This page collects ISW and CTP's updates on the conflict in Ukraine. In late February 2022, ISW began publishing daily synthetic products covering key events related to renewed Russian aggression against Ukraine. These Ukraine Conflict Updates replaced ISW’s previous “Indicators and Thresholds for Russian Military Operations in Ukraine and/or Belarus,” which we maintained from November 12, 2021, through February 17, 2022.
This page also includes prominent warning alerts that ISW and CTP launched beyond our daily Ukraine Conflict Updates. These products addressed critical inflection points as they occurred.
Click here to view ISW's entire catalogue of Russia-Ukraine interactive maps.
Click here to read about the methodology behind ISW and CTP's mapping of this conflict.
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 25, 2025
Click here to read the full report.
Christina Harward, Nicole Wolkov, Davit Gasparyan, Daria Novikov, George Barros with Nate Trotter
US, Ukrainian, and Russian officials reached some agreements for temporary ceasefires on strikes against energy infrastructure and in the Black Sea. The details of these ceasefires remain unclear and evaluating the ceasefires’ specifics in the absence of officially published joint texts of the agreements signed by Russia and Ukraine remains difficult. The White House issued one readout about the outcomes of the US-Russian talks in Saudi Arabia from March 24 and another about the US-Ukrainian talks from March 25.[1] The Kremlin and Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov each issued separate statements for Russia and Ukraine.[2] The American, Russian, and Ukrainian statements share some commonalities but differ from each other significantly in other regards. The US readouts, the Kremlin readout, and Umerov commonly stated that the United States, Ukraine, and Russia "agreed to develop measures for implementing" US President Donald Trump's, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's, and Russian President Vladimir Putin's "agreement to ban strikes against energy facilities of Russia and Ukraine."[3] Zelensky stated that Ukraine also gave the United States a list of "strategic infrastructure objects" that Ukraine would like protected under a strikes ceasefire.[4] This list is not explicitly mentioned in the US or Russian readouts. The Kremlin later issued a list of Russian and Ukrainian facilities that Russian and American delegations agreed fall under the temporary ceasefire on strikes on the energy system.[5] The Kremlin stated that the list includes oil refineries; oil and gas pipelines and storage facilities, including pumping stations; electricity generation and transmission infrastructure, including power plants, substations, transformers, and distributors; nuclear power plants; and hydroelectric dams. It is unclear if the Russian list of objects is the same list of “strategic infrastructure objects” that Zelensky mentioned. The Kremlin stated that the temporary ceasefire is valid for 30 days starting from March 18, 2025, meaning that the ceasefire will by default expire on April 17, 2025, unless Russia and Ukraine mutually agree to renew it. The Kremlin stated that Russia and Ukraine have the right to consider themselves free from the obligations of the agreement if one of the parties violates the agreement. The mechanisms to monitor and address allegations of violations remain unclear. The Kremlin's list notably only includes energy infrastructure facilities, and it remains unclear whether discussions regarding Zelensky's list of other non-energy facilities that he wants protected under the ceasefire are still ongoing or whether the Kremlin has rejected Zelensky's proposal. Umerov also stated that Ukraine is ready to "ready to organize a separate meeting at the technical level to begin work on implementation mechanisms" for the strikes and Black Sea ceasefires and that "at this point, all parties are going to brief the relevant leadership, and we will announce the dates and times soon."[6] The Kremlin's and Umerov's statements suggest that Russia and Ukraine may not yet be in agreement about whether the ceasefire has gone into effect or not as of March 25.
The US readouts of its bilateral meetings in Saudi Arabia and Umerov noted that the United States, Ukraine, and Russia "agreed to ensure safe navigation, eliminate the use of force, and prevent the use of commercial vessels for military purposes in the Black Sea."[7] The Kremlin readout of the US-Russian talks similarly stated that the United States and Russia agreed to such measures as part of a "Black Sea Initiative," but added that there need to be "appropriate control measures through inspection of such vessels."[8] Umerov uniquely added that all Russian military vessels movement "outside of [the] eastern part of the Black Sea" will constitute a violation of the spirit of this agreement and that Ukraine will regard such movement as a violation of the commitment to ensure the safe navigation of the Black Sea and a threat Ukraine's national security.[9] Umerov stated that Ukraine will be able to exercise its right to self-defense in the event of such violations.
All readouts of the March 23 to 25 bilateral meetings noted that the parties "welcome the good offices of third countries with a view toward supporting the implementation of the energy and maritime agreements" and that all parties "will continue working toward achieving a durable and lasting peace."[10] (Turkey notably helped facilitate the July 2022 grain deal by inspecting commercial vessels transporting foodstuffs in the Black Sea.)[11] The White House and Umerov stated that the United States and Ukraine "agreed that the United States remains committed to helping achieve prisoners of war (POWs) exchanges, the release of civilian detainees, and the return of forcibly transferred Ukrainian children."[12]
Putin continues to reject Trump's and Zelensky's proposed temporary frontline ceasefire, despite agreeing to some form of ceasefire for strikes on energy infrastructure and in the Black Sea. Putin’s persistent stalling and intransigence are inhibiting Trump's efforts to secure a lasting and stable peace settlement. The US readouts for both its meetings with Russian and Ukrainian delegations noted that Trump's "imperative that the killing on both sides" of the war must stop, "as the necessary step toward achieving an enduring peace settlement" — likely in reference to the unconditional 30-day general ceasefire on the frontline that Trump and Zelensky have already agreed upon, but that Putin rejected on March 18.[13]
The Kremlin stated that it will not implement the agreed ceasefire in the Black Sea until the United States lifts sanctions on Russian state-owned agricultural bank Rosselkhozbank and other unspecified financial organizations involved in international food and fertilizer trade.[14] The Kremlin stated that unspecified actors — presumably the United States — must also reconnect Rosselkhozbank and other unspecified financial organizations to SWIFT and lift restrictions on trade finance transactions. Additionally, they must lift sanctions restricting companies producing and exporting food and fertilizers and their insurance companies, lift restrictions on servicing ships in ports and sanctions against ships operating under the Russian flag involved in trading food and fertilizer products, and lift restrictions on supplying agricultural machinery and other tools used in food and fertilizer production to Russia. The United States did not provide Russia such demanded sanctions relief when Ukraine and Russia agreed to the grain deal in July 2022.[15] The White House and Kremlin readouts of the US-Russian meetings noted that the "United States will help restore Russia’s access to the world market for agricultural and fertilizer exports, lower maritime insurance costs, and enhance access to ports and payment systems for such transactions," but the US readout notably did not include explicit language suggesting that Russia‘s acceptance and adherence to the Black Sea ceasefire would be conditional on preliminary US sanctions relief.[16] The United States will likely require European Union (EU) cooperation in order to lift some sanctions and restrictions on Russian agricultural, financial, and trade entities to reconnect Russia to international agricultural and fertilizer markets.[17] US President Donald Trump responded to a question about the United States lifting some sanctions on Russia before Russia implements measures in the Black Sea and stated that the US is considering lifting some sanctions against Russia.[18] Establishing the initial grain deal in July 2022 did not require any sanctions relief, and reinstating the grain deal likely similarly does not require preliminary sanctions relief.[19] Establishing a temporary ceasefire in the Black Sea does not require preliminary sanctions relief.
The Kremlin's official statements are vague, stipulate requirements for the ceasefire that neither the United States nor Ukrainian official statements mention, and leave room for disagreement among the parties that would be involved in interpreting the agreements, lifting sanctions, and monitoring potential violations. The official Kremlin statement is vague on the specific sanctions and restrictions the Kremlin is demanding that the West preliminarily lift and the specific financial organizations and companies involved. The Kremlin statement also does not specify the actors that will interpret the parameters of these restrictions, monitor lifting these restrictions, and verify all parties' compliance. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated that Ukraine, Russia, and the United States issued separate statements because the US-Ukrainian meetings did not discuss US-Russian efforts to assist in restoring Russian access to agricultural and trade markets.[20]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 24, 2025
Click here to read the full report.
Christina Harward, Angelica Evans, Grace Mappes, Olivia Gibson, Daria Novikov, and George Barros with Nate Trotter
March 24, 2025, 5:15pm ET
Note: The data cut-off for this product was 11:15am ET on March 24. ISW will cover subsequent reports in the March 25 Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment.
US and Russian delegations met in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on March 24 following US–Ukrainian talks on March 23 about the details of temporary ceasefires on long-range strikes and in the Black Sea. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated on March 23 that the US–Ukrainian talks are "more technical in nature."[1] Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov stated on March 23 that the US–Ukrainian talks discussed proposals for the safety of energy and infrastructure facilities and that the talks were "productive and focused."[2] A source familiar with the bilateral negotiations in Saudi Arabia told Ukrainian outlet Suspilne that the Russian-US meeting on March 24 will consider the ceasefire agreements that Ukraine agreed to on March 23.[3] The source stated that the discussions focused on moratoriums on strikes against energy facilities and civilian infrastructure and attacks in the Black Sea. Ukrainian Presidential Office Advisor Serhii Leshchenko stated that the US–Ukrainian talks concerned a ceasefire against strikes on Russian "facilities at seas and rivers" and against Ukrainian ports in Kherson, Mykolaiv, and Odesa oblasts.[4] Leshchenko stated that the Ukrainian delegation will hold additional discussions with the US delegation following the US–Russian talks on March 24.[5] Suspilne reported that the US delegation in the US–Russian talks includes State Department Policy Planning Director Michael Anton, US Special Envoy to Ukraine Keith Kellogg, and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and that the Russian delegation includes Russian Federation Council International Affairs Committee Chairperson Grigory Karasin and Advisor to the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) Director Colonel General Sergei Beseda.[6] Saudi Arabian state-owned outlet Al Arabiya reported that US National Security Council member Andrew Peek is also participating in the US delegation in the US–Russian talks.[7] Kremlin wire TASS reported that the US and Russian delegations will release a joint statement on March 25.[8] ISW will report on the details of the various bilateral talks as information becomes available in the coming days.
Ukrainian forces recently advanced in Demidovka along the international border in northwestern Belgorod Oblast amid ongoing Ukrainian attacks in the area. Geolocated footage published on March 24 indicates that Ukrainian forces recently advanced in central Demidovka (northwest of Belgorod City).[9] Russian milbloggers acknowledged that Ukrainian forces advanced into southern Demidovka but denied that Ukrainian forces seized the settlement.[10] Ukrainian forces began limited attacks into northwestern Belgorod Oblast on March 18 and have made marginal advances towards Grafovka (southeast of Demidovka) and Prilesye (south of Demidovka) over the last six days.[11] Russian milbloggers claimed on March 24 that Ukrainian forces also began attacking towards Popovka (west of Demidovka).[12] Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces are operating all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and some armored vehicles and attacking in small infantry groups.[13] Russian sources claimed that Russia redeployed border guards, Chechen Akhmat forces, elements of the Russian Northern Grouping of Forces, and elements of the 155th Naval Infantry Brigade (Pacific Fleet) to respond to the Ukrainian attacks in northwestern Belgorod Oblast.[14] ISW will not offer an assessment of Ukraine's intent behind these attacks at this time.
