>>12259892If they classify species similarly, probably. The broadstrokes definition of subspecies is geographic isolation leading to particular morphological traits. In contrast, breeds like dogs are morphological differences in domestic populations or not isolated from one another, which makes sense with them being bred and not naturally evolved. So looking at the long term history of humankind and how populations migrated, became isolated from one another, then developed particular traits, it makes sense to characterize races as subspecies. Ethnic groups within racial groups are more akin to breeds.
Terminology for humans is different because there are uncomfortable implications with animal taxonomy. Even if we're talking about dog breeds where there is very minute genetic difference between breeds, there is distinct disposition, behavior, intelligence, AND appearance. But with humans we pretend it's just superficial appearance.
