Category World News

Russian mortality rates on the front lines are rising to levels that cannot be sustained by the current method of voluntary recruitment, Ukrainian figures suggest.

“In December, 35,000 occupiers were eliminated – and this has been confirmed with video footage,” said Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a Monday evening address. “In November, there were 30,000, and in October, 26,000 eliminated occupiers.”

Ukrainian commander-in-chief Oleksandr Syrskii echoed that analysis.

“The enemy lost over 33,000 personnel [in December]. This figure includes only confirmed video cases, but the actual losses of the occupiers are greater,” he wrote on the Telegram messaging service.

That, he said, made December 2025, “the first month when the unmanned systems units of the Ukrainian Defence Forces neutralised approximately as many servicemen of the occupying army as Russia conscripted in a month”.

Russia has kept regular conscripts out of its war in Ukraine, recruiting volunteers on a contract basis to fight in its “special military operation”.

On December 27, Ukrainian military intelligence (GUR) chief Kyrylo Budanov told state broadcaster Suspilne that Russia had reached its quota of 403,000 recruits in 2025 – an average of 33,583 per month, and planned to increase that slightly to 34,083 per month in 2026.

Ukraine’s casualty reports, if accurate, suggest they are no longer sustainable and may force Russia to start using its active reserve.

The Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, observed in November that forward reserve units in Belgorod had begun to receive heavy equipment such as howitzers, thermobaric weapons and all-terrain vehicles.

“Reserve territorial defence units assigned with protecting rear-area critical infrastructure do not require such heavy equipment suited for offensive operations,” the ISW said, adding “Russia is setting conditions to deploy Belgorod Oblast active reservists for combat missions.”

Analysts have said that deploying reservists or conscripts could carry significant political risk for Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has left mainstream Russian society unscathed by his war of aggression.

Ukraine estimates that almost 420,000 Russian troops were killed or wounded last year.

Zelenskyy first noted the rising mortality rate of Russian troops on December 16.

“The increase in these figures is the result of the right decisions. There must be more decisions like these,” he said on Monday.

He was referring to the production of drones, which Ukraine successfully stepped up in 2025 and plans to increase this year.

This, he said, was the main reason why he appointed former First Deputy Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov as defence minister on Friday.

Zelenskyy described Fedorov as “deeply involved in the issues related to the drone line and works very effectively on digitalising public services and processes”.

The president praised departing Defence Minister Denys Shmyal, whom he moved to the energy portfolio, for reaching the production target of 1,000 intercept drones per day by the end of last year.

Russia claims that Ukraine has its own recruitment problems.

“Ordinary Ukrainians are becoming increasingly disillusioned with the actions of the authorities due to the situation at the front,” said Russian commander-in-chief Valery Gerasimov in a year-end report to Putin on December 18.

He said Ukrainian recruitment levels had dropped by half during 2025 to 14,000 in November, and that Ukraine’s prosecutors had opened a total of 160,000 cases against defectors since 2022.

Al Jazeera is unable to verify either Russian or Ukrainian claims.

Russia has not been without success in 2025.

Its average daily rate of advance was 13.24sq km (5.1sq miles) a day, compared with 9.87sq km (3.8sq miles) a day in 2024, said the ISW.

But a monthly breakdown showed an inconsistent pattern of land grabs, rather than a steady increase. Russia’s territorial gains still amounted to 0.8 percent of Ukraine, consisting of villages and fields.

New Russian tactics

Russia has said it aims to capture the rest of Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson, three regions it has, on paper, annexed in their entirety.

To achieve this, Russia has been experimenting with new tactics, using drones to cut Ukrainian supply lines and creating a kill zone as deep as 15km (9 miles) behind the front line.

Russia introduced wired fibre-optic drones impervious to electronic jamming in 2025, and Syrskii credited these for Russia’s ability to capture the city of Siversk in Donetsk during the recent months.

“The Russians have followed our path and created separate drone systems units, which already number 80,000 military personnel,” wrote Syrskii. “In the second stage, in 2026, they plan to double their numbers to 165,500. And by 2030, they aim to reach almost 210,000.”