Ukrainian forces appear to be leveraging long-range strikes to complicate Russian logistics and command and control (C2) in the area. Ukrainian forces recently conducted two strikes on Russian command posts in western Belgorod Oblast, destroying communications equipment.[15] Ukraine's Special Operations Forces (SSO) reported on March 24 that Ukrainian forces downed four Russian helicopters over Belgorod Oblast.[16] Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces recently struck a bridge near Grafovka and another bridge near Nadezhevka (east of Grafovka), likely to complicate Russian logistics in the area.[17] Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian drone strikes, shelling, and HIMARS strikes are also complicating Russian forces' ability to hold some positions in the area.[18]
The Kremlin is recirculating existing narratives aimed at undermining support for Ukraine amid the negotiations in Riyadh and likely remains uninterested in conducting meaningful negotiations to end the war. Kremlin officials are likely attempting to capitalize on the current lack of available details about the US–Ukrainian and US–Russian discussions in Riyadh on March 23 and 24. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accused Ukraine of being "well-bred Nazis" who lack agency as part of Kremlin efforts to justify the Kremlin's demand of "denazification" — or regime change and the installation of a pro-Russian proxy government in Kyiv — as a condition to end the war in Ukraine.[19] Lavrov also reiterated claims accusing European countries of seeking to prolong the war in Ukraine, likely to drive a wedge between Europe and the United States. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov accused Ukraine of violating the proposed moratorium on energy strikes, despite the fact that the proposed moratorium agreement and its contours are not yet finalized and are currently under discussion in Riyadh.[20] Peskov and Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesperson Maria Zakharova attempted to temper domestic expectations for the ongoing talks, stating that there is no need to expect breakthroughs and there is still a lot of work to do on technical issues.[21] These statements continue to signal to the domestic Russian audience that Russians should not expect a meaningful peace in Ukraine in the near term and support Kremlin condition-setting for a protracted war effort.[22]
Recent statements by Russian diplomats and academics indicate that the Kremlin likely aims to prioritize bilateral discussions with the United States over talks to end the war in Ukraine and will set this expectation within Russian society. Russian State Duma Foreign Affairs Committee Vyacheslav Nikonov recently told the New York Times (NYT) that Russian President Vladimir Putin sees bilateral Russian-US relations as "more important than the question of Ukraine."[23] Other Russian officials and voices indicated to the NYT that it is more important for Russia to accomplish its goals in bilateral US–Russian relations regarding alleviating sanctions pressure, constraining NATO, and seeking a "broader deal" — which likely includes US–Russian bilateral terms — before agreeing to any ceasefire in Ukraine.[24]
Russia continues to persecute religious minorities, especially Evangelical Christian communities in occupied Kherson Oblast as part of a wider campaign in occupied Ukraine aimed at destroying independent Ukrainian national and religious identities. The Ukrainian Resistance Center reported on March 23 that Russian occupation officials are forcibly converting and reconsecrating Ukrainian churches into the Russian Orthodox Church Moscow Patriarchate (ROC MP) in occupied Kherson Oblast.[25] The Ukrainian Resistance Center reported that ROC MP priests watch Russian occupation officials torture Ukrainian Protestant Christian believers and force Ukrainian children to pray for the "Russkiy Mir" (Russian World) — a Kremlin-promoted geopolitical concept with amorphous parameters that broadly encompasses Russian language, culture, Orthodoxy, and media. ISW has previously reported on Russia's religious oppression in occupied Ukraine, including arbitrary detention and assassinations of Ukrainian clergy or religious leaders and the looting, desecration, and deliberate destruction of places of worship.[26] ISW has also reported at length on Russia's systematic repression of Ukrainian Orthodox communities and other religious minorities, particularly Ukrainian Protestants and Baptists who have faced Russian brutality and other repressions throughout southern Ukraine.[27]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 23, 2025
Click here to read the full report with maps
Grace Mappes, Olivia Gibson, Christina Harward, and George Barros with William Runkel
March 23, 2025, 4:30 pm ET
US and Ukrainian officials are meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on the evening of March 23 to discuss the contours of the temporary moratorium on long-range strikes and a possible temporary maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea. An unnamed US official told the Financial Times (FT) on March 23 that the talks will cover the technical aspects of the temporary strikes moratorium, including monitoring and enforcement mechanisms, and Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesperson Heorhiy Tykhyi added that the talks will define the scope of this ceasefire.[1] Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov is leading the Ukrainian delegation, which also includes Ukrainian Presidential Office deputy heads Pavlo Palisa and Ihor Zhovka, Deputy Energy Minister Mykola Kolisnyk, MFA State Secretary Oleksandr Karasevich, and several unspecified military officers.[2] FT reported that the US delegation includes US National Security Council member Andrew Peek and State Department Policy Planning Director Michael Anton.[3] A Ukrainian official told the New York Times (NYT) that the US and Ukrainian delegations may hold additional talks on March 24 depending on the progress of negotiations.[4] The US-Ukrainian meeting is ongoing as of this publication and ISW will report on the details of the talks in-depth on March 24.
Unconfirmed reports suggest that there is tension between Russian Central Bank Chairperson Elvira Nabiullina and the Kremlin over Russia's high interest rate and wartime monetary policies. A Russian insider source claimed on March 23 that the Russian Federation Council Accounts Chamber (the Russian Federation’s highest audit body) recently initiated an audit of the Russian Central Bank to investigate its monetary policy from 2022 to 2024 and the impact of the interest rate on inflation, budget expenditures, and investment.[5] The source claimed that the investigation is "effectively" an attack on Nabiullina. The insider source claimed that a group of lobbyists from large Russian businesses seek interest rate reductions. ISW cannot independently verify this insider source's claim and has not observed other reporting about the alleged audit.
Russian inflation has been rising due to Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and the Russian Central Bank decided in December 2024 to maintain the key interest rate at 21 percent – the highest Russian interest rate since 2003 – as part of efforts to curb growing inflation rates.[6] The Russian Central Bank‘s interest rate through 2025 has remained relatively conservative despite significant and growing inflationary pressures.[7] The Kremlin has claimed in recent months that the inflation rate is about nine to 10 percent, but these figures are likely far below the actual inflation rate, which is likely closer to 20 to 25 percent.[8] Russia's current interest rate should likely be higher, and the Kremlin likely pressured the Central Bank to keep the rate at 21 percent when the Central Bank should have increased it to curb inflation.[9]
Russian President Vladimir Putin has also attempted to shift blame for the rising inflation rate on the Central Bank, and on Nabiullina in particular. This was likely in an effort to draw the ire of the Russian business community away from the Kremlin and onto her, although Nabiullina likely has not been able to exercise fully independent monetary policy. The audit on the Central Bank may be part of the Kremlin's ongoing efforts to apply political pressure on the bank to prevent further interest rate hikes beyond the current rate of 21 percent, manage the expectations and frustrations of the Russian business community, and further the Kremlin's narrative about Russia's economic stability. The Kremlin’s continued manipulation of the Central Bank's decisions is likely hampering the Russian government's ability to enact sound wartime monetary policies.
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 22, 2025
Click here to read the full report
Christina Harward, Karolina Hird, Nicole Wolkov, George Barros, and Frederick W. Kagan with William Runkel
US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff uncritically amplified a number of Russian demands, claims, and justifications regarding the war in Ukraine during an interview on March 21. Witkoff told American media personality Tucker Carlson in an interview published on March 21 that Russia "100 percent" does not want to invade Europe and that Russia "does not need to absorb Ukraine."[1] Witkoff stated that Russia "reclaimed" five regions in Ukraine — Crimea and Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts — and that Russia "has gotten what [it] wants" and will not want more. The Kremlin has repeatedly and falsely claimed that Crimea and these four oblasts are Russian territory contrary to international law, and Witkoff's statement about Russia "reclaiming" these areas (which Russia has illegally occupied and annexed) amplifies the Kremlin's justifications for its expansionist territorial demands and multiple invasions of Ukraine.
Vladislav Surkov, a former close adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin, recently reiterated a number of longstanding Kremlin claims and ambitions that directly contradict Witkoff's assertions in an interview with French media aimed at Western audiences. Surkov previously served as a long-time close advisor to Putin and organized protests in Crimea against the Ukrainian government in 2014.[2] Surkov also oversaw the Kremlin's 2014-2015 project to promote the creation of "Novorossiya" (an amorphous, invented region in Ukraine that Kremlin officials have claimed includes all of southern and eastern Ukraine and is an "integral" part of Russia) in eastern Ukraine.[3] Putin relieved Surkov of his duties as Presidential Aide in February 2020.[4] Surkov stated in an interview with French outlet L'Express on March 19 that a Russian victory in Ukraine would be the "military or military and diplomatic crushing of Ukraine" and the "division of this artificial quasi-state into its natural fragments."[5] Surkov stated that Russia will achieve this strategic objective — which Surkov stated has not changed since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 — even if there are "maneuvers, slowdowns, and pauses along the way." Surkov stated that the return of Ukraine to Russia's desired and self-defined sphere of influence has been a Russian objective since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Surkov claimed that "Ukraine is an artificial political entity" consisting of "at least" three regions — the "Russian" southern and eastern Ukraine, the "Russian-non-Russian" central area, and the "anti-Russian" west. Surkov claimed that Russia's war in Ukraine "will separate the Russians and the anti-Russians" and will "confine" the "anti-Russians" to their "historical territory" such that they "stop spreading across Russian soil." Surkov claimed that "perhaps" Ukraine will exist as a "real state" in the future but as a much smaller entity. Surkov implied that Europe will be involved in the future partitioning of Ukraine, claiming that "a balanced division of Ukraine will have to include a share for Brussels." Surkov responded to a question about how he sees Russian borders, stating that the ideology of the Russian World (Russkiy Mir) "has no borders" and exists "everywhere there is Russian influence," including cultural, military, economic, ideological, or humanitarian influence. Surkov claimed that Russia's influence varies across regions in the world, but "is never zero." Surkov claimed that Russia "will spread out in all directions." The Kremlin has repeatedly used the idea of the Russian World to justify Russian military interventions into former Soviet states and to claim that areas of the former Soviet Union and Russian Empire are historical Russian territories.[6] Surkov's statements about Russia's claims over southern and eastern Ukraine and the future expansion of Russkiy Mir are in direct contrast to Witkoff's statement that Russia has no territorial ambitions beyond Crimea and Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts.
