Donald Trump declared this week that Ukraine could ‘win back all its land’ from Russia if it had the right support.
The bold claim, made at the UN General Assembly on Tuesday, has left many critics questioning how Kyiv could possibly achieve such a sweeping victory after more than three years of war.
The US president said: ‘With time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original borders from where this war started, is very much an option.’ He also claimed that Russia’s economy was in trouble and said Putin had been ‘fighting aimlessly.’
However, on Wednesday, the Kremlin hit back at the statement, saying that Russia’s economy fully satisfied the needs of its army, and it was a big mistake to believe Ukraine could reclaim any lost territory.
Trump’s position marks a major shift from his previous assertions that Ukraine would have to concede land. It has sparked debate over whether Kyiv has the military muscle and resources to achieve such a goal.
Colonel Philip Ingram, a former British Army officer and intelligence expert, told Daily Mail that although Ukraine faces ‘a mammoth task’ in trying to reclaim its occupied territory, there is still a path forward.
‘From a pure military perspective, it would be very difficult for the Ukrainians to use their military to push the Russians out,’ he said ‘But from a wider operational perspective, where you bring in the geopolitical aspect of it, there is a realistic possibility, but it will take a long time.
‘It will rely on the Russian ability to continue to support its tactical operations, collapsing. The Ukrainians are having a lot of success in destroying Russia’s oil and gas industries, which is helping to fund its war.
‘The more the Ukrainians destroy, the less ability Russia has to manufacture the arms and ammunition they need to support the tactical fighting in the east. They could be put into a position where they are in danger of parts of their front collapsing.’
Russia and Ukraine are still locked in a brutal conflict more than three years after Vladimir Putin launched his full-scale invasion.
Behind the headlines of daily battles lies a much bigger story, one of manpower, machines, and money.
Russia still occupies about 19 per cent of Ukraine, with around 3.5million Ukrainians living under occupation. Putin currently controls Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Luhansk, and Donetsk. His forces seized and annexed Crimea in March 2014.
Russia has fortified much of the territory it holds with vast trench networks, anti-tank ditches, ‘dragon’s teeth’ barriers and minefields described by the UK Ministry of Defence as among the densest in the world.
On the battlefield, Ukraine continues to resist ferocious Russian assaults and launch counter-strikes of its own.
When the war is stripped down to the hard numbers, a comparison of the two militaries’ manpower, defence spending, air power, armoured strength, and naval forces reveals that the gap between them is glaring.
It also considers the staggering losses both sides have suffered. Taken together, these factors give a clearer picture of the scale of the challenge Ukraine faces in trying to reclaim occupied land.
As it stands, Russia holds a clear edge in sheer manpower – analysts list its active military personnel at about 1.32 million, while Ukraine has around 900,000.
That gives Moscow nearly half a million more soldiers it can put into uniform at any given moment.
This means Russia has a greater capacity to rotate units, keep fresh troops in reserve, and absorb casualties without immediately weakening its front line.
Ukraine’s figure of 900,000 is still huge for a country of its size, and it reflects the national mobilisation that followed the invasion.
Russia’s reserve personnel tally is at 2,000,000. That’s 800,000 more than Ukraine’s 1,200,000. North Korea has also sent about 11,000 troops to Russia to fight in the war.
According to assessments, these soldiers were trained in eastern Russia and were later integrated into Russian units under Moscow’s command.
But the bottom line is that Kyiv cannot match Moscow man for man, and that imbalance shapes the way the war is fought.
According to Col Ingram: ‘The Ukrainians are having difficulties in recruiting individuals, but that’s because the government has put some limits on where they’ll go from an age perspective. Russia is having equal difficulties in recruiting, but Russia is a much larger country. And Putin is in a position to force people into the military.
‘Manpower is one thing that will be an Achilles heel on both sides. Putin can generate lots more people to go into his meat grinder than Zelensky can. But at some stage, there will be some dissatisfaction with what’s happening, and that’s one thing that Putin fears more than anything.’
Losses have been devastating on both sides – according to estimates, Russia has suffered more than one million casualties since the start of the war. Ukraine’s losses are also severe, with more than 400,000 casualties recorded over the same period.
Russia’s ability to draw on a larger population and a bigger pool of reservists has allowed it to replace many of its losses, even if the quality of new recruits is often questioned.
Ukraine, with a smaller population, has been forced to rely on repeated rounds of mobilisation, and every fresh call-up has become more politically sensitive.
Many of the casualties have come during grinding assaults or costly counter-offensives.
Russia, for its part, has seen entire units destroyed in failed attacks around places like Avdiivka. In that onslaught, Russia is said to have suffered 30,000 casualties.
Meanwhile, in the battle of Bakhmut, some Ukrainian units lost over 80 per cent of their soldiers, according to media reports.
These losses are made even harder to bear by the vast network of Russian fortifications, which experts have said will make the reclaiming of any lands extremely difficult.
Col Ingram said: ‘No defences are impenetrable, but the Russian defensive lines are probably the most extensive we have ever seen in any conflict. The Ukrainians do not currently have the ability to punch through them with force.
‘To have a proper effect against these defences, the Ukrainians would need heavy armoured engineering capabilities with a lot of heavy artillery support. But most of all, they would need what is called local air superiority. They don’t have enough aircraft to be able to provide that.’
Defence budgets tell us what each side is prepared to spend on sustaining and modernising their militaries.
