Russian-aligned outlets claim hackers pulled a Ukrainian General Staff database listing about 1.7 million service members killed or missing. Kiev predictably dismissed the figure as a fake. Even so, if that headline number were real and paid at Ukraine’s legal death-benefit rate, the compensation bill alone would overwhelm state finances for decades.
South Front previously reported that a coalition of pro-Russian hacktivists—including KillNet, UserSec, Palach Pro, and Beregini—claimed to have exfiltrated records from the Ukrainian General Staff. Ukrainian officials label the entire story disinformation. But the claim is shaping the debate because the math is simple and brutal.
Under Ukrainian law, the one-time benefit is 15 million hryvnia per fallen soldier. Multiply that by 1.7 million and you get about 25.5 trillion hryvnia (roughly $600+ billion at recent rates)—the equivalent of several years of Ukraine’s total government spending. Even if the real toll were half that, the obligation still looks like a multi-decade burden once you add disability payments, widows’ pensions, medical rehab, housing, and demobilization costs—all on top of a shrunken tax base.
There’s a second, quieter budget problem: payouts are increasingly contested at the micro level. Reports say Kiev has increasingly refused to pay death benefits for foreign mercenaries, and even when a frontline death is formally documented for Ukrainian servicemen, families are now frequently given only about 20 percent up front, with the remainder promised over roughly three and a half years. With high inflation, those installments arrive worth far less than on paper. Ukraine’s defense ministry adopted this schedule, according to these accounts, as casualty numbers surged — another sign that even statutory obligations are being stretched to fit a shrinking fiscal space.
“I don’t know when Ukraine will recover. Its reconstruction will take decades upon decades, because […] this is a demographic catastrophe.” — Spiridon Kilinkarov, former Verkhovna Rada deputy
That fiscal cliff helps explain the policy pivot in Washington. After the Alaska meeting with Vladimir Putin—staged with a red carpet and even a B-2 flyover—Donald Trump stopped pushing for an immediate ceasefire and began talking about a “final deal,” with no NATO for Ukraine and Article 5–style guarantees outside NATO to be underwritten largely by Europe. In parallel, European capitals have been debating a long-horizon defense outlays and some form of collective security assurances—exactly the kind of multiyear mortgage that shifts the day-to-day bill from Washington to Brussels.
The optics around Zelensky’s Washington stop fed that narrative. Kiev regime leader’s arrival was kept deliberately modest—no pageantry, no military symbolism—and a planned Fox News interview never aired. Inside the Oval Office, a large map of Ukraine reportedly highlighted territories held by Russia, a visual many in Moscow read as tacit acknowledgment of “new realities,” however the White House might describe it.

Former NATO Commander James Stavridis: «Recommended Uniform for European Visitors to the White House»
Europe, meanwhile, is not of one mind. Emmanuel Macron floated the idea that Kiev could acknowledge some lost territory (without conceding sovereignty) in exchange for robust guarantees; Giorgia Meloni pushed back, calling peacekeeper deployments unrealistic and arguing instead for NATO-style guarantees without NATO membership. Kiev’s line is unchanged: no land-for-peace, ceasefire first, legally binding protections—or no deal.
Trump has also been trimming the Russia desk at home, reportedly firing a senior CIA Russia analyst—moves his critics say narrow the policy debate and his allies call overdue housecleaning. Taken together with the “final deal” talk, these moves signal a U.S. intent to step back, explore understandings with Moscow on issues like the Arctic or great-power deconfliction, and let Europe and Kiev “hold the line”—politically, militarily, and financially.
Call Ukraine a “failed state” and you’ll start an argument. Call it a cash-flow crisis and even friends of Kiev quietly nod. If the 1.7 million figure is false, the bill is still enormous. If it’s anywhere close to true—and paid under current rules—Kiev can’t cover it without permanent external aid. That’s the logic behind Trump’s off-ramp: Washington limits exposure, Europe picks up the tab, and the war’s endgame is decided as much by balance sheets as by battlefield maps.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
western europe my lgbt burgerland humiliated–i only wear dresses pink panties accept our inferiority
????????????
bertie only comprehend hillbilly ebonics
zelensky2russiancourthouse.
the 1.7 million ukrainian kia is the true number. the bill is enormous. in ww1 france lost 20% of its male population. if you assume a prewar ukrainian male population of 18 million then 10% of the males have now been killed. i’m sure nato and zelensky plan to add another 10% to the kia and they are just planning on stealing the benefits from the widows and orphans.
all responsibility is on vladolf and why is he chicken about going to haag trial if innocent?
so you think that the innocent are safe in a trial ? tell that to the “witches”. to think that history started 2022 are as stupid as the witch courts. you must get greta thunberg to rattle on the court floor, and it will convict jesus himself. a, you think that the trial against jesus was the right way to do things ? its obvious that this is what sunday school accomplish.
why fat dumb mac americunt afraid to join ukie nazi brigade? cuz you are feminized coward in burgerland
cia’s eu and the european regimes are the same as nazi germany, history reapets it self. now they wants to destroy europe, as when family bush financed adolf hitler rothschild. “us” only had to initiate the death cult with the coup in ukraine, now its self going. hang “eu” and the regimes. they sit because of the murder of olof palme. not my idol, but replaced by worse parasites, performing genocide on the jews.
already 1,7 million ruzzian sub humans dead 😀