Surkov's statements are consistent with those made by Putin and senior Russian officials, who have recently and repeatedly stated that Russia intends to bring Ukraine under Russian control and establish suzerainty over neighboring countries in order to weaken the West and strengthen Russia's global influence. Senior Russian officials have recently reiterated that any future peace settlement must address the "root causes" of the war, which Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov defined as recently as March 10, 2025, as the alleged "threats to Russia's security from the Ukrainian and Western directions in general" that are due to NATO's eastward expansion and the Ukrainian government's alleged "extermination" of everything that is "connected with Russia and the Russkiy Mir," including Russian language, culture, Orthodoxy, and media.[7] Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko acknowledged on March 17, 2025, that Russia's demands for Ukrainian neutrality and NATO's refusal to allow Ukraine into the alliance are the same demands that Russia made in 2021 before its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.[8] Putin's 2021 demands also stipulated that NATO commit to not accepting any countries as new members and that NATO not deploy any military forces to states that became NATO members after May 1997; would ban any NATO military activity in Ukraine, Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia; would ban deployments of intermediate-range missiles in areas that could reach Russian or NATO state territory; and would ban the United States from deploying intermediate-range missiles in Europe or nuclear missiles outside of US territory.[9] The Kremlin has used the "Russkiy Mir" narrative for decades to justify Russian aggression in Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova and to set conditions to influence independent countries once colonized by the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire.[10] Putin and other senior Russian officials have repeatedly propagated pseudo-history to deny Ukrainian statehood and nationhood and have falsely asserted that Ukraine's Western neighbors have legitimate claims to Ukrainian territory in an effort to sow division between Ukraine and Europe.[11] Putin has recently reamplified Russia's territorial demands that Ukraine cede all of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts, including areas that Russian forces do not currently occupy, amid ongoing bilateral US-Russia negotiations.[12] Putin and other Russian officials have also recently reamplified Russian narratives that "Novorossiya," which Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has defined as all of eastern and southern Ukraine including Kharkiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Mykolaiv, and Odesa oblasts, is an "integral" part of Russia.[13] Putin has used the term "Novorossiya" to refer to eastern and southern Ukraine since 2014 to set informational conditions to justify Russia's occupation and territorial ambitions and claimed in 2023 that Odesa City, Crimea, and the entire "Black Sea region" have nothing "to do with Ukraine."[14]
Witkoff uncritically repeated several inaccurate Russian claims regarding the status of the Ukrainian territories that Russia illegally occupies. Witkoff claimed during the March 21 interview that Russian-occupied Crimea, Donbas, and Kherson and Zaporizhia oblasts are "Russian-speaking" and that "there have been referendums [in these regions] where the overwhelming majority of people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule."[15] Russia has long used similar claims to justify its unprovoked aggression against Ukraine, having used the claim that Russia needs to "protect Russian-speakers" in eastern Ukraine to justify the launch of its full-scale invasion in 2022.[16] Russia has routinely undermined its own myth of "protecting Russian speakers" in Ukraine, however, destroying predominantly Russian-speaking cities in eastern Ukraine, killing Russian-speaking Ukrainians, and deporting Russian-speaking Ukrainian children to Russia in violation of international law.[17] The Russian invasions of Ukraine have never been about protecting Russian speakers.[18]
The assertion that the "overwhelming majority" of Ukrainians living under Russian occupation want to be under Russian control is also demonstrably false. Russian manipulations and coercive control tactics in occupied Ukraine are inconsistent with the claim that all residents of occupied Ukraine "want" to be part of Russia. Russia staged sham referendums in Crimea and parts of Donbas in 2014 and then in Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts in 2022 in an attempt to claim that most of the population "voted" to be annexed by Russia.[19] These referendums were all conducted under an intense Russian military presence and without legitimate election observers, and Russian authorities likely falsified attendance statistics and manipulated ballots.[20] Annexation referendums in 2022 did not account for the millions of Ukrainians who fled their homes to avoid living under Russian occupation.[21] Russian forces used physical intimidation to force Ukrainian civilians to vote for annexation during the 2022 referendums, with reports from occupied Zaporizhia Oblast suggesting that Russian occupation authorities instituted "at-home" voting in order to allow Russian security forces to enter the homes of Ukrainians and threaten them into voting for annexation at gunpoint.[22] Russian occupation officials also made their provision of humanitarian aid and basic necessities contingent on Ukrainians voting for annexation in the 2022 referendums.[23]
Russian demographic manipulations and mass indoctrination in occupied Ukraine are also at odds with the claim that Ukrainians living under occupation want to be under Russian control. Russian occupation administrators have had to institute coercive measures to force residents into obtaining Russian passports, threatening to deny Ukrainians access to basic services and medical care — demonstrating that there is no mass support in occupied Ukraine for Russian citizenship offers.[24] The extent of Russian pressure on populations in occupied areas is another strong indicator that residents of these areas do not want to be part of Russia but must be coerced to "Russify" — something that should be unnecessary among people who already identify as Russians. Russia has also embarked on a state-directed effort to deport Ukrainians from occupied Ukraine and to import Russians to live in occupied Ukraine, using manipulated demographic data to create the impression that there are more people willingly living in occupied areas.[25] Russia would not have to forcibly deport millions of Ukrainians to Russia if these Ukrainians actually wanted to be part of Russia.[26]
Witkoff's statements undermine US President Donald Trump's stated desired end state for the war in Ukraine that achieves an enduring peace and is in the best interests of the United States, Ukraine, and Europe. Trump has said that the United States will try to return as much territory to Ukraine as possible.[27] Trump also recently stated that the United States is interested in taking control of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP), which Russian forces currently occupy — implying that Russia would have to cede this territory in Zaporizhia Oblast before the United States can take control of the ZNPP.[28] Witkoff's March 21 presentation of Russia's territorial demands for the entirety of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts — including areas of these four oblasts that Russian forces do not currently occupy — undermines Trump's efforts to achieve a resolution to the war favorable to US interests. Ceding territory in these four oblasts to Russia — either along the current frontlines or along the oblasts' administrative boundaries – would not provide Ukraine with the defensible lines required to reliably defend against renewed Russian aggression in the future, hindering Trump's stated objective of securing a lasting, sustainable peace in Ukraine.[29] Witkoff also claimed that Ukrainian officials have "conceded" that Ukraine will not be a member of NATO — a preemptive US concession to Russia on one of the Kremlin's main demands as Russia continues to make no concessions in return. Witkoff's statements appear to yield to multiple Kremlin demands before the start of official negotiations for a peace settlement, ceding valuable US and Ukrainian leverage over Russia in future negotiations that the United States will need in order to achieve Trump's desired end to the war.
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 21, 2025
Click here to read the full report
Grace Mappes, Angelica Evans, Davit Gasparyan, Olivia Gibson, Daria Novikov, and Frederick W. Kagan
March 21, 2025, 7:15 pm ET
Note: The data cut-off for this product was 12:30pm ET on March 21. ISW will cover subsequent reports in the March 22 Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment.
The Kremlin is weaponizing ongoing ceasefire negotiations and deliberately misrepresenting the status and terms of a future ceasefire agreement in order to delay and undermine negotiations for a settlement to the war. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed on March 21 that Ukrainian forces blew up the Sudzha gas distribution station in Kursk Oblast while withdrawing on the night of March 20 to 21 in order to discredit Russian President Vladimir Putin's "peace initiatives" and to provoke Russia.[1] The Ukrainian General Staff denied the Russian MoD's claim and stated that Russian forces shelled the station, causing a fire.[2] The Ukrainian General Staff warned that Russian authorities are attempting to mislead the international community and discredit Ukraine. Footage published on March 21 shows a fire at the station, although ISW cannot independently verify the cause of the fire.[3] Russian officials seized on the fire to claim falsely that Ukrainian forces violated the proposed 30-day ceasefire banning Russian and Ukrainian strikes on civilian and energy facilities, which is not yet formally in effect and terms of which remain disputed.[4] Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov claimed that Russian forces are "implementing" an order from Putin to refrain from striking Ukrainian energy infrastructure in accordance with the US ceasefire proposal.[5] Russian milbloggers observed that the ceasefire proposal has not come into force yet, however, and acknowledged that Russia has continued nightly strikes on Ukraine, including Ukraine's port infrastructure in Odesa Oblast, in recent days.[6] Founder of the Kremlin-awarded Rybar telegram channel, Mikhail Zvinchuk, recently published a video of himself mocking US officials for believing that Russia is currently or intends to commit to the proposed temporary ceasefire in the area.[7] The exact contours of Putin's supposed order or a future moratorium on energy and infrastructure strikes between Russia and Ukraine remain unclear as of this report.
Kremlin officials are leveraging narratives about Ukrainian strikes and combat operations in Russian territory to justify rejecting peace negotiations with Ukraine and continuing the war to a domestic Russian audience. Peskov claimed in reaction to the Sudzha gas distribution station fire that Ukraine's denial of blowing up the station "shows how much one can believe and trust" Ukrainian officials.[8] Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesperson Maria Zakharova asked how the United States will "manage" Ukraine given Ukraine's alleged violation of the moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes (that has yet to be finalized and implemented).[9] Zakharova's and Peskov's comments are an effort to revive the narrative that Ukraine is the aggressor in this war, that Ukraine only acts under guidance or pressure from the West, and that the war in Ukraine is an existential risk to the Russian state to which Russia must respond.[10] Russian authorities have also revived narratives accusing Ukrainian forces of targeting Russian nuclear power plants and committing war crimes against Russian civilians to undermine Ukraine's credibility and heighten the invented existential threat to domestic audiences. The Russian Investigative Committee published a summary on March 21 of ongoing criminal investigations, cases, and convictions of Ukrainian soldiers and high-level commanders for allegedly targeting the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) and civilians in strikes.[11] ISW recently assessed that the Kremlin was preparing to intensify narratives accusing Ukrainian forces of war crimes in Kursk Oblast to discredit the Ukrainian military, erode Western support for Ukraine, and spoil or delay talks about temporary ceasefire proposals.[12]
The Kremlin has pushed these narratives consistently throughout the war in an attempt to distract from Russia's actions. Russian forces have committed numerous war crimes on the battlefield and in occupied Ukraine and have endangered the occupied Zaporizhzhia NPP (ZNPP) by militarizing it, and a Russian long-range Shahed drone struck the containment structure of the Chornobyl NPP's Reactor No. 4 on February 14.[13] The Kremlin may seek to leverage its narratives falsely portraying Ukraine as recklessly endangering Russian NPPs and being an unsafe operator of the ZNPP to spoil US-Ukrainian bilateral talks, given recent US and Ukrainian official statements about possible US involvement in Ukrainian energy infrastructure, including the Russian-occupied ZNPP.[14]
US Special Envoy to Ukraine Keith Kellogg stated that US officials will conduct "shuttle diplomacy" to engage bilaterally with both Ukrainian and Russian delegations in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Kellogg stated during an interview on March 20 that US technical teams will conduct "proximity talks," which Kellogg described as "shuttle diplomacy between rooms," in Riyadh with Ukrainian and Russian delegations.[15] CBS Senior Correspondent Jennifer Jacobs reported on March 21 that sources familiar with the matter stated that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz will not attend the upcoming discussions in Riyadh.[16] Jacobs reported that US technical teams intend to meet with the Ukrainian delegation on March 23, the Russian delegation on March 24, and may meet with the Ukrainian delegation again later on March 24 if there is significant progress. Russian and Ukrainian foreign ministry representatives will also not participate in the Riyadh meetings.[17] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated on March 21 that the Ukrainian delegation will present a list of Ukrainian facilities that the strikes moratorium should protect.[18] US and Russian officials previously stated that the March 24 Riyadh meeting will focus on achieving a temporary maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea and laying the groundwork for a "full ceasefire."[19]
Russia continues to strengthen its bilateral relations with North Korea, despite growing warnings from the US against deeper Russian-North Korean cooperation. Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu traveled to North Korea on March 21 and met with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, likely to discuss Russian-North Korean ties.[20] US State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce condemned North Korea's involvement in Russia's war against Ukraine on March 19, noting that North Korean support to Russia fuels and exacerbates the war in Ukraine.[21] Ukrainian and other Western officials have also continuously noted that North Korean involvement in Russia's offensive operations in Kursk Oblast and broader cooperation with Russia has particularly enhanced North Korea's military capabilities, posing potential security risks in the Asia-Pacific region.[22]
Russian officials also continue to deepen ties with the People's Republic of China (PRC). Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) Head Alexander Bortnikov met with PRC Security Minister Wang Xiaohong in Beijing on March 21 to discuss Russia-PRC bilateral relations.[23] Wang noted that the PRC is prepared to support multi-level meetings between Russian and Chinese law enforcement agencies and security services and to strengthen partnership in the fight against terrorism and transnational crime. ISW has observed that the PRC has supported Russia's war effort in Ukraine through sanctions evasion, rhetoric, and even direct military aid while posturing itself as a neutral actor and mediator to end the conflict.[24]
Ukraine's European allies continue efforts to provide Ukraine with military assistance and bolster Ukraine's defense industrial base (DIB). Ukrainian Strategic Industries Minister Herman Smetanin announced on March 20 that an unspecified Ukrainian defense enterprise signed an agreement with Norwegian-Finnish ammunition manufacturer NAMMO to deepen bilateral defense industrial cooperation and create a joint venture for 155mm artillery shell production in Ukraine.[25] Deutsche Welle (DW) reported on March 21 that Germany's Bundestag Budget Committee and both houses of parliament approved an additional 3 billion euros (roughly $3.3 billion) in military aid for Ukraine, in addition to Germany's pledged amount of 4 billion euros (roughly $4.3 billion), for Ukraine in 2025 and 8.3 billion euros (roughly $8.9 billion) pledged from 2026 to 2029.[26]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 20, 2025
Click here to read the full report.
