Strong analysis—and credit for flagging the accounting caveat instead of just running with the 30%. That caveat is exactly why the revenue side is the firmer signal: spending can be shifted between years, but the receipts can't. Only 8.3 trillion rubles in tax revenue in Q1, held down by the strong ruble and oil sanctions—and any relief from higher oil prices looks temporary.
Unfortunately this article gives the wrong impression about the state of Russia's economic and future. The Russian economy is not degrading noticeably, as the country's military spending is about only 7-8% of GDP, which is equal to or less than the situation in NATO countries. Given that no one is saying the economies of those countries are ready to collapse, and that indeed many western countries are far vulnerable to disruptions in the energy supplies from Russia and Iran (by their own arrogant aggression, no less), the focus should be on how the western elites are driving their own countries into the ground with their continual commitment to the proxy war in Ukraine and subservience to Tel Aviv/Washington's suicide pact.
Omission and misdirection still counts as deception. Observe that Western reporting on military expenditures by NATO countries completely excludes spending on the Ukraine war. This includes dual use items, funding for gas, electricity, and other things needed to prop up the Kiev government, which is completely dependent on Western funding to survive. This amounts to hundreds of billions of dollars of additional spending which needs to be included in 'war spending'. These hidden costs are labeled "emergency supplemental spending", "foreign aid", or "security spending" and such in public media.
Note that the cost of active deployments and maintenance of overseas bases are not included in western baseline defense budgets. Militarized intelligence activities by CIA, MI6, including electronic warfare, are also not included even though the run in the billions of dollars. In addition, for the last two years the Trump administration has farmed its proxy war in the Ukraine to the CIA or privatized groups like Palantir and Hornet Security. The paid use of Starlink and SpaceX is another cost that is classified under civilian, commercial, or space expenditures that needs to be included in war spending. US DOE nuclear weapons programs, coast guard, space programs, veterans' programs, relevant DHS spending, and general debt and interest costs from previous mass conflicts are also hidden costs.
This makes the actual US military spending near 8% of GDP, on par with Russia. One can look at the POGO site (Project on Government Oversight) and Costs of War project for more details. These sites argue that in contrast to the reported $800 billion yearly military spending publicly stated by corporate media, the actual US military spending is $1.5-2.1 trillion dollars a year. This occurs within a context of $30 trillion GDP per year. Note that historically, US military, intelligence, and associated expenditures take up about 50-60% of federal discretionary budget, the thing that Congress votes to spend on each year. The other expenses Congress may not know about or not want the public to know about, given the corrupt cretins they usually are.
For EU NATO countries, one needs to include border security/fortifications, paramilitary funding, auxiliary intelligence, and direct contributions to proxy states like Ukraine just as with the US. This raises spending to 5% of GDP on average. For Russian border states this goes up to 6.5-7.5% . Note that NATO itself recognizes how outdated the narrow focus on core hardware spending is when it ratified a new 5% spending target among EU member countries, whereby that 5% was split between 3.5% basic military spending and 1.5% more peripheral spending on logistics, contributions to proxy states, etc.
In terms of raw numbers, EU NATO spending is $1.12-$1.38 trillion a year. NATO overall is $3.3-4.0 trillion. In contrast, Russia's GDP is $2.66 trillion a year but military spending is $186 billion. This reflects domestically produced armaments rather than purchases from expensive Western sources. Adjusted for purchasing power, Russia's GDP is $7.79 trillion and military spending $545-623 billion a year.
Thus it is deceptive to point to the NATO Secretary General's report on military spending as a guide for judging what is costing who how much in the Ukraine proxy war. The ruling western elites wrongly started a war of aggression against Russia using Ukrainians as sacrificial victims to the cause. They thought they could win easily and when things went south they dug its heels in contrary to the will of their own citizens. No one should need to subscribe to the false western narrative that the Ukraine conflict was a result of impulsive Russian imperialism or delusion by President Putin, whatever else one may think of him. The moral bankruptcy of the western ruling elites and the intellectuals who apologize for them has been on display for a long time, epitomized by its facilitation of the genocide in Gaza and support for the most evil state currently on the planet, namely Israel.
I will think about this more, but for the moment I note the report says the 2025 expenditures are estimated. Second, it is a widely known fact that the GDP of the US and EU countries is over-inflated or deceptive in the sense that those economies are largely financialized, driven by speculation, and rentier capitalism. The products of late stage neoliberal capitalism, of course. The economies of China most of all, and Russia second, are not like that. That would spell very different fates for the former group compared to the latter when it comes to increased military spending and its impact on actual people in those countries.
Strong analysis—and credit for flagging the accounting caveat instead of just running with the 30%. That caveat is exactly why the revenue side is the firmer signal: spending can be shifted between years, but the receipts can't. Only 8.3 trillion rubles in tax revenue in Q1, held down by the strong ruble and oil sanctions—and any relief from higher oil prices looks temporary.
