Make him wrong.
👤 About the Author
Benjamin Cook travels to, often lives in, and works in Ukraine, a connection spanning more than 14 years. He holds an MA in International Security and Conflict Studies and has consulted with journalists on AI in drones, U.S. military technology, and related topics. He is co-founder of the NGO UAO, working in southern Ukraine. You can find Mr. Cook between Odesa, Ukraine; Charleston, South Carolina; and Tucson, Arizona.
💬 For direct inquiries or collaborations, contact: Contact me on Substack or visit my webpage at www.bpcusc.com /
Direct Support: https://buymeacoffee.com/researchukraine
It makes no sense. Putin would sell out the US. Why do people think he can be trusted? What evidence is there to support Putin as trustworthy?
EU and UK have many weapons that will 'expire' within 24 months of now. they are already paid for.
using them against Russia (within Ukraine or on ONLY military targets in russia) is a no brainer.
why? how could Russia respond in military terms? it has nothing much left to respond with... and the nuclear threat is in reality an empty threat, if they deployed 1 nuke they ( and everyone else) has lost, as, then the NATO countries (not counting trump forces) would set upon Russia en masse with full force.
act now NATO v2