(KYIV, UKRAINE) – Leaked casualty figures suggest that an elite Russian special forces brigade has suffered severe losses during the war in Ukraine, losing more than half of its personnel through deaths, injuries, disappearances, and desertions.
The data concerns the 10th Separate Guards Special Purpose Brigade, Military Unit 51532, a Spetsnaz formation under Russia’s military intelligence service. The unit was re established in 2002 from a Soviet era formation that had been transferred to Ukraine following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Since Russia’s full scale invasion in February 2022, the brigade has been deployed mainly on the Kherson front, where fighting around islands and river crossings along the Dnipro River has been intense and prolonged. Russian sources have repeatedly reported high casualties in this area.
The figures were published by the Telegram channel “Don’t Expect Good News”, which said a staff officer had provided detailed lists of those killed, missing, or absent without leave. The information includes individual names and service details.
According to the data, since February 2022 at least 621 soldiers from the brigade have been killed. A further 315 are listed as missing in action, while 169 are recorded as unaccounted for, a category that often indicates desertion.
By the end of 2025, the brigade’s strength had fallen well below its authorised level. Records show that 1,811 personnel were formally assigned to the unit, but only 1,230 were on active duty. At that time, 315 were missing in action, 144 were unaccounted for, 109 were receiving medical treatment, 10 were under arrest, and three were in captivity.
Military analysts say the scale of the losses is unusually high for a special forces formation. Spetsnaz units receive more advanced training and equipment than standard infantry, and their depletion is likely to weaken Russia’s operational capabilities.
The disclosures have also renewed scrutiny of Russia’s reliance on commercial digital platforms for military communications, particularly Telegram and Starlink.
Russian war bloggers say senior commanders have been reluctant to acknowledge how dependent frontline units have become on these services. Public statements by officials suggesting that Telegram plays no major role in military communications have been met with strong criticism online.
Commentators argue that the leadership is unwilling to admit its failure to develop reliable internal communication systems. Official military messengers and the Yamal satellite network are widely regarded as slow and unreliable, lacking essential technical features.
As a result, Telegram has no clear institutional sponsor within the armed forces. Supporting its use would require senior officers to accept responsibility for shortcomings in military communications policy.
Regional authorities, businesses, and security services also depend on Telegram, particularly in border areas where rapid alerts about drone attacks are important. However, there is no unified structure capable of representing these interests at the highest political level.
Analysts note that no senior official in Moscow has been given direct responsibility for coordinating digital governance during wartime. Governors and regional leaders have their own priorities and limited incentives to push for systemic reform.
A former working group on military affairs, which once reported directly to the Russian leader and was chaired by Andrey Turchak, ceased functioning after his departure. Observers say its closure removed one of the few mechanisms for addressing institutional weaknesses.
The communications issue has gained urgency following recent Ukrainian operations in the Zaporizhzhia region, including advances near Orikhiv and other southern directions. Ukrainian forces intensified their attacks in early February after Russian frontline Starlink terminals were reportedly disrupted.
Soon afterwards, Russian authorities imposed new restrictions on the use of Telegram, prompting anger among pro war commentators. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov faced criticism after downplaying the platform’s importance.
Commanders in assault units have said that the loss of real time drone imagery, particularly from commercial quadcopters, has reduced battlefield awareness and slowed decision making. Some units have been forced to revert to basic radio communications similar to those used in 2022.
Russian forces have attempted to compensate by installing temporary wireless links, but specialists say these cannot match the bandwidth or resistance to electronic interference previously provided by Starlink.
Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces reported that they had conducted coordinated strikes on energy, aviation, and communications facilities used by Russian troops. Targets included an electrical substation in occupied Luhansk region, an air base in Crimea, and a data centre in Primorsk.
According to Ukrainian officials, medium range drones with a reach of 100 to 300 kilometres were used in these operations. They said the attacks were intended to weaken Russia’s command, logistics, and information networks.
Ukrainian long range drones also struck an oil refinery more than 1,700 kilometres from the front line, demonstrating growing reach and technical capability.
Meanwhile, attention has also focused on statements by Belarusian ruler Alexander Lukashenko, who was shown publicly reprimanding senior officers and threatening physical fitness tests for generals.
In recorded remarks, he said commanders would be assessed on their physical condition and warned that senior staff would be required to meet the same standards as frontline troops. The comments were widely circulated on social media and interpreted as an attempt to project discipline and control.