Grace Mappes, Angelica Evans, Davit Gasparyan, Olivia Gibson, Daria Novikov, and Frederick W. Kagan with Nate Trotter and William Runkel
Ukrainian forces conducted a drone strike against Engels Airbase in Saratov Oblast on the night of March 19 to 20. The Ukrainian General Staff reported on March 20 that elements of Ukraine's Security Service (SBU), Unmanned Systems Forces, Special Operations Forces (SSO), and other Ukrainian forces struck the Engels Airbase in Saratov Oblast causing a fire, explosions, and a secondary detonation of ammunition in the vicinity of the airfield.[1] Geolocated footage and other footage published on March 20 show an explosion and fire at the Engels Airbase.[2] The Ukrainian General Staff noted that Russian forces use Engels Airbase to conduct missile strikes against Ukraine, and an SBU source told Ukrainian news outlet Suspilne that Engels is a key base for Russian strategic aviation, housing Tu-95MS, Tu-22M3, and Tu-160 strategic bombers as well as FAB and KAB glide bombs and cruise missiles storage facilities.[3] Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation Head Lieutenant Andriy Kovalenko reported that the Ukrainian strike destroyed a large number of Russian Kh-101 cruise missiles that Russian forces use in nightly strikes against Ukraine.[4] Saratov Oblast Governor Roman Busargin claimed on March 20 that Ukrainian forces conducted the "most massive drone strike of all time" against Saratov Oblast and that Ukrainian drones struck civilian infrastructure near Engels and caused a fire near the base.[5]
Russia, Ukraine, and the United States have not yet concluded the details of the moratorium against energy infrastructure strikes. The Ukrainian strike against Engels Airbase would not have been subject to this moratorium in any event because it is a military target. Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesperson Maria Zakharova absurdly accused Ukraine of violating the Russia-Ukraine 30-day moratorium on strikes against "energy infrastructure" by targeting the Engels Air Base.[6] Russian forces notably conducted strikes against Ukrainian energy and other infrastructure on both nights since Russian President Vladimir Putin's March 18 statements agreeing to the moratorium.[7]
The Kremlin announced that Russia and the United States will hold another round of talks in Riyadh, Saudia Arabia on March 24, and it is unclear whether these talks will include Ukraine. Russian Presidential Aide for International Affairs Yuriy Ushakov announced on March 20 that Russian Federation Council International Affairs Committee Chairperson Grigory Karasin and the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) Director's advisor, Colonel General Sergei Beseda, will lead the Russian delegation in bilateral discussions on the technical details of a possible maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea with US officials in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on March 24.[8] Beseda served as the Director of the FSB's Fifth Directorate, which is officially tasked with overseeing operational information and international relations, from 2009 to 2024.[9] Karasin worked in Russia's MFA from the 1970s to 2019 and served as a Deputy Foreign Minister in 1996 and from 2005 to 2019, when Karasin joined the Federation Council.[10] Karasin has headed the Federation Council Committee on International Affairs since 2021. Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesperson Maria Zakharova stated on March 20 that Russian MFA representatives will not participate in the March 24 talks in Riyadh.[11] US State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce stated on March 19 in response to a question about whether these talks will be bilateral or trilateral that it is "still being discussed or arranged."[12]
Kremlin officials continue to amplify narratives indicating that Putin remains committed to his long-standing goal of conquering Ukraine and is attempting to leverage upcoming ceasefire negotiations to secure preemptive concessions from Ukraine and the United States. Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu reiterated claims on March 20 that the Ukrainian government is illegitimate and that Ukrainian authorities must repeal the September 2022 decree banning negotiations with Putin before Ukraine and Russia can discuss the end of the war.[13] Shoigu also claimed that Ukraine must change its constitutional clauses regarding "territorial integrity." The Ukrainian Constitution recognizes occupied Crimea and Sevastopol and Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts as Ukrainian and forbids the Ukrainian government from amending the constitution if the amendment is "oriented towards the liquidation of [Ukraine's] independence or violation of [Ukraine's] territorial indivisibility."[14] Shoigu is likely calling for Ukrainian authorities to amend the constitution in order to allow Ukraine to recognize Russia's occupation and illegal annexation of occupied Ukraine.
Russian authorities have repeatedly mischaracterized the Ukrainian Constitution in order to legitimize Russian calls for regime change in Ukraine and to justify Putin's ongoing efforts to delay peace negotiations and blame Ukraine for the lack of progress toward peace. Putin claimed that there are "serious risks" associated with Ukraine's "inability to negotiate" in the Kremlin readout of his March 18 call with US President Donald Trump, possibly referring to Putin's previous claims about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's supposed illegitimacy.[15] The Ukrainian Constitution bars the government from holding elections or amending the Ukrainian Constitution in times of martial law, and the Ukrainian government cannot legally lift martial law while Russia continues to attack Ukraine.[16]
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) appears to be amplifying Kremlin narratives and lending credibility to some of the Kremlin's demands. The CCP-operated English language China Daily outlet stated in an editorial published on March 19 that the West's unwillingness to halt all military and intelligence support to Ukraine in response to Putin's March 18 demand has "complicat[ed] the path of peace."[17] The editorial states that "no country should build its security on the insecurity of another." The Kremlin reported that Putin demanded that the West stop all military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine as a "key condition" for working towards ending the war during his March 18 call with Trump.[18] Putin has made similar demands for Ukraine to reject foreign military assistance and abandon its aspirations to join an external security bloc — particularly NATO — since the beginning of the war, and the China Daily's editorial appears to be at least in part justifying Putin's long-standing demand that the West cut all military aid to Ukraine.[19]
Kremlin officials are also working to exacerbate tension between the United States and its European allies in order to break Western support for Ukraine and undermine the NATO alliance. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov claimed on March 20 that Europe's "plans to militarize" are "clearly at odds with" Putin's and Trump's efforts to pursue peace in Ukraine and that Europe has become a "war party."[20] Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesperson Maria Zakharova claimed on March 7 that Europe is a "militarized union" that is "deliberately fueling" escalation between the West and Russia.[21] Russian Permanent Representative to the United Nations (UN) Vasily Nebenzya and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov have also recently framed European countries (in contrast with the United States) as aggressive towards Russia, indicating a new Kremlin effort to drive a wedge between the United States and Europe.[22]
Putin continues to condition domestic Russian audiences to prepare for a protracted war in Ukraine rather than a sustainable peace built on compromise. Putin's and other Kremlin officials' statements in recent days and weeks perpetuating narratives about the difficulty of negotiations, the illegitimacy of Ukrainian officials, and US-European divisions reinforce messaging that Russia expects a prolonged war in Ukraine and peace only on Russian terms. Putin also reportedly directly told Russian businessmen to prepare for a protracted war. Russian business journalists Farida Rustamova and Maxim Tovkaylo reported on March 20 that Putin held a private meeting with Russian businessmen at the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs Congress ahead of Putin's call with Trump on March 18.[23] Rustamova and Tovkaylo cited two sources at the meeting and one source with knowledge of the meeting as saying that Putin told the businessmen that negotiations to end the war would be slow and difficult and advised the businessmen "not to be naive" given the people and issues involved in negotiations.[24] Putin also publicly stated at the congress that Russia should not expect the West to lift sanctions quickly.[25] The Kremlin has long broadcasted Russian demands for territorial and security concessions beyond the current frontlines as a return on investment for the Russian people to justify the war effort to its domestic audience.[26] Putin and other Kremlin officials will likely continue messaging to domestic audiences that the war in Ukraine remains a protracted Russian effort and that Russia will not make peace in Ukraine quickly.
The Kremlin is intensifying efforts to change the demographic makeup of occupied Ukraine in order to legitimize Putin's claim over occupied areas. Putin signed a decree on March 20 mandating that Ukrainian civilians who are "illegally" living in Russia and occupied Ukraine must "regulate their legal status" or leave Russia and occupied Ukraine by September 10, 2025.[27] The Kremlin has conducted a thorough passportization campaign to coerce Ukrainians living under occupation into obtaining Russian citizenship in efforts to legitimize Russia's territorial claims over occupied areas and tighten control over local populaces.[28] The Kremlin has also conducted Russian repopulation campaigns to artificially decrease the number of Ukrainians living in occupied Ukraine and inflate the number of Russians in these areas.[29] Putin's March 20 decree also obliges "foreigners," presumably including those with Ukrainian citizenship, and stateless persons entering occupied Ukraine to take Russian medical exams and blood tests.[30] The Kremlin has historically used these tests to obtain personal data to later exert pressure on Ukrainians to comply with occupation authorities and serve in the Russian military, as well as to forcibly deport Ukrainian children to Russia.[31]
The Kremlin also continues Russifying Ukrainian children in occupied areas to further the destruction of Ukrainian national and cultural identity and to portray Russia as the humane governor of occupied Ukraine. Kremlin Children's Rights Ombudsman Maria Lvova-Belova met with Donetsk People's Republic (DNR) Head Denis Pushilin on March 20 and claimed that occupation authorities sent 127 ill Ukrainian children to medical treatment in unspecified locations, likely including in Russia, and that 1,346 Ukrainian children participated in the "Day After Tomorrow" social adaptation project for youths.[32] Lvova-Belova stated that occupation officials opened two youth centers in occupied Makiivka and Mariupol, Donetsk Oblast, and that these centers often host social events for youths, including Ukrainian minors under Russian guardianship.[33] The Kremlin has frequently used forced deportations of Ukrainian children and youth social organizations to indoctrinate Ukrainian children into Russian military-patriotic education and eradicate their Ukrainian identities.[34] Lvova-Belova also proposed that Pushilin create a social system to place 500 Ukrainian children who are currently in state custody in occupied Donetsk Oblast with Russian families and noted that many of these children have relatives who can take in the children.[35] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently stated that Ukraine will not compromise on the return of Ukrainian children to unoccupied Ukraine, and the US-Ukrainian joint statement agreeing on a 30-day ceasefire similarly emphasized the importance of returning forcibly deported Ukrainian children.[36] The Kremlin's continued efforts to forcibly deport and indoctrinate Ukrainian children — instead of working with Ukrainian authorities to return these children to Ukraine — underscores how committed the Kremlin remains to eradicating Ukrainian identity and strengthening its claim over occupied Ukraine.
Kremlin officials continue advertising the possibility of future economic cooperation with the United States, likely to extract preemptive concessions from the United States in ceasefire or peace negotiations. Kremlin newswire TASS reported on March 20 that it obtained a copy of a letter in which Russian Federation Council Committee on Economic Policy Chairperson Andrei Kutepov proposed to Russian First Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturov the creation of a rare earth metals fund for cooperation with foreign investors.[37] TASS claimed that the letter states that Russian actors will control the fund and will prevent foreign investors from holding shares directly in foreign projects but will still compensate them.[38] TASS reported that Kutepov first wrote the letter following a December 2024 meeting on subsoil licensing. TASS's decision to platform this letter only now amid ongoing US-Ukrainian talks about a mineral deal indicates that Russian state media likely intended for this letter to offer a more enticing deal to the United States and spoil the US-Ukrainian deal. Senior Russian officials, including Putin, have also recently emphasized economic incentives for the United States, likely in return for concessions favorable to Russia.[39] Trump noted during his March 18 call with Putin that the United States and Russia can conclude "enormous economic deals" after there is peace in Ukraine.[40]
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and President Trump spoke about investments in Ukraine's energy infrastructure during their call on March 19. Zelensky reported on March 19 that the two leaders discussed how the United States can help restore the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP).[41] Zelensky indicated to Trump that Ukraine is open to US investment in Ukraine's energy infrastructure, including the ZNPP, but reiterated on March 20 that "all nuclear power plants belong to the people of Ukraine."[42] US State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce stated on March 19 that Trump believes a US company's ownership of Ukraine's nuclear power plants and energy facilities would be an effective deterrent against future Russian strikes and would contribute to a positive economic partnership between Ukraine and the United States that would increase Ukraine's economic viability.[43]
US State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce condemned North Korea's involvement in Russia's war against Ukraine on March 19 and expressed concern about Russian support to North Korea.[44] Bruce emphasized that North Korea's military cooperation with Russia, including troop deployments, fuels and exacerbates the war in Ukraine. Bruce stressed that both Russia and North Korea bear responsibility for perpetuating the war in Ukraine and called for an end to military support by both sides. North Korea has supplied Russia with Kn-23 ballistic missiles, artillery shells, and personnel in its ongoing effort to support Russia's war against Ukraine.[45] Ukrainian and other Western officials have previously noted that North Korean involvement in Russia's offensive operations in Kursk Oblast and broader cooperation with Russia has particularly enhanced North Korea's military capabilities, possibly posing security risks in the Asia-Pacific region.[46]
Ukraine’s allies continue to provide financial and material military assistance to Ukraine, including funds from frozen Russian assets in Europe. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced on March 20 that Ukraine recently received “several” additional F-16s from unspecified partners.[47] The European Commission announced on March 20 that its exceptional Macro-Financial Assistance (MFA) loan program issued Ukraine the second tranche of funds with revenue generated from the proceeds of frozen Russian assets worth one billion euros (roughly $1.08 billion).[48] The loan is part of the G7-led Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) loans initiative which plans to provide 45 billion euros (roughly $48.8 billion) in financial support to Ukraine.
