To your point here that they don’t seem to be able to effectively, fundamentally change their approach. A better writer than me once described it really well - namely that Fascist and generally corrupt regimes love the aesthetic of militarism, but aren’t able to commit to the disciplines to make it actually work well. They’re bored by less sexy concepts that are CRITICAL to sustained state warfare like industrial efficiency, logistics, banking systems. Since they’re in mafia goon states that protect the leader, theft is expected and they incentivize blind loyalty over competence, systemic corruption limits how good they can ever be at those critical pillars.

Instead, they love army parades, tanks rolling through their capital in crisp order, aircrat fly-bys, drilled march stomping past proud leaders in big hats, with an absurd panopoly of medals hanging off their barrel chests and bloated bellies. Often there are frankly silly videos of their (often shirtless) special forces karate chopping boards, jumping around and doing feats of coordinated athleticism that don’t really translate to effective battlefield tactics. You see this all the time with North Koreans, Belarussians, Middle eastern Arab armies of the 70’s/80s and even the Russian VDV. Prancing around to choreographed pulse-pounding music, leaping through hoops and showcasing their high kicks. That doesn’t really help you seize airfields, avoid drones and flush out trenches. They’re a circus, not a professional army.

But sustained, large scale conflicts requires way more than for-show armies whose real function is internal repression to keep the regmine safe, while also NOT allowing charismatic, capable commanders who could threaten The Leader to emerge. Quite the contradiction. The quality of The Average Fighting Man in a corrupt, authoritarian regime starts low and can never really get that high. Since Power is the organizing principle of these societies, authority flows upwards and those who don’t have it are treated like trash. They get poor training, poor leadership, poorly supplied and supported. Because…the whole point of the society is to hoard power and authority, not delegate it down to be wasted on the low-functioning grunts. THEIR job is to obey orders and die - and they know it. So what’s the incentive for them to train hard and be really effective soldiers? None - so the ones that survive are the ones with the skills to avoid being sent on suicidial assaults. Put simply - they aren’t incentivized to fight that well.

This is a story as old as time, and is why throughout history slave armies almost always lose to citizen armies where the power dynamic is REMOTELY comparable between the two sides. You know, that old saying about an army of sheep led by a lion will beat an army of lions led by sheep. It’s been true since the days of the Greeks - soldiers fight harder for their identity and their freedom than they do to avoid the lash and just for the simple paycheck. Especially when they know their less-than-impressive commanders who don’t give a damn about them, and are ordering them to die are in the rear stealing the best food and lodging for themselves.

Went way off on a tangent there - but to your point - why don’t they seem to learn anything? The Russian army may be capable of evolving Tactically, but with their entire brutalist psyche where the point of power and authority is to hoard it, the quality of the Average Figthing Man trying to just earn a check or avoid punishment can never be anywhere near as high as someone fighting an existential war of surivival and cultural identity in their homeland.