More superb research.
Staggering testimony to the absolute unwavering political commitment to achieving victory
Russia entered 2026 with a plan to spend less on the war. The war had other plans. No breakthrough. No victory.
Unfortunately this article gives the wrong impression about the state of Russia's economic and future. The Russian economy is not degrading noticeably, as the country's military spending is about only 7-8% of GDP, which is equal to or less than the situation in NATO countries. Given that no one is saying the economies of those countries are ready to collapse, and that indeed many western countries are far vulnerable to disruptions in the energy supplies from Russia and Iran (by their own arrogant aggression, no less), the focus should be on how the western elites are driving their own countries into the ground with their continual commitment to the proxy war in Ukraine and subservience to Tel Aviv/Washington's suicide pact.
NATO defense spending is 2.8% of GDP, not 8%.
Source for that?
NATO Annual Report 2025, page 66.
https://www.nato.int/content/dam/nato/webready/documents/publications-and-reports/annual-reports/sgar25-en.pdf
Omission and misdirection still counts as deception. Observe that Western reporting on military expenditures by NATO countries completely excludes spending on the Ukraine war. This includes dual use items, funding for gas, electricity, and other things needed to prop up the Kiev government, which is completely dependent on Western funding to survive. This amounts to hundreds of billions of dollars of additional spending which needs to be included in 'war spending'. These hidden costs are labeled "emergency supplemental spending", "foreign aid", or "security spending" and such in public media.
Note that the cost of active deployments and maintenance of overseas bases are not included in western baseline defense budgets. Militarized intelligence activities by CIA, MI6, including electronic warfare, are also not included even though the run in the billions of dollars. In addition, for the last two years the Trump administration has farmed its proxy war in the Ukraine to the CIA or privatized groups like Palantir and Hornet Security. The paid use of Starlink and SpaceX is another cost that is classified under civilian, commercial, or space expenditures that needs to be included in war spending. US DOE nuclear weapons programs, coast guard, space programs, veterans' programs, relevant DHS spending, and general debt and interest costs from previous mass conflicts are also hidden costs.
This makes the actual US military spending near 8% of GDP, on par with Russia. One can look at the POGO site (Project on Government Oversight) and Costs of War project for more details. These sites argue that in contrast to the reported $800 billion yearly military spending publicly stated by corporate media, the actual US military spending is $1.5-2.1 trillion dollars a year. This occurs within a context of $30 trillion GDP per year. Note that historically, US military, intelligence, and associated expenditures take up about 50-60% of federal discretionary budget, the thing that Congress votes to spend on each year. The other expenses Congress may not know about or not want the public to know about, given the corrupt cretins they usually are.
For EU NATO countries, one needs to include border security/fortifications, paramilitary funding, auxiliary intelligence, and direct contributions to proxy states like Ukraine just as with the US. This raises spending to 5% of GDP on average. For Russian border states this goes up to 6.5-7.5% . Note that NATO itself recognizes how outdated the narrow focus on core hardware spending is when it ratified a new 5% spending target among EU member countries, whereby that 5% was split between 3.5% basic military spending and 1.5% more peripheral spending on logistics, contributions to proxy states, etc.
In terms of raw numbers, EU NATO spending is $1.12-$1.38 trillion a year. NATO overall is $3.3-4.0 trillion. In contrast, Russia's GDP is $2.66 trillion a year but military spending is $186 billion. This reflects domestically produced armaments rather than purchases from expensive Western sources. Adjusted for purchasing power, Russia's GDP is $7.79 trillion and military spending $545-623 billion a year.
Thus it is deceptive to point to the NATO Secretary General's report on military spending as a guide for judging what is costing who how much in the Ukraine proxy war. The ruling western elites wrongly started a war of aggression against Russia using Ukrainians as sacrificial victims to the cause. They thought they could win easily and when things went south they dug its heels in contrary to the will of their own citizens. No one should need to subscribe to the false western narrative that the Ukraine conflict was a result of impulsive Russian imperialism or delusion by President Putin, whatever else one may think of him. The moral bankruptcy of the western ruling elites and the intellectuals who apologize for them has been on display for a long time, epitomized by its facilitation of the genocide in Gaza and support for the most evil state currently on the planet, namely Israel.
I will think about this more, but for the moment I note the report says the 2025 expenditures are estimated. Second, it is a widely known fact that the GDP of the US and EU countries is over-inflated or deceptive in the sense that those economies are largely financialized, driven by speculation, and rentier capitalism. The products of late stage neoliberal capitalism, of course. The economies of China most of all, and Russia second, are not like that. That would spell very different fates for the former group compared to the latter when it comes to increased military spending and its impact on actual people in those countries.