Russia also shifted tactics a few months ago, from large mechanised assaults that had resulted in huge losses of personnel and equipment, to infiltration tactics using several teams of two soldiers to establish bridgeheads and supply drops before reinforcements arrive.

These tactics enabled it to capture two-thirds of the hotly contested eastern town of Pokrovsk, in Donetsk, by the end of last year, and roughly half of neighbouring Myrnohrad.

Anticipating the further honing of these tactics, Ukraine has said it is improving the training of new troops.

“We clearly understand what we will have to face in the near future,” wrote Syrskii. “We have set the task of forming special units designed to effectively detect and destroy enemy high-tech drone units, control points, and the crews of the occupiers’ unmanned aerial systems.”

The long-range war

On Monday, the war claimed the first two civilian deaths of the year in Ukraine. A patient was killed when a Russian drone struck a hospital in Kyiv, and a second civilian was killed southwest of the capital.

On the same day, Russia struck heating and electricity plants in the northern city of Kharkiv.

During the first week of the year, Russia launched 789 drones and 10 missiles against Ukrainian cities.

Ukraine shot down 83 percent of the drones and one of the missiles.

Russia sharply increased its packages of long-range aerial attacks against Ukraine shortly after United States President Donald Trump won the November 2024 election.

During 2025, it launched 54,000 long-range attack drones and 1,900 missiles against Ukraine, said the ISW.

Russia introduced an innovation on Sunday, deploying Shahed drones with mounted Man-Portable Air Defence Systems (MANPADS) designed to shoot down drone-hunting aircraft, according to Ukrainian electronic and radio warfare expert Serhiy Beskrestnov.

“I ask the pilots of the army aviation to take note of the emergence of a new threat. They should avoid approaching the Shahed on a head-on course,” Beskrestnov said.

The information war

On December 29, Russia claimed Ukraine had attempted to strike Putin’s residence on the shores of Lake Valdai in Novgorod, and on January 1, its Ministry of Defence said flight data from a downed drone proved this.

The target audience appeared to be US President Donald Trump, whom Putin phoned to give him the news in person.

Despite initially declaring he believed the story was true, Trump on Sunday [January 4] told reporters on Air Force One, “I don’t believe that strike happened.”

On New Year’s Day, Russia claimed Ukraine had deliberately struck a bar in Kherson’s town of Khorly. Ukraine denied the attack.

“We are seeing the Kremlin spreading new falsified information to prepare Russian and foreign audiences for further escalation,” said Ukraine’s Foreign Intelligence Service the following day.

In recent days, leaked recordings and documents have provided the rough outline of a conspiracy to launch an insurgency in the Alawite-dominated coastal region of Syria. Behind the plan are a number of high-level officials of the former regime of Bashar al-Assad living in exile. The leaks reveal the recruitment of fighters within the Alawite community, the movement and storage of weapons, and the transfer of payments to their families.

The revelations come months after an insurrection staged in the coastal region in March led to the deaths of more than 1,000 people, including civilians, government troops and Alawite fighters.

Similar violence erupted again in July in Suwayda, the Druze stronghold in southern Syria where several hundred Druze civilians were killed as government forces tried – unsuccessfully – to restore order after clashes between Sunni tribes and Druze militias.

There have also been sporadic clashes between the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and government forces despite a March 10 agreement to integrate the former into the national army.

Concerns are now growing that minority-dominated regions may be carved out, undermining the establishment of a strong Syrian state or even violating the territorial integrity of the country. Such a development, however, is not inevitable.

The Alawite challenge

While the leaked recordings and documents show that al-Assad regime remnants have not accepted their fate and are planning a comeback in some form, they are far from being successful. Most Alawites, deeply shaken by what they view as abandonment and betrayal by the al-Assad family, seem to have resigned themselves to living under a new authority and are trying to adapt to this reality.

