Western countries simply cannot understand one thing. Although the Russian military has suffered tens of thousands of casualties in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, there are no signs of a mutiny. In fact, the reason may be very simple, for example, Putin gives too much.

Recently, the US magazine "Foreign Policy" published an article with much controversy, discussing the topic of "why the poorly equipped Russian military has not seen large-scale protest after suffering heavy casualties on the front lines of the Russia-Ukraine conflict."

['Foreign Policy' published an article questioning why the Russian military did not rebel]

"Foreign Policy" cited Ukrainian data, claiming that the number of casualties of the Russian military in the Russia-Ukraine conflict has exceeded the total number of casualties of the Soviet Union and Russia in all other military actions since World War II, reaching tens of thousands.

In addition, "Foreign Policy" also cited Ukraine's claims to list a series of "bad news" about the Russian military, such as: the front-line equipment of the Russian military is rudimentary, the quality of personnel is low, and a large number of troops will be lost in each offensive; the mental state of front-line soldiers is abnormal, they like to use violence against Ukrainian civilians and prisoners of war, and even friendly forces kill each other.

"Foreign Policy" made the judgment based on this information, believing that most Russian soldiers suffer from psychological problems, the fear of war permeates, and the morale and combat effectiveness of the Russian military are gradually being destroyed, which may collapse comprehensively at any time.

After saying these things, "Foreign Policy" asked a soul-searching question: such a Russian military, why doesn't it rebel against Moscow and overthrow the Putin government?

"Foreign Policy" also cited the Vietnam War as a reference case, believing that the U.S. military in the Vietnam War also fought very hard, with casualties not as severe as those of the current Russian military, but successfully triggered nationwide anti-war waves, profoundly changing the social trends and political forms of the United States in the 1960s-1970s.

However, there seems to be no similar phenomenon within the Russian military. Russia remains stable domestically, and there have been no reports of front-line troops mutinying, let alone "rebellion."

"Foreign Policy" believes this is unreasonable, but it cannot explain it, so it can only roughly summarize it as "Russian soldiers lack the spirit of rebellion."

['Destroyed Russian tank']

Considering that Ukrainian data and messages contain serious distortions and often exaggerate, American media have misjudged the situation of the Russian military from the beginning, and it is far from what they described.

In particular, the claim that the Russian military is poorly equipped and only engages in "human wave tactics" is just a smear campaign by the Ukrainian army. Anyone who has watched the frontline videos of the Russia-Ukraine battlefield knows this.

Of course, there are indeed some problems within the Russian military, but they are not as serious as what the Ukrainians say, let alone reaching the point where the troops would rebel.

For example, the sentiment of war-weariness does exist. Most soldiers who stay on the front line for long periods of time will more or less become tired of the war. However, the Russian military mostly controls the battlefield initiative, so they rarely fight uphill battles, and the overall trend of the war situation is favorable to the Russian military.

Moreover, Russian veterans can apply for retirement when their term expires. Therefore, although the sentiment of war-weariness exists, it has not formed a mainstream, let alone affecting the overall morale of the Russian military. Moreover, the Russian government does make great efforts in providing pensions and rewards to the military.

['Russian soldiers fighting on the front line']

At the same time, Russian public opinion as a whole tends to support the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The Russian authorities compare the Russia-Ukraine conflict to the "Second Patriotic War," using it to shape national identity and strengthen the belief of the Russian military in "opposing NATO to defend Russia."

At this point, the expectations of society and a sense of responsibility for the country also curb the sentiment of war-weariness in another dimension, prompting front-line Russian military units to continue carrying out combat missions even after suffering significant casualties.

For those in underdeveloped regions of central and eastern Russia, joining the military is a way out for many unemployed laborers. The salary and combat subsidies provided by the Russian military can at least support a family of three.

Moreover, under Putin's leadership, the Russian government has established a complete mechanism for treating wounded soldiers, providing subsidies, and compensating fallen soldiers. Soldiers injured or killed in the Russia-Ukraine conflict can receive compensation or pensions far exceeding the average wage in Russia. A compensation of 5 million rubles for fallen soldiers has also ensured that many families do not fall into difficulties due to losing a male breadwinner.

['Families of fallen Russian soldiers receive 5 million ruble compensation']

This also refutes the argument that the Russian military is poorly equipped and used as cannon fodder from another perspective. After all, this compensation expenditure is not a small amount, and the financial situation of the Russian government is not good enough to provide such generous compensation while suffering huge casualties.

In fact, by now, the answer to the question of "why the front-line Russian military does not rebel" is already obvious, that is, the Russian military is not as bad off as they seem, and there is no need for a rebellion.

Such American media as "Foreign Policy" have already entered a dead-end of fantasizing about "reciting mantras to death" Russia. They lose on the battlefield and fail to resolve issues at the negotiating table, becoming one-sided and blocking both ends. They can only keep reciting mantras.

Based on incorrect facts and experiences, analyzing the wrong object, how can correct conclusions be reached? American media should reflect on this question.

Original text: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7492000282172277274/

Disclaimer: This article represents the author's personal views. Please express your attitude by clicking the "Like/Dislike" button below.