February 27, 2024 - 3:30pm
On Sunday, President Volodymyr Zelensky stated that 31,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed in the war with Russia — the first official announcement concerning Ukrainian troop losses since December of 2022. Many on social media have expressed scepticism about the figure. But what do the facts say?
Zelensky’s 31,000 figure is certainly at odds with other estimates. Earlier today, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu claimed that Ukraine’s losses amount to 444,000 men. Using a 1:3 ratio of killed to wounded, this would equate to 111,000 deaths. Of course, the Russians have an incentive to inflate their enemy’s losses, so we shouldn’t put much stock in Shoigu’s claim.
Yet even the Americans have given figures far higher than Zelensky’s. Last August, officials told the New York Times that “close to 70,000” Ukrainian soldiers had been killed. Now, we don’t know who these specific functionaries were. Although US policy is to “stand with Ukraine”, some officials may privately favour a dovish strategy and therefore have an incentive to overstate Ukraine’s losses when talking to the media.
The 31,000 figure is also inconsistent with other estimates given by the Ukrainian government. Officials have at various points reported the number of daily troop deaths, with figures ranging from “50–100” to “200–500”. Taking the median of the lower bounds (100) and multiplying by the number of days since the war started yields a figure of 73,300 deaths.
Can we do better than unverifiable estimates put out by officialdom?
Yes, actually. An anonymous website called UALosses has been compiling a database of Ukrainian soldiers killed in the war using publicly available information, such as announcements by local authorities and social media posts by relatives. The database currently has 42,152 entries. As evidence of its reliability, Mediazona manually checked a random sample of 400 entries and found that 96% could be verified. The outlet also concluded that the database contains no more than 500 duplicates.
This provides strong evidence that Zelensky’s figure is an underestimate — to the tune of at least 10,000 deaths. In fact, the website states, “as only data that is available online is considered, the real level of losses is estimated to be considerably higher.”
Another database of Ukrainian soldiers killed in the war (compiled by analysts at the pro-Russian Telegram channel Rybar) is available at the website WarTears. It currently has 69,005 entries. However, these cannot be easily verified as the database does not provide external links.
Interestingly, Mediazona, in collaboration with BBC News Russian, has compiled its own database of Russian soldiers killed in the war, which currently has 44,654 entries. Like UALosses, it states that the “the true death toll is undoubtedly higher.” This suggests the two sides may have sustained a similar number of battlefield deaths, which is not wholly implausible in a war of attrition.
Of course, we don’t know how many entries are missing from each database. Political scientist John Mearsheimer has given theoretical reasons to believe that Ukrainian losses are higher. Russia has far more artillery, which accounts for a large share of battlefield deaths in attrition warfare. And although the attackers typically take more casualties, Ukraine has been on the offensive for much of the last 18 months (in Kharkiv, Kherson and then Zaporizhzhia).
Using a completely different method, I obtained an estimate bigger than any of those discussed so far. Last summer, the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology asked Ukrainians whether any of their friends or relatives had died in the war. Of those questioned, 63% said yes. By combining this figure with analogous figures from a YouGov poll that asked people in different countries whether any of their friends or relatives had died of Covid, along with the actual Covid death rates for those countries, I calculated that up to 188,000 Ukrainians may have died (including civilians).
The figure given by Zelensky is also hard to reconcile with widespread reports of “manpower shortages”. In July of 2022, Ukraine’s Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov stated that the armed forces had a strength of 700,000 men. Why would there now be “manpower shortages” if “only” 31,000 had died?
It is unclear how many Ukrainian soldiers have been killed in the war. The true number could be well over 100,000. What we can say is that Zelenksy’s figure of 31,000 is likely to be a substantial underestimate.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeAs a child in Ireland, fifty years ago, there was actually not a lot of difference between the classes. Most so-called “middle-class” people were just working types who’d made good, so there was a certain affinity within society. Today, Ireland is like every other western country, it’s second and third generation middle-class totally divorced from the people beneath them, yet, for some incomprehensible reason, feeling totally at liberty to speak for them and to articulate what they want. Whether they want it or not. Thus, you have the NGOs, all filled with the same university educated non-entities as everywhere else, literally dancing in the street (LITERALLY, not metaphorically) upon the passage of abortion, and screaming for the silencing of anyone who utters a word of dissent under the odious label of “hate speech”. Unfortunately, Ireland is a diseased country, and it’s not much comfort to know that the others are as bad.
I liked the bars, so its not all diseased.
A lot of these NGOs are providing social services that would otherwise be provided directly by the state, e.g. Barnardos, Rehab. But yes, some just exist as taxpayer-funded lobbying outfits… the government lobbying itself, basically. This is the phenomenon of “policy-laundering” that Mary Harrington of this parish has documented very well:
This is utterly corrosive to democracy.