While a small number of die-hard figures may still harbour fantasies of a return to power, possibly through the creation of a coastal enclave, such ambitions remain politically detached from the broader Alawite community.

What shapes Alawite attitudes today are economic deprivation and physical insecurity, not aspirations for secession or restoration of the former regime.

Last month, the response to calls for protests by Ghazal Ghazal, head of the so-called Islamic Alawite Council in Syria and the Diaspora, reflected accumulated grievances rather than realistic political projects.

The dissolution of state institutions, particularly the army and security services, has plunged hundreds of thousands of families into poverty. Even pensioners have gone unpaid for more than a year.

Should violence re-emerge among Alawites, it would be driven by poverty and desperation rather than ideological or political ambition. This situation must be addressed before it erupts into a full hunger mutiny.

The absence of transitional justice further aggravates tensions. It encourages victims of the former regime to seek revenge outside legal frameworks while collective blame directed at Alawites has led to frequent revenge killings in Alawite-dominated areas.  Many Alawites now urge the government to publish a clear list of former regime officials responsible for major crimes, both to individualise accountability and to lift the burden of collective guilt imposed on their community.

Druze and Kurdish resistance

The situation is more complicated in the southwest region of Suwayda, where the local Druze community has categorically refused to allow government forces to enter their territory. Hikmat al-Hijri, a prominent Druze spiritual leader with known ties to Israel, has been suspicious of the new government, and his position hardened after the March massacres in the coastal region of Syria. Over the summer, he was elevated to the position of the sole political authority of the Druze community.

Suwayda has become a de facto autonomous zone after the failure of government forces backed by Sunni tribal fighters to impose control in July. Al-Hijri openly appealed to Israel, whose intervention forced Damascus to retreat.

Since then, he has overseen the creation of a so-called National Guard, led by former regime officers and financed and armed by Israel, while openly advocating for independence.

In the northeast, Damascus also faces a formidable challenge. The SDF has refused to fully implement the March 10 agreement and relinquish the political and military gains it has consolidated over the past decade.

The collapse of the latest round of talks to implement the agreement, held in Damascus on Sunday, sparked tense fighting in and around Kurdish-dominated neighbourhoods of Aleppo, threatening to plunge the country into yet another civil war – this time along ethnic faultlines.

Backed by the United States and enjoying good relations with Israel, the SDF commands a force of roughly 60,000 fighters and runs an autonomous civil administration that governs roughly one-third of the country, including a significant amount of Syria’s natural resources. In effect, the SDF aspires to a status resembling that of the Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq.

Maintaining unity

Dark predictions that Syria would slip back into a civil war have failed to materialise. However, the current situation still poses immense challenges.

Lacking decisive US backing while simultaneously fearing Israeli intervention and coordinated unrest both along the coast and in Suwayda, Damascus possesses little credible leverage to fully unify the country in the near term.

As minorities lack the capacity to challenge the new government and Damascus lacks the power to subjugate them, Syria risks sliding into a prolonged deadlock – one that may ultimately solidify into de facto partition.

Israel’s recent recognition of Somaliland as a breakaway entity has reinforced fears that it may employ similar tactics in Syria, aiming to weaken the state by promoting fragmentation along sectarian lines.

However, there are also other external powers that have vested interests in a stable and united Syria. Fearing a revival of ISIL (ISIS) and the return of Iranian influence, the US is pressuring both the SDF and the government in Damascus to implement the March 10 agreement. Turkiye is also applying pressure on the SDF to soften its position and agree to the terms of integration. Ankara has threatened to use military force to abort any attempt by Kurdish forces to break away from Syria.

Aiming to facilitate the return of Syrian refugees, many European countries, including Germany and the United Kingdom, have also put their weight behind efforts to stabilise Syria. The recent joint UK-French strike against ISIL targets in Syria following a wave of attacks by the US in December further demonstrates Paris’s and London’s interest in ensuring stability and security.