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 19, 2025
Click here to read the full report.
Christina Harward, Nicole Wolkov, Olivia Gibson, Daria Novikov, George Barros, and Frederick W. Kagan with Nate Trotter and William Runkel
March 19, 2025, 8:00pm ET
Note: The data cut-off for this product was 12:30 pm ET on March 19. ISW will cover subsequent reports in the March 20 Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment.
Russia and Ukraine have not formally announced the implementation of the temporary long-range strikes ceasefire. Ceasefires take time to negotiate, execute, and monitor and require both sides to agree to cease attacks on specified targets at a specific time and date. Ceasefires also require both sides to agree to mechanisms to monitor the ceasefire and to address allegations of violations. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated on March 19 that if Russia and Ukraine come to a temporary strikes ceasefire agreement, then Ukraine will prepare a list of "civilian objects, energy objects, infrastructure objects" to give to Ukraine's partners — indicating that Russia and Ukraine have not finalized the details of which targets would be off limits or agreed on an implementation date.[1]
Official American, Ukrainian, and Russian statements indicate that the parties to the ceasefire have not yet finalized the details of the agreement. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stated on March 19 that the temporary ceasefire only applies to "energy infrastructure facilities," and Kremlin newswire TASS reported that Peskov declined to comment on the White House statement — likely referring to the March 18 White House statement following the call between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin — that the ceasefire applied to "energy and infrastructure."[2] Trump told the Washington Examiner on March 18 after his call with Putin that Russia agreed to "an immediate ceasefire on energy and infrastructure."[3] US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff similarly stated on March 18 after the call that the temporary ceasefire covers "energy and infrastructure in general."[4] The Trump administration's statement following Trump's March 19 call with Zelensky stated that Trump and Zelensky "agreed on a partial ceasefire against energy."[5] Zelensky stated on March 19 that Ukraine is "ready to implement" a ceasefire on strikes against "energy and civilian infrastructure."[6]
Russian President Vladimir Putin is adding confusion about the timing and details of the ceasefire in an attempt to falsely blame Ukraine for violating the ceasefire before both countries have officially implemented the agreement. The Kremlin is attempting to posture Russia as already adhering to the temporary ceasefire while claiming that Ukraine is violating the ceasefire — even though both parties have not agreed on the details of the agreement or officially implemented the ceasefire. The Kremlin readout of the March 18 phone call between Putin and Trump stated that Putin "immediately gave the Russian military" an order that "corresponded" with his "positive response" to Trump's temporary ceasefire proposal.[7] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed that seven Russian drones were en route to striking Ukrainian energy facilities connected to defense industrial enterprises in Mykolaiv Oblast when Putin issued the order to the Russian military.[8] The Russian MoD claimed that Russian forces received orders to "neutralize" the drones and that Russian forces used Pantsir air defense systems to down six drones and that a Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) fighter jet destroyed the other. Ukrainian officials reported that Russian forces launched a series of drone and missile strikes against Ukraine on the night of March 18 to 19, and Zelensky noted on March 19 that Russian drones had struck a hospital in Sumy Oblast and unspecified areas in Donetsk Oblast.[9] The Russian MoD claimed that Ukrainian drones struck an oil transshipment facility in Krasnodar Krai following the Trump-Putin call and attempted to frame the Ukrainian strike as a violation of the ceasefire agreement.[10] Russian claims that Russia adhered to the ceasefire by abstaining from conducting strikes against Ukrainian energy infrastructure and that Ukraine violated the ceasefire are inaccurate as Russia and Ukraine have not yet officially implemented the agreement. Such Russian claims are attempts to take advantage of the lack of clarity about the details of the ceasefire that the Kremlin is injecting. Putin's attempt to confuse and manipulate the temporary strikes ceasefire and blame Ukraine for violations even before the agreement has come into effect is an indicator of how Putin will likely exploit any future agreements.
The Kremlin continues to contradict Trump's report of his call with Putin on March 18. The Kremlin readout of the call stated that Putin called for a halt to all foreign military aid to Ukraine.[11] Peskov claimed on March 19 that Putin and Trump "touched upon" the topic of continuing military aid to Ukraine in their call.[12] Trump stated on March 18 that he and Putin "did not talk about aid at all."[13]
The Kremlin continues to demand that Ukraine cede Ukrainian territory that Russia does not currently occupy and to set conditions to make further territorial demands. Russian business outlet Kommersant reported on March 18 that its sources said that Russian President Vladimir Putin stated at a private meeting with the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs Congress on March 18 that Russia would not claim "Odesa and other territories" if unspecified countries — likely Ukraine, the United States and/or European countries — recognize Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts and Crimea as part of Russia.[14] Putin and other Russian officials have recently reiterated their ongoing demand that Ukraine surrender the entirety of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts, including areas that Russian forces do not currently occupy.[15] The Kremlin may have intentionally leaked Putin's statement to Kommersant in an attempt to portray Russia's extreme demands to seize the entirety of the four oblasts as reasonable and less extreme than alternatives. Putin recently claimed that "Novorossiya" is an integral part of Russia, and Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov defined "Novorossiya" as all of eastern and southern Ukraine — including Odesa Oblast.[16] Putin has repeatedly referred to parts of occupied Ukraine as "Novorossiya," having most recently thanked employees of the Russian Prosecutor General's Office in "Donbas and Novorossiya" during a March 19 address to Prosecutor General's Office's Board.[17] Putin has also claimed that Odesa City is a "Russian city."[18] Putin and other senior Kremlin officials continue to set informational conditions to demand that Ukraine cede more territory to Russia as Russian forces continue to push in areas that Russia has not yet formally demanded. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated on March 18 that Russian forces are concentrating in Kursk Oblast on the border with Sumy Oblast and may be preparing new attacks on Sumy, Kharkiv, and Zaporizhia oblasts.[19] ISW continues to assess that Russia would likely leverage attacks into oblasts that Russian forces do not currently occupy to fabricate justifications for demands that Ukraine cede additional territory to Russia.
The United States, Ukraine, and Europe continue to agree that Ukraine and Europe must be involved in peace negotiations to end the war, despite Russian President Vladimir Putin's efforts to exclude Ukraine and Europe from such negotiations. Bloomberg reported on March 18, citing people familiar with the matter, that US officials told European officials that the EU must be involved in any future peace agreement since the Kremlin wants the EU to lift its sanctions on Russia as part of a peace deal. The sources stated that the United States told the EU that America's first priority is "to stop the fighting," after which the United States will discuss "potential security arrangements" for Ukraine.[20] US President Donald Trump told the Washington Examiner on March 18 after his call with Putin that both Russia and Ukraine would have to agree to a "full ceasefire and a [peace] deal."[21] Trump's statement rejects Putin's calls for ongoing negotiations about a ceasefire and future peace negotiations to occur in "bilateral mode" between the United States and Russia.[22]
Ukraine and Russia conducted a prisoner of war (POW) exchange on March 19. Ukraine and Russia each exchanged 175 POWs, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced that Russia returned an additional 22 severely wounded Ukrainian soldiers.[23] Zelensky thanked the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for mediating the exchange.[24] The Kremlin initially announced the POW exchange following Russian President Vladimir Putin's March 18 call with US President Donald Trump, during which Putin claimed that Russia would transfer an additional 23 seriously wounded Ukrainian servicemembers in a "gesture of goodwill."[25]
The Russian Ministry of Defense's (MoD) Main Military-Political Directorate Deputy Head and Akhmat Spetsnaz Commander, Major General Apti Alaudinov, described recent Russian deception tactics that may amount to acts of perfidy — a war crime under the Geneva Convention. Alaudinov claimed in a March 19 interview with Kremlin newswire TASS that Russian forces recently used blue electrical tape identification marks during an operation in which Russian forces used an underground pipeline to covertly attack behind Ukrainian positions in Kursk Oblast and noted that Ukrainian forces also use blue electrical tape.[26] Alaudinov claimed that Russian forces used the blue tape in order to "prevent the Ukrainian military from understanding what was happening" and so that Ukrainian forces "would think that their own units were advancing." Alaudinov noted that Ukrainian drone operators would have "seen people with blue electrical tape" and would have "decided that these were their own units." Alaudinov claimed that Russian forces were attempting to "create panic in [Ukrainian ranks]," allowing Russian force to "inflict maximum damage" while Ukrainian forces "were sorting it out." Alaudinov claimed that Russian forces "were supposed to have blue tape for the first 24 hours of the operation and then change it to red [tape]" — which Russian forces use for identification marks. The Geneva Convention defines perfidy as "acts inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead him to believe that he is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence."[27]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 18, 2025
Click here to read the full report with maps
Davit Gasparyan, Christina Harward, Grace Mappes, Nicole Wolkov, Daria Novikov, and Frederick W. Kagan
March 18, 2025, 6:00 pm ET
Russian President Vladimir Putin did not accept the US-Ukrainian proposal for a temporary ceasefire along the frontline and reiterated his demands for a resolution to the war that amount to Ukrainian capitulation.[1] Putin and US President Donald Trump held a phone call on March 18.[2] The Kremlin's official readout of the call stated that Putin emphasized the need to address the "root causes" of the war.[3] Russian officials have repeatedly defined these root causes as NATO's eastward expansion and Ukraine's alleged violations of the rights of Russian-speaking minorities in Ukraine. Russian officials’ calls for the elimination of these "root causes" amount to Russian demands for Ukraine's permanent neutrality and the installation of a pro-Russian government in Kyiv.[4]
Putin demanded on March 18 that Ukraine stop mobilizing (i.e. recruiting and training) forces during a potential temporary ceasefire. Putin also called for a halt to all foreign military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine but did not discuss Russia's military support from North Korea, the People's Republic of China (PRC), and Iran.[5] Putin claimed that Russia and the United States should continue their efforts toward a peace settlement in "bilateral mode," excluding Ukraine or Europe from future negotiations about the war in Ukraine. Putin's demands on the March 18 call parallel the demands he made on March 13.[6]
ISW continues to assess that Putin is attempting to hold the temporary ceasefire proposal hostage in order to extract preemptive concessions ahead of formal negotiations to end the war.[7] ISW also continues to assess that Putin's demands for the removal of the legitimate government of Ukraine, the weakening of the Ukrainian military such that it cannot defend against future Russian aggression, and the denial of Ukraine's sovereignty and independence remain unchanged.[8] The persistence of Putin's demands for Ukraine's capitulation demonstrates that Putin is not interested in good-faith negotiations to pursue Trump's stated goal of achieving a lasting peace in Ukraine.