I’ve always voted in elections seeing it as a small way to not accept the status quo but now with these NGO’s dictating policies behind the scenes I wonder if my vote is worth anything st all.
P.S. Thank you for comparing the NGO spend with the health budget.
Don’t give up – In Wales I went to vote at the last (local) election determined to spoil my ballot paper with “none of the above”. It’s the first time I have not voted for the “least- evil”.of the offering. Until the main parties sort themselves out or I stumble over someone worth voting for I shall continue to do the same. I will continue this while telling those who dare knock on my door what I think of them in no uncertain terms. I’m reading “Cynical Theories” by Pluckrose and Lindsay on a ‘know your enemy’ basis. I found it hard going for the first several pages but I’m getting the hang of the first-read. Seems to be extracting-the-urine is a good place to start the fight-back. Onwards and Upwards!
I always vote for whoever is the furthest right. They haven’t a chance of winning, of course, but as protest votes go, it’s about as good as it gets.
Great article. This is the template being followed in many other countries (certainly Scotland). There is also a revolving door between the media, ministerial and Special Advisor roles, to remunerative CEO and Head of Advocacy roles in NGOs. The state also funds the media either directly through the license fee (which is allocated to the “independent” broadcast sector as well as to RTE), or through lavish communications budgets. Many television programs are directly funded by State bodies, and are effectively advertorials. As journalism jobs are poorly paid and insecure, they are really just entry points into political and NGO roles.
Thanks, Conor, that was very informative.
“The National Council of Women has historically been a relatively neutral organisation, but in recent years it has adopted increasingly progressive positions, such as signing a letter asking the Government to no-platform gender critical voices.” Is this NGO trying to erase women?
Great piece
Billions of taxpayer money and philanthrocapital going to change policies and laws and the low IQ half witted goons who work in the sector consider themselves “activists”, making fools of themselves at government sponsored protests
NGOs are jobs prigrammes for half witted UCD Arts graduates
I think this is why their push back against populist politicians is so fierce. They threaten this enormous sector. If you add in universities- which you really should (at least in part) – then it probably doubles in size. Their entire existence relies on taxpayer money – but they act as if they are untouchable. Under normal conditions no politician could defund them because of the noise they’d create. But a populist politician running against the ‘elites’ could and should. Could you see a Donald Trump figure saying ‘screw the entire lot of you – pay for your own programs.’ I could. In fact in the US it is already happening – they are refusing to give loans for certain degree programs in some states.
It seems that the term ‘progressive’ is being massively misused now. Anything that contradicts our values and attitudes is being pushed as the ‘valiant,better way forward’ despite the majority not necessarily supporting it. They used to use that word in the college where I taught to try to bounce us into changes definitely not in our best interests and dubious at best.
It’ll be interesting when Sinn Fein are elected on both sides of the border to seek unification and have to suppress Protestant dissidents in the north, then watching NGOs tie themselves up in knots to support Sinn Féin’s medieval belief system based on religious bigotry and not human rights.
A very interesting article. More attention must be paid to the role of NGOs in all countries. It is quite clear, for example, that Russian funding of German environmental pressure groups was instrumental in shaping that country’s disastrous energy policies.
And the UK’s.
Strange. I made a very innocuous comment about foreign funding of NGOs and my comment was stuck in moderation. Now it has vanished. Not impressed by the moderation system.
I’ve read i another topic that the site had issues yesterday.
It’s yet another example of a lack of courage: you might expect that from the powerless but from the poerful? This smacks of craven cowardice. But that’s hardly new. We have grown men and women, highly intelligent afraid of being ‘canceled’ by ignorant morons.
And all-powerful NATO afraid of backward Russia? Wouldn’t it have been a simple matter for Sweden, Finland and Georgia to threaten NATO membership if Russia invaded Ukraine? Of course they’re considering it now! Too late cowards! And/or to increase their military spending (and all existing NATO countries as well) if the invasion occurred? Theyre doing it now of course. Too late cowards!
And wouldn’t it have been simple for the UN to instruct every member country that borders Russia to mobilise on thier borders eg India, Pakistan, China etc. immediately an invasion occurred. They would at least force Russia to split its forces and give Ukraine a fighting chance! But no! Lily-livered sanctions instead. Pretend sanctions even! Cowards!
Trying to appease rabid tyrants is never hoing to work be they Russian dictators or mad bitches!
The UK isn’t increasing expenditure, and it’s policy to reduce the army to be even more of a token hasn’t been stopped.