Yet, the government of President Ahmed al-Sharaa cannot rely on external support alone to maintain Syria’s unity and territorial integrity. Initiating an inclusive political process, forming a unity government and convening a national dialogue conference to draft a new constitution with broad participation from Syria’s political, ethnic and sectarian components can help win more support in Syria’s troubled regions.

The initiation of a transnational justice track along with national reconciliation would also help heal the wounds of the past 14 years. Some conciliatory gestures towards minorities on the coast and in Suwayda and the northeast would also help. Yet all these measures will have little impact if they are not accompanied by the right economic policies especially designed to address dire poverty and staggering unemployment.

Taken together, these policies would certainly help Damascus abort Israel’s wicked plans for Syria and maintain unity.

The United States blatantly announced its plan to sell massive advanced weapons to China’s Taiwan region in December 2025. It grossly violated the one-China principle and the three China-US joint communiques, infringed on China’s sovereignty, security and territorial integrity, and undermined peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. China strongly deplores and firmly opposes this, and has taken a series of necessary measures to safeguard China’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The Taiwan question is entirely China’s internal affair. There is but one China in the world, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory, and the government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China. This has been clearly recognised by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971.

Taiwan’s restoration to China is a victorious outcome of World War II and an integral part of the post-war international order. A series of instruments with legal effect under international law, including the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, have all affirmed China’s sovereignty over Taiwan.

Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, 183 countries have established diplomatic relations with China on the basis of the one-China principle. The one-China principle is a universal consensus of the international community and a basic norm in international relations.

The US’s massive arms sales to China’s Taiwan region grossly interfere in China’s internal affairs. The US side pledged in the August 17 communique, which China and the US jointly issued in 1982, that it does not seek to carry out a long-term policy of arms sales to Taiwan, that its arms sales to Taiwan will not exceed, either in qualitative or in quantitative terms, the level of those supplied in recent years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and China, and that it intends gradually to reduce its sale of arms to Taiwan, leading, over a period of time, to a final resolution.

However, the US has not been faithfully implementing the one-China principle and stipulations in the three China-US joint communiques, especially the August 17 communique, over the past 40 years. There have been more frequent open military interactions between the US and Taiwan, and the size and performance of arms sold by the US to Taiwan have kept increasing. It gravely undermines China’s sovereignty and security, while emboldening the “Taiwan independence” separatist forces.

Resolving the Taiwan question is a matter for the Chinese and must be decided by the Chinese ourselves. History and practice have repeatedly proved that the one-China principle is what underpins peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. When the one-China principle is fully recognised and earnestly followed, the Taiwan Strait would remain calm and tranquil. However, when the one-China principle is wilfully challenged or even sabotaged, there would be dark clouds or even violent storms across the Taiwan Strait.

The root cause of the tensions across the Taiwan Strait is that the Taiwan authorities have kept soliciting US support for “Taiwan independence”, and some people in the US intend to use Taiwan to contain China. It is the US and Taiwan separatist forces, not China, that seek to change the status quo across the Taiwan Strait. The US arms sales to Taiwan made provocations first. China’s response is legitimate, lawful and justified. It is a severe punishment against the “Taiwan independence” separatist forces and a stern warning to external interference forces.

Although the two sides across the Taiwan Strait have yet to be reunified, the fact that the Chinese mainland and Taiwan belong to one and the same China and that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China has never and will not be changed. This is the true status quo in the Taiwan Strait.

To solicit US support to advance their separatist agenda, the DPP (Democratic Progressive Party) authorities are turning Taiwan into a powder keg. Their massive and desperate arms purchase further reveals their true nature as provocateurs, saboteurs of peace and warmongers. External forces who try to arm Taiwan to contain China will only embolden the separatists and push the Taiwan Strait closer to the peril of armed conflict.

The Taiwan question is at the core of China’s core interests, and is a red line that must not be crossed. China will take all measures necessary to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity. No matter how many advanced weapons are sold to Taiwan, this will not reverse the inevitability of China’s reunification. Anyone who crosses the line or makes provocations on the question will be met with China’s firm response. All attempts to hold back China’s reunification will invariably fail.