July 31, 2025

Institute for the Study of War: Kremlin accused of exaggerating its battlefield gains

The Kremlin is pursuing a multi-pronged informational effort aimed at deterring Western support for Ukraine and undermining European participation in the peace process. The Kremlin has recently been intensifying three rhetorical lines aimed at influencing Western decision-making in the Kremlin’s favor: accusing European states of prolonging the war in Ukraine, levying nuclear threats against Western states, and claiming that Russian victory in Ukraine is inevitable. Kremlin officials, most notably Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov and CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) Kirill Dmitriev, implied that European states seek to prolong the war in Ukraine in an effort to reinject this long-held Russian narrative back into the Western information space to undermine US trust in European governments.[1] The Kremlin often leverages Dmitriev to advocate for Russia’s interests in the West, particularly involving the peace process in Ukraine and sanctions, on English-language platforms and media outlets.[2] Russian Security Council Chairperson Dmitry Medvedev criticized French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on his English-language X (formerly Twitter) account on August 31, regarding France’s and Germany’s involvement in US efforts to end the war in Ukraine.[3] Medvedev claimed that Merz and Macron have “forgotten the lessons” of the Second World War and that “things could end up like they did in 1945 – [Macron and Merz] too may end up being identified by their teeth.” Medvedev is evoking the memory of US atomic bombs to threaten France and Germany for supporting Ukraine in the peace process. Medvedev also claimed that Russian advances are “bad news” for Macron and Merz. These various rhetorical lines seek to bolster the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD)’s recently intensified effort to falsely portray Russian victory in Ukraine as inevitable.[4] The MoD attempted to use large amounts of qualitative data to make claims about Russian advances – data and claims which ISW assesses are inflated.

Russian milbloggers criticized the Russian MoD for exaggerating its battlefield successes. Russian milbloggers heavily criticized Russian Chief of the General Staff Army General Valery Gerasimov’s August 30 claims that Russian forces seized 3,500 square kilometers of territory and 149 settlements since March 2025 and rejected Gerasimov’s claim that Russian forces have seized half of Kupyansk.[5] The milbloggers characterized Gerasimov’s figures as a “very big exaggeration” and asked which elements of the Russian military command structure are feeding false reports to the Russian high command. ISW has observed evidence to assess that Russian forces had gained only roughly 2,346 square kilometers of Ukrainian territory and seized 130 settlements between March 1 and August 30.[6]

The Kremlin is intensifying these information efforts because its territorial gains remain disproportionately limited and slow relative to the high losses incurred. The Ukrainian General Staff reported on August 30 that Russian forces incurred 210,000 personnel casualties in Kharkiv, Luhansk, and Donetsk oblasts from January to August 2025, an average of 26,250 casualties per month.[7] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces suffered a total of 290,000 personnel casualties throughout the entire theater from January to August 2025, an average of 36,250 casualties per month. Russian opposition outlets Meduza and Mediazona reported on August 29 that data from the Russian Register of Inheritance Cases (RND) suggests that at least 93,000 Russian military personnel died in 2024 — almost twice as many as in 2023 (about 50,000), and estimated using a predictive model that at least 56,000 Russian soldiers have died since the start of 2025.[8] Russia’s gains have been largely gradual and creeping for many months, and Russia’s rate of advance is incredibly slow under the norms of modern mechanized warfare.[9] Any assessment of Russia’s battlefield performance and strength must examine both the tempo of advance and the resulting losses to make those gains.

Key Takeaways:

  •  Ukrainian forces advanced near Novopavlivka. Russian forces advanced near Toretsk.
Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.