Trump and Putin agreed on a temporary moratorium on long-range strikes against energy infrastructure, but the exact contours of the moratorium remain unclear at this time. The Kremlin stated that Putin accepted Trump's proposal for a 30-day moratorium on strikes against "energy infrastructure" and that Putin "immediately gave the Russian military the corresponding order," whereas the White House stated that Putin and Trump agreed to "an energy and infrastructure ceasefire."[9] It is unclear which targets are explicitly prohibited under the 30-day moratorium given the difference in language between the two readouts of the call.
The Kremlin also stated that Putin "informed" Trump that Russia and Ukraine will each exchange 175 prisoners of war (POWs) on March 19 and that Russia will also transfer 23 seriously wounded Ukrainian soldiers, whom Putin claimed are currently undergoing medical treatment in Russian hospitals, as a "gesture of goodwill." The March 11 US-Ukrainian temporary ceasefire proposal stated that Ukrainian and American delegations discussed POW exchanges as part of the peace process, particularly during a potential temporary ceasefire on the frontline.[10] The White House stated on March 18 that Russia and the United States will "immediately" begin negotiations in an unspecified country in the Middle East about a temporary maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea, a "full ceasefire," and a permanent peace settlement.[11] The Kremlin stated that the United States and Russia are creating "expert groups" to continue efforts to achieve a peace settlement "in bilateral mode."[12]
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky endorsed the Trump-Putin energy strikes moratorium agreement on March 18 and said that Ukraine expects to receive additional information from Trump about the proposal.[13] Zelensky stated that Ukraine would not accept a situation in which Russia strikes Ukrainian energy infrastructure and Ukraine is unable to respond.
Putin continues to hold the temporary ceasefire hostage, likely to extract further concessions from US President Donald Trump and delay or spoil negotiations for an enduring peace in Ukraine. Putin rejected a temporary ceasefire in the Black Sea but agreed to participate in negotiations on such an agreement, which Putin will likely use to delay or spoil negotiations for a permanent peace agreement.[14] Putin also did not accept the US-Ukrainian temporary frontline ceasefire and continued to cite concerns that call back to his pre-war demands amounting to Ukraine's total capitulation and regime change. The Kremlin readout stated that Putin and Trump discussed the development of bilateral economic and energy cooperation, though White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that future US-Russian relations would include "enormous economic deals...only when peace has been achieved."[15]
Putin spoke at the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs Congress before his call with Trump on March 18 and claimed that some Western companies that left Russia following the February 2022 full-scale invasion now seek to return or are taking steps to return to Russia and that Russia will consider this return through the lens of prioritizing Russian businesses.[16] Putin ordered the Russian Cabinet of Ministers to create a procedure for Western businesses to return to Russia.[17] Putin is likely attempting to bypass the Trump administration's stated conditions of concluding economic deals after achieving peace in Ukraine by extracting concessions for sanctions relief or other economic concessions in preliminary talks for a temporary ceasefire in Ukraine, as other Kremlin officials have attempted in recent weeks.[18]
Russian forces recently advanced in western Zaporizhia Oblast amid intensified Russian offensive operations in the area, likely as part of efforts to leverage Russia's deliberate stalling of the temporary ceasefire proposal to make battlefield gains. Geolocated footage published on March 18 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced in eastern Stepove (east of Kamyanske).[19] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces marginally advanced southeast of Shcherbaky (east of Kamyanske), north of Pyatykhatky (southeast of Kamyanske), and toward Lobkove (southeast of Kamyanske).[20] Russian forces continued attacking near Mali Shcherbaky (east of Kamyanske), Shcherbaky, Stepove, and Lobkove on March 18.[21] Russian milbloggers claimed that elements of the Russian 247th and 108th airborne (VDV) regiments (both of the 7th VDV Division) are responsible for recent Russian advances along the Shcherbaky-Stepove-Pyatykhatky line.[22]
Ukrainian Southern Defense Forces Spokesperson Colonel Vladyslav Voloshyn stated on March 17 that Russian forces have become more active in the Zaporizhia direction and are taking advantage of improving weather.[23] Voloshyn noted that mud is drying out, and trees are regaining their foliage, so Russian forces are trying to improve their tactical positions by attacking in assault groups of five to seven people. Voloshyn also noted that the number of first-person view (FPV) drones that Russian forces use per day has increased in March 2025 by about 50 drones to about 400 to 420 drones per day.
Russian forces are likely intensifying offensive operations in western Zaporizhia Oblast to push towards Zaporizhzhia City amid continued Kremlin demands that Ukraine cede all of Zaporizhia Oblast to Russia.[24] Russian forces are also likely trying to draw and fix Ukrainian forces to additional areas of the frontline to allow Russian forces to prioritize certain efforts and make grinding gains across the theater as the weather improves and Russia protracts negotiations.
Ukrainian officials warned in November 2024 about a possible intensification of Russian activity in the Zaporizhia direction, and Russian milbloggers began claiming in late February 2025 that Russian forces intensified activity northwest of Robotyne, especially near Pyatykhakty and Kamyanske.[25] Russian forces have only attempted occasional localized offensive operations west of Orikhiv since the Summer 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive.[26] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated on February 7 that Ukraine's incursion into Kursk Oblast forced the Russian military command to redeploy forces from southern Ukraine to Kursk Oblast, preventing Russian forces from launching the attack on Zaporizhzhia City they had been planning.[27]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 17, 2025
Click here to read the full report with maps
Nicole Wolkov, Christina Harward, Grace Mappes, Davit Gasparyan, Olivia Gibson, Daria Novikov, and Frederick W. Kagan with Nate Trotter
Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to have been partially successful in holding the ceasefire proposal hostage as part of his efforts to extract preemptive concessions from US President Donald Trump in negotiations to end the war. Trump stated on March 17 that he plans to speak with Putin on March 18 and "want[s] to see if [he and Putin] can bring the war to an end."[1] Trump added that he and Putin will "be talking about land," "power plants," and "dividing up certain assets."[2] The United States and Ukraine agreed on March 11 to a 30-day ceasefire proposal that is contingent on Russia's "acceptance and concurrent implementation."[3] The proposal stated that Ukraine and the United States intend to name their negotiating teams and immediately begin negotiations toward an enduring peace — noting the distinction between the temporary ceasefire and future negotiations on a peace settlement. Putin rejected the temporary ceasefire proposal on March 13 and claimed that the cessation of hostilities "should be such that it would lead to long-term peace and eliminate the initial causes" of the war.[4] Putin thus rejected one of the main principles of the US-Ukrainian proposal — that the temporary ceasefire precedes formal negotiations to end the war. The US-Ukrainian temporary ceasefire proposal noted that the United States and Ukraine discussed the return of prisoners of war (POWs), detained civilians, and forcibly deported Ukrainian children — all of which will require future talks with Russia. The US-Ukrainian temporary ceasefire proposal did not mention talks with Russia about Ukrainian territory, energy infrastructure, or assets. Putin also suggested on March 13 that he may call Trump to discuss "issues" involved in the ceasefire proposal, such as Ukraine's continued ability to mobilize forces and receive military aid from partners and allies — issues notably not included in the US-Ukrainian temporary ceasefire proposal. Putin is attempting to change the sequence of talks in order to push Trump into making preemptive concessions on issues that are not part of the US-Ukrainian temporary ceasefire but are part of Russia's war aims. The acceptance of these Russian demands in the context of negotiations for an immediate ceasefire would cede valuable US and Ukrainian leverage during future negotiations to secure a lasting peace in Ukraine.
Russian officials continue to demonstrate that Russia's aim of destroying Ukrainian sovereignty remains unchanged since before Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko claimed in an interview with Kremlin-affiliated outlet Izvestiya on March 17 that Russia continues to demand that Ukraine be a neutral state and that NATO states refuse to accept Ukraine as a member.[5] Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha stated to RBK Ukraine on March 17 that no country should have a "veto" over Ukraine's choice to participate in alliances, including the EU or NATO.[6] Syhiba noted that Ukraine's NATO aspirations are enshrined in the Ukrainian Constitution and reflect a "strategic choice of the Ukrainian people." A Russian "veto" of Ukraine's choices about these matters would amount to a denial of Ukraine's ability to make choices about its alliances and security arrangements as a sovereign and independent state. Grushko acknowledged during his interview that Russia's demands for Ukrainian neutrality and NATO's refusal to allow Ukraine into the alliance are the same demands that Russia made in 2021 before its full-scale invasion of Ukraine — demonstrating how Russia's demands to destroy Ukraine as an independent, sovereign state have remained unchanged.[7]
The Kremlin continues to reject the prospect of European peacekeepers in Ukraine, in opposition to US and Ukrainian positions on the matter and impeding the establishment of a stable, lasting peace to end the war. Grushko stated on March 17 that Russia will not accept peacekeepers from the EU, NATO, or individual Western states in post-war Ukraine as Russia considers all of these possible peacekeeping contingents to be "NATO contingents."[8] Grushko claimed that any talks about future international peacekeeping missions in Ukraine should only occur after the conclusion of the final peace agreement to end the war and only if parties to the peace agreement agree that the peace agreement requires international support. The Kremlin appears to be trying to dictate the timing and sequence of talks, demanding that final peace talks precede any discussions about peacekeeping missions in post-war Ukraine.[9] Russia continues to make clear its rejection of any European involvement in post-war Ukraine — in contradiction to US and Ukrainian positions on the matter. Trump stated on February 26 that Europe should be responsible for security guarantees for Ukraine, and the joint US-Ukrainian March 11 statement outlining the temporary ceasefire proposal stated that Ukraine reiterated its positions that European partners should be involved in the peace process.[10] Sybiha stressed the importance of European support to assist in monitoring and enforcing the terms of a permanent ceasefire in Ukraine and noted that Ukraine is already discussing specific details with those European countries willing to deploy peacekeeping forces to Ukraine.[11] Significant European involvement in post-war Ukraine is critical for any peace settlement that aims to establish an enduring peace in Ukraine.
A strong Ukrainian military backed by security guarantees remains the most important component of a sustainable peace in Ukraine and deterrence of future Russian aggression. Sybiha emphasized that there can be no restriction on Ukraine's defensive capabilities or military strength in any future peace agreement and that Ukraine must keep working towards a self-sufficient defense industrial sector to deter further Russian aggression.[12] Sybiha, responding to a question about Ukraine's fundamental stipulations in "any" future negotiations, stated that Ukraine will not compromise its territorial integrity and sovereignty and "will never recognize occupied territories." Discussions on the permanent status of occupied Ukrainian territory should properly only be a part of negotiations on a permanent settlement of the war.