Russia’s official defence budget is listed at about $126billion while Ukraine’s is around $53.7billion – meaning Moscow spends more than twice as much as Kyiv.
In practice, the difference is even larger because Russia’s economy is bigger and more resources can be channelled into defence industries, even under sanctions.
Ukraine’s budget figure includes not only what it raises at home, but also what it can add thanks to foreign aid, loans, and emergency spending.
Without billions of dollars and euros from allies, Ukraine could not hope to sustain such an effort.
While Moscow can produce its own shells, missiles, and tanks, Ukraine needs a steady stream of shipments from the United States, the European Union, and other partners to keep fighting.
When it comes to warplanes, the difference is staggering. Figures put Russia’s total aircraft inventory, which includes both fixed-wing and rotary, at 4,292. Ukraine is listed with 324, a ratio of more than 13 to one.
Russia’s air force includes modern fighters like the Su-35 and Su-30, and bombers such as the Tu-95 and Tu-22M, capable of launching long-range missiles.
Ukraine relies on ageing MiG-29s and Su-27s, though Western F-16 deliveries are expected to improve its airpower gradually.
It allows Moscow to conduct long-range strikes, deploy glide bombs from Su-34s, move supplies by air, and maintain air patrols along the front.
Ukraine has a much smaller fleet, much of it made up of older Soviet models that are difficult to maintain and increasingly hard to replace.
The imbalance in the skies is one reason Ukraine has relied so heavily on air defences, drones, and creative tactics to deny Russia total air superiority.
Kyiv has used Western-supplied systems such as Patriot and NASAMS to protect cities and critical infrastructure, but it cannot match Russia aircraft for aircraft.
Russia strikes with Kh-101 cruise missiles, Iskander-M ballistic missiles, Kalibr sea-launched missiles, and Kh-47M2 Kinzhal.
It drops UMPK glide bombs from Su-34s. Moscow mass-produces Shahed or Geran one-way attack drones inside Russia after partnering with Iran, enabling frequent large-scale swarms since 2023.
Ukraine, meanwhile, has received HIMARS rocket systems, Patriot air defence, and Storm Shadow or SCALP long-range cruise missiles.
Western armour includes Leopard 2, Challenger 2, and Abrams tanks.
Col Ingram said the supply of weapons from the West is essential to Ukraine, tipping the war in its favour.
‘The old Soviet style equipment that Ukraine has is not good enough,’ he said. ‘We have seen how weapons like the F-16s and Western-supplied air defence capabilities are having an increased effect on the battlefield.’
Tanks have been central to the ground war, and here again, Russia has the advantage.
Putin has 5,750 tanks compared to Ukraine’s 1,114. Tanks provide not only firepower but also psychological shock.
Russia’s ability to deploy thousands of tanks, even older models, allows it to mass armour at points along the front and force Ukraine to stretch its defences.
During its Zapad 2025 military drills with Belarus earlier this month, Russia showed off various weapons in its arsenal.
Ukraine’s smaller number means tanks are precious assets, often used in combined arms assaults supported by infantry and artillery.
The loss of even a few modern Western tanks can be a severe blow. Ukraine has had to adapt, turning increasingly to drones, anti-tank guided missiles, and artillery to blunt Russia’s armoured attacks.
The naval balance is just as uneven – Ukraine’s naval strength is at 89 units, while Russia has 419.
Russia’s fleet includes 63 submarines, 83 corvettes, and nine patrol vessels. It also has destroyers and cruisers. Ukraine, on the other hand, has mostly smaller craft and patrol boats.
The destruction of its flagship Moskva in 2022 was a symbolic victory for Ukraine, but it did not erase the underlying imbalance.
Russia can blockade Ukrainian ports, launch missiles from the Black Sea, and maintain a presence in multiple theatres.
Ukraine has responded with ingenuity, using sea drones and long-range missiles to hit Russian ships in port and at sea.
Even so, the raw numbers underline Russia’s enduring dominance in naval strength.
But despite all this, Col Ingram indicated Ukraine’s most essential advantage is that it is fighting a war of ‘national survival’.
He said: ‘In military terms, this is what is called the moral component of fighting power. That brings with it resolve, and it is associated with a military capability that is difficult to measure in scientific terms. The Russians do not have that.’
The one definitive way Ukraine can win the war, he said, is to hit Russia’s economy, so it won’t be able to keep funding the war.
‘The only way to force Putin’s hand would be to stop Russia’s ability to export its oil and gas products overseas,’ he said. There needs to be secondary sanctions against China and India, and other countries buying from Russia.
Donald Trump’s remark that Ukraine could ‘win back all its land’ speaks to the hopes of millions of Ukrainians who want to see their homes freed from occupation.
It also sets a high bar against the hard facts of this war. Russia has more men, more machines and more money, and its defence industry has been grinding out weapons at scale for more than three years.
Ukraine, by contrast, is fighting from a position of numerical disadvantage.
However, the country has shown that determination, training, Western support, and innovation can offset some of the imbalance.
It has inflicted heavy losses on Russian armour, defended its skies with advanced air defences, and even taken the fight to Russia’s navy with drones and missile strikes.
Still, the raw figures explain why the war is grinding and costly. For every Ukrainian breakthrough, Russia can feed in more troops and machines.
Russia has five more tanks in its inventory for each one Ukraine loses. And for every jet Ukraine struggles to repair, Russia has a dozen more in reserve.