The United States announced its withdrawal from war crimes monitoring agencies related to the war in Ukraine — essentially a unilateral concession to Russia with no Russian concessions in return. The New York Times, citing an internal letter from the US Department of Justice (DoJ), reported on March 17 that the US DoJ notified the International Center for the Prosecution of Crimes of Aggression (ICPA) against Ukraine that the United States would withdraw from the organization by the end of March 2025 after having participated in the organization since November 2023.[13]The EU Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust), the ICPA's parent organization, confirmed to SkyNews that the United States is withdrawing from the ICPA.[14] The ICPA is responsible for investigating the leaders directly accountable for crimes committed in the context of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine.[15]The New York Times also reported that the Trump administration intends to scale back the US DoJ's War Crimes Accountability Team (WarCAT), which the US DoJ established in 2022 to coordinate the DoJ's efforts to hold Russians accountable for war crimes committed in Ukraine.[16]
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky replaced Chief of General Staff Lieutenant General Anatoliy Barhylevych with Major General Andriy Hnatov on March 16.[17]Zelensky appointed Hnatov to Deputy Chief of the Ukrainian General Staff on January 26, 2025, and Hnatov previously served as the Khortytsia Group of Forces Commander and Joint Forces Commander.[18]Zelenskyappointed Barhylevych to serve as the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense (MoD)'s Inspector General, who monitors compliance with military standards and reform processes.[19]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 16, 2025
Click here to read the full report with maps
Nicole Wolkov, Angelica Evans, Grace Mappes, Olivia Gibson, and Frederick W. Kagan with Nate Trotter and William Runkel
March 16, 2025, 5:45pm ET
US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz stated on March 16 that Ukraine will receive unspecified security guarantees in exchange for unspecified territorial concessions.[1] Waltz also stated that the United States is considering "the reality of the situation on the ground" in diplomatic talks when discussing an end to the war in Ukraine.[2] It is not clear exactly what Waltz meant by "the reality of the situation on the ground." Russian officials have frequently used the narrative that any negotiations must consider the "realities on the ground" to refer to the current frontline in Ukraine and their claims of the inevitability of further Russian battlefield gains.[3] Waltz's acknowledgement that Ukraine will receive unspecified security guarantees is a key aspect of achieving US President Donald Trump's stated goal of securing a lasting peace in Ukraine, but stopping hostilities on indefensible lines would limit the effectiveness of security guarantees.
The current frontlines do not provide the strategic depth that Ukraine will need to reliably defend against renewed Russian aggression. Russian forces are just across the Dnipro River from Kherson City, roughly 25 kilometers from Zaporizhzhia City, and 30 kilometers from Kharkiv City. Russian troops on the Dnipro River could use a ceasefire to prepare for the extremely difficult task of conducting an opposed river crossing undisturbed, significantly increasing the likelihood of success in such an endeavor. Stopping a well-prepared, major mechanized offensive cold is extremely rare in war, which means that a renewed Russian assault would likely threaten both Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia cities, as well as key cities in the Donetsk "fortress belt," almost immediately. Russia is constructing a large highway and railway aimed at connecting major cities in occupied Ukraine and Russia, which will reinforce Russia's hold on occupied Ukraine and Russia's ability to transport and supply Russian forces operating in Ukraine in the event of a future Russian offensive in southern Ukraine.[4]
The US and Europe would likely need to provide military aid to Ukraine more rapidly, in much larger volumes, and at higher cost the closer the ultimate ceasefire lines are to the current frontline. Ukraine would likely need an even larger military with greater capabilities to play its critical role in deterring and, if necessary, defeating future aggression along current frontline (both within Ukraine and along Ukraine’s international border with Russia) that is over 2,100 kilometers long. Enforcing a ceasefire along the current frontline would also require the commitment of large numbers of Western forces. Helping Ukraine regain strategically critical territory, as Trump has suggested he intends to do, could significantly reduce the cost and difficulty of securing a future peace.[5] A ceasefire along more defensible positions would also place Russian forces in a more disadvantaged position for renewed offensive operations, making future Russian aggression less likely.
Russian officials maintain their maximalist territorial claims over all occupied Ukraine and significant parts of unoccupied Ukraine, however. Senior Kremlin officials, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, have consistently demanded that Ukraine surrender the entirety of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts, including areas that Russian forces do not already occupy, and have reiterated these claims in recent weeks.[6] Russian state media has also recently amplified similar sentiments from Kremlin-affiliated mouthpieces.[7] Putin recently claimed that "Novorossiya" is an integral part of Russia, and Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov defined "Novorossiya" as all of eastern and southern Ukraine including Kharkiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Odesa, and Mykolaiv oblasts.[8] Russia currently occupies a small portion of Kharkiv Oblast and the Kinburn Spit in Mykolaiv Oblast, and Russian forces are advancing towards the Dnipropetrovsk Oblast administrative border. Continued Kremlin statements demanding that Ukraine cede unoccupied Ukrainian territory indicate that the Kremlin and Putin remain committed to these territorial goals despite ongoing negotiations.
Russian officials have given no public indications that they are willing to make concessions on their territorial or security demands of Ukraine. Accepting Western-backed security guarantees for Ukraine would be a significant concession for Putin. Putin has repeatedly called for Ukraine to permanently abandon its goals of joining NATO or any security bloc and to reject future offers of foreign military assistance, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently claimed that Russia will reject the future deployment of any European peacekeepers to Ukraine and consider any such deployment as the "direct, official, undisguised involvement of NATO countries" in the war.[9] Russian officials also appear to be generating increased support for their demands in Russian society despite the costs of Russia's protracted war effort, and Putin likely remains committed to securing a return for Russia's investment in the war he regards as sufficient.[10] Putin and Kremlin officials have been regularly broadcasting their demands for Ukrainian territorial and security concessions beyond the current frontlines to the Russian people, underscoring how unlikely Putin is to abandon his ambitions in Ukraine even after a ceasefire.
Russia continues to seize on diplomatic engagements with the United States to normalize its war demands. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke on the phone on March 15 and discussed next steps in discussions about a peace agreement in Ukraine.[11] Rubio and Lavrov agreed to continue working toward restoring dialogue between the United States and Russia. The US Department of State's and Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs' readouts differ, however. Russian readouts emphasized that Rubio and Lavrov discussed implementing "mutual understandings" that were reached during the February 18 bilateral meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, but did not mention more recent US-Russian diplomatic engagements, whereas the US State Department's did not refer to "mutual understandings" reached in Riyadh.[12] This discrepancy in messaging indicates that the Kremlin is seizing specifically on the Riyadh meeting as part of ongoing narrative efforts to portray the United States and Russia as in complete agreement on how to settle the war in Ukraine and to draw attention away from Russian President Vladimir Putin's recent rejection of the US-Ukrainian ceasefire proposal.
The United Kingdom (UK) convened a virtual Coalition of the Willing summit on March 15 to reiterate support for Ukraine and discuss plans for peace. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer chaired a virtual meeting with 29 international leaders, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and officials from Europe, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, who have agreed to continue pressuring Russia, supplying military aid to Ukraine, and tightening economic restraints on Russia "to weaken Putin's war machine and bring him to the [negotiating] table."[13] Starmer stated that the Kremlin's delay over the US ceasefire proposal contradicts Putin's stated desire for peace.[14]
An unnamed military source told The Sunday Times on March 16 that 35 countries within the coalition have agreed to supply weapons, logistics, and intelligence support aimed at deterring Putin from resuming offensive operations in the future.[15] The Sunday Times reported on March 16 that Starmer outlined plans to deploy a Western peacekeeping contingent of over 10,000 troops to Ukraine, and an unnamed senior official told the outlet that officials are working at an "unprecedented" speed to establish the contingent. Starmer stated that the coalition will reconvene on March 20 to accelerate efforts to support a potential peace deal in Ukraine.[16]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 15, 2025
Click here to read the full report.
Nicole Wolkov, Grace Mappes, Angelica Evans, Olivia Gibson, and George Barros
March 15, 2025, 3:15pm ET
Note: The data cut-off for this product was 11:00 am ET on March 15. ISW will cover subsequent reports in the March 16 Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment.
Russian milbloggers and Ukrainian officials continue to deny Russian President Vladimir Putin's unsubstantiated claim that Russian forces have encircled a significant number of Ukrainian troops in Kursk Oblast. Russian milbloggers published maps on March 14 and 15 showing Russian and Ukrainian positions in Kursk Oblast that do not indicate Russian forces have encircled Ukrainian forces, and two Russian milbloggers explicitly denied Putin's claim that Russian forces encircled a significant number of Ukrainian forces in the area on March 13 and 14.[1] One milblogger characterized Putin's claims as a narrative intended to influence US President Donald Trump ahead of peace negotiations.[2] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky noted that Russian forces are unsuccessfully attempting to encircle Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast, that no encirclement currently exists, and stated that Putin is attempting to delay discussion of the US-Ukrainian 30-day ceasefire proposal by spreading these claims.[3] Independent Ukrainian sources also denied Putin's claims about Russian encirclements of Ukrainian forces and noted that Ukrainian forces maintain the ability to maneuver from their remaining positions in Kursk Oblast despite a difficult tactical situation.[4] ISW has still not observed any Russian milblogger claims or geolocated footage suggesting that Russian forces have encircled Ukrainian troops in Kursk Oblast. Ukrainian forces appear to maintain egress routes across the international border from their positions in Kursk Oblast as of this publication.
Russian forces continued offensive operations in Kursk Oblast but have not completely pushed Ukrainian forces out of the area as of this publication. Geolocated footage published on March 12 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced in western Basivka (northeast of Sumy City in Sumy Oblast).[5] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and other Russian sources claimed on March 15 that Russian forces seized Zaoleshenka (immediately west of Sudzha) and Rubanshchina (west of Sudzha), but ISW has not observed evidence to assess that Russian forces have seized the entirety of these settlements.[6] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces seized Gogolevka (west of Sudzha) and are clearing Guyevo (south of Sudzha).[7] Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces maintain positions near Oleshnya and Gornal (both southwest of Sudzha).[8] Russian forces continued attacking near Rubanshchina, Gogolevka, and Guyevo.[9] Elements of the Russian 11th Airborne (VDV) Brigade are reportedly operating near Gogolevka, and elements of the 810th Naval Infantry Brigade (Black Sea Fleet) and 177th Naval Infantry Regiment (Caspian Flotilla) are reportedly operating near Guyevo.[10]
Ukrainian officials expressed concern about Russian ground operations in northern Sumy Oblast but doubt Russia's ability to conduct an effective concerted offensive operation against Sumy City. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated that the Russian military is accumulating forces along Ukraine's eastern border, indicating Russia's interest in "striking" Sumy Oblast.[11] Zelensky may be referring to Russian efforts to advance far enough into northern Sumy Oblast to get within artillery range of Sumy City. Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation Head Lieutenant Andriy Kovalenko stated that Russian forces are preparing for more "active actions" in the Sumy Oblast border area and to "strike" Sumy Oblast but not conduct an offensive operation against Sumy City.[12] Ukrainian officials stated that Russian assault groups and sabotage and renaissance groups continue to operate along the Sumy Oblast border and are attempting to advance into Ukraine.[13]
The Kremlin is likely preparing to intensify a narrative that accuses Ukrainian forces of war crimes in Kursk Oblast in an attempt to discredit the Ukrainian military, erode Western support for Ukraine, and spoil or delay straightforward discussions about the 30-day ceasefire that US President Donald Trump proposed to Putin. Russian President Vladimir Putin, other facets of the Russian government, Russian state media, and pro-Kremlin mouthpieces have recently intensified claims accusing Ukrainian forces of committing war crimes in Kursk Oblast during their seven-month incursion. Putin asked on March 13, in reaction to the US-Ukrainian temporary ceasefire proposal, whether Russia should let Ukrainian forces leave Kursk Oblast "after they committed a lot of crimes against civilians" and reiterated claims on March 14 that Ukrainian forces committed "terrorism" in Kursk Oblast.[14] The Russian Investigative Committee announced on March 12 that it is opening investigations into alleged Ukrainian war crimes in areas of Kursk Oblast that endured heavy fighting and announced the conviction of two Ukrainian soldiers for alleged "terrorism" and "war crimes" in Kursk Oblast on March 14.[15] Russian ultranationalist voices, including those with Kremlin affiliations, have been amplifying Putin's statements and Russian state media claims accusing Ukrainian forces of war crimes, including executing civilians in Kursk Oblast, more frequently in recent days.[16] Russian state media has amplified pro-Kremlin voices, including Acting Kursk Oblast Governor Alexander Khinshtein, accusing Ukrainian forces of war crimes in Kursk Oblast since the start of the incursion in August 2024 but has intensified these efforts since February 2025.[17] These claims are unsubstantiated.
Putin likely intends to use this narrative falsely portraying Ukrainian forces as brutal war criminals - as the Kremlin did in late 2021 and 2022 to justify Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine - to spoil or delay discussions about a 30-day ceasefire, especially when contrasted with Putin's efforts to portray himself as a merciful leader.[18] Russian ultranationalist voices used Putin's and Russian state media's allegations of Ukrainian war crimes to support their calls for Russia to reject any ceasefire in Ukraine whatsoever and to justify the brutal treatment of Ukrainian forces on the battlefield.[19] ISW has frequently reported on the sharp uptick of confirmed Russian executions of Ukrainian prisoners of war (POWs) on the battlefield in 2024 and early 2025 likely under orders from the Russian military command, and ISW observed a report of Russian forces executing Ukrainian POWs near Sudzha on March 13.[20]
Russian forces conducted drone and missile strikes against Ukraine on the night of March 14 to 15, including conducting their third double-tap strike against Ukraine in the past week. The Ukrainian Air Force reported on March 15 that Russian forces launched two Iskander-M ballistic missiles from Kursk Oblast and 178 Shahed and decoy drones from Oryol, Bryansk, and Kursk cities; Millerovo, Rostov Oblast; Primorsko-Akhtarsk, Krasnodar Krai; and occupied Cape Chauda, Crimea.[21] Ukrainian forces downed 130 drones over Kharkiv, Poltava, Sumy, Chernihiv, Cherkasy, Kyiv, Zhytomyr, Khmelnytskyi, Kirovohrad, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, Odesa, and Mykolaiv oblasts and 38 drones were "lost," likely due to Ukrainian electronic warfare (EW) interference. Ukrainian Southern Operational Command reported that two ballistic missiles struck Kryvyi Rih, Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, and Ukrainian officials reported that Russian drones struck civilian and critical infrastructure in Chernihiv and Sumy cities and Chornomorsk, Odesa Oblast.[22] Ukraine's State Emergency Service reported on March 15 that Russian forces conducted three drone strikes each one hour apart on a residential area of Bohoduhiv, Kharkiv Oblast, likely in an effort to injure and kill Ukrainian first responders in the area.[23] Ukrainian officials reported that Russian forces conducted double tap strikes against Kryvyi Rih, Dnipropetrovsk Oblast with missiles on the night of March 11 to 12 and a hospital in Zolochiv, Kharkiv Oblast with drones on the night of March 13 to 14.[24]
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appointed the official Ukrainian delegation to "engage with Ukraine's international partners" in the negotiation process to end the war on March 15. Ukrainian Presidential Office Head Andriy Yermak will lead the delegation, and the delegation will also include Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha, Defense Minister Rustem Umerov, and Deputy Presidential Administration Head Pavlo Palisa.[25] This is the same delegation who attended the US–Ukrainian meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on March 11.[26]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 14, 2025
Click here to read the full report with maps
Angelica Evans, Grace Mappes, Olivia Gibson, Daria Novikov, George Barros, and Frederick W. Kagan with Nate Trotter and William Runkel
March 14, 2025, 7:15 pm ET
ISW has observed no geolocated evidence to indicate that Russian forces have encircled a significant number of Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast or elsewhere along the frontline in Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed during a press conference on March 13 that Russian forces have "isolated" Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast and that it is "impossible" for small groups of Ukrainian forces to withdraw from positions in Kursk Oblast.[1] Putin claimed that Ukrainian forces will not be able to leave Kursk at all "if" Russian forces can conduct a "physical blockade" in the coming days. Putin stated during a Russian Security Council meeting on March 14 that Russian forces have "blocked" unspecified Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast.[2] The Ukrainian General Staff reported on March 14 that Russian authorities are fabricating claims about the alleged "encirclement" of Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast in order to influence the political and informational scene.[3] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces have regrouped and withdrawn to more advantageous defensive positions in Kursk Oblast and that Ukrainian forces are not under threat of encirclement.
Russian milbloggers have also not coalesced around claims that Russian forces have encircled or "blocked" a significant number of Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast in recent days, but milbloggers may alter their reporting to mirror Putin's claims in the coming days. Some Russian milbloggers claimed on March 12 and 13 that Russian forces encircled an unspecified number of Ukrainian forces in an unspecified area of Kursk Oblast, but many Russian milbloggers published maps on March 13 and 14 acknowledging that Ukrainian forces have viable egress routes into Sumy Oblast from their remaining positions in Kursk Oblast.[4] At least one Russian milblogger explicitly questioned claims that Russian forces encircled Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast on March 12, and another complained on March 12 that Russian forces are unable to encircle Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast because Russian forces cannot conduct rapid, mechanized breakthroughs into rear Ukrainian areas.[5]
Putin claimed in October 2024 that Russian forces "encircled" 2,000 Ukrainian troops in Kursk Oblast, but ISW never observed any Russian milblogger claims or geolocated footage to substantiate Putin's October 2024 claim.[6] Putin has repeatedly failed to acknowledge that the Ukrainian salient in Kursk Oblast extends from the Ukrainian-Russian international border and that Ukrainian forces can transit the sections of the border under Ukrainian control.
Putin seized on a statement by US President Donald Trump about the supposed encirclement of Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast to distract from his recent rejection of the US-Ukrainian ceasefire proposal. President Trump stated in a post on Truth Social on March 14 that Russian forces have "completely surrounded" "thousands" of Ukrainian forces, presumably in Kursk Oblast, and called on Putin to "spare" their lives.[7] Putin responded directly to Trump's request during the March 14 security council meeting and claimed that Russian forces will guarantee the "life and decent treatment" of Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast if Ukrainian forces surrender.[8] Putin reiterated unsubstantiated claims that Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast have committed crimes against Russian civilians in the area and said that Russia considers the Ukrainian incursion an act of "terrorism." Putin claimed that Ukrainian authorities must order Ukrainian forces to surrender in order for Russia to implement Trump's request. Putin is attempting to present himself as a reasonable and merciful leader whom President Trump can engage with and to generate a new narrative to distract from Putin's decision to reject the US-Ukrainian ceasefire proposal on March 13.[9]
Kremlin statements following Putin's meeting with US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff on March 13 underscore Putin's rejection of the US-Ukrainian ceasefire proposal and continued unwillingness to engage in good faith negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that Putin received Witkoff in Moscow on the evening of March 13 and reiterated that Putin "supports Trump's position on the settlement in Ukraine" but that there are "questions that need to be answered together."[10] Peskov said that Putin gave Witkoff information to pass to Trump and that Russia and the United States understand that Putin and Trump need to have a conversation and will determine the details of a Putin-Trump phone call in the future.[11] Neither the Kremlin nor the US government have provided further details about this meeting as of this report.
Peskov's emphasis on a direct Putin-Trump call and Putin's continued refusal to accept the US-Ukrainian proposed ceasefire suggests that Putin likely intends to distract from and prolong any negotiations for a future ceasefire in Ukraine. Putin's recent calls for a direct phone call with Trump are only the latest development in Putin's efforts to posture Russia and the United States as equal on the global stage.[12] Russian insider sources recently claimed that Putin aims to protract negotiations about a possible temporary ceasefire, and Putin's recent public statements are consistent with these insider claims.[13] Leaked documents from a think tank close to the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB)'s Fifth Service reportedly state that the Kremlin is unwilling to accept a ceasefire in Ukraine before 2026.[14] ISW assessed on March 12 that these Russian insider source leaks may have been intentional and part of a Russian negotiating strategy that aims to push the United States to renegotiate its deal with Ukraine on the temporary ceasefire.[15]
US intelligence reportedly continues to assess that Putin is unwilling to end the war in Ukraine and remains committed to conquering Ukraine, which is consistent with ISW's long-term assessment of Putin's objectives in Ukraine and unwillingness to negotiate in good faith. The Washington Post, citing unspecified people familiar with the matter, reported that classified US intelligence reports assess that Putin remains committed to his goal of dominating Ukraine.[16] The Washington Post reported that a US intelligence assessment dated March 6, 2025, concluded that Putin remains determined to "hold sway" over Ukraine. Current and former US officials told the Washington Post that if Putin did agree to a temporary ceasefire, Russia would use the ceasefire to rest and refit Russian forces and that Putin would likely break the agreement and falsely blame Ukraine for violating the ceasefire. Four Western intelligence officials and two US congressional officials told NBC on February 18 that intelligence from the United States and US allies shows that Putin still aims to control all of Ukraine and that there is no intelligence suggesting that Putin is ready for a peace deal.[17] ISW continues to assess that the Kremlin maintains its long-standing goals in Ukraine, which amount to Ukraine's full capitulation, and the Kremlin has maintained its expansionist rhetoric despite recent talks with the Trump administration about peace in Ukraine.[18]
Russian forces marginally advanced towards the international border in Kursk Oblast on March 14, but Ukrainian forces still maintain limited positions in Kursk Oblast. Geolocated footage published on March 13 indicates that Russian forces advanced within Zaoleshenka (immediately west of Sudzha).[19] Russian forces likely also seized Goncharovka (west of Sudzha), given that NASA Fire Information for Resource Management (FIRMS) data from March 14 indicates heavy fighting in the area and that Russian sources recently claimed that Russian forces seized the settlement.[20] Other Russian sources continued to claim that Russian forces seized Zaoleshenka, Goncharovka, and Rubanshchina (west of Sudzha), and that Russian forces advanced near Guyevo (south of Sudzha) and up to the southern outskirts of Oleshnya (southwest of Sudzha along the international border).[21] A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces have not yet entered Gogolevka (southwest of Sudzha along the international border), and another milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces also maintain positions within Oleshnya, Guyevo, and Gornal (southwest of Guyevo along the international border).[22] Russian forces continued ground attacks near Kurilovka (south of Sudzha), and a milblogger claimed that Russian forces are regrouping for further advances within Kursk Oblast.[23] Elements of the Russian "Kurskiye Vityaz" Assault Battalion, reportedly of the "Pyatnashka" International Volunteer Brigade (51st Combined Arms Army [CAA], formerly 1st Donetsk People's Republic Army Corps [DNR AC], Southern Military District [SMD]), are reportedly operating near Sudzha, and elements of the 1st Battalion of the Russian 9th Motorized Rifle Regiment (18th Motorized Rifle Division, 11th AC, Leningrad Military District [LMD]) are reportedly operating near Malaya Loknya (north of Sudzha).[24]
Russian forces also reportedly continued to advance in northern Sumy Oblast. Ukraine's State Border Service Spokesperson Andriy Demchenko stated on March 14 that small Russian assault groups are continuing to attack into northern Sumy Oblast and are trying to advance towards Novenke and Zhuravka (both northeast of Sumy City).[25] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced east of Novenke and into northern Basivka (northeast of Sumy City).[26] A Russian milblogger reiterated claims on March 14 that Russian forces may attempt to create a "sanitary zone" in Sumy Oblast in the future.[27] Ukraine's Pivnich (Northern) Operational Command Spokesperson Colonel Vadym Mysnyk responded to recent speculation about the possibility of a Russian cross border attack into Chernihiv Oblast and stated that Ukrainian forces have the situation along the international border in Chernihiv Oblast under control and that Russian sabotage and reconnaissance groups have operated in the area "for a long time."[28]
Consistent Ukrainian strikes against Russian air defense assets are reportedly allowing Ukrainian long-range drones to increasingly penetrate the Russian air defense umbrella in deep rear areas, including in Moscow Oblast. Krasnodar Krai authorities reported that Ukrainian drone strikes hit the Tuapse Oil Refinery overnight and caused a fire at one of the oil tanks that burned an area of over 1,000 square meters.[29] Geolocated footage published on March 14 shows a burning oil depot in Tuapse.[30] Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation Head Lieutenant Andriy Kovalenko stated that the Tuapse Oil Refinery is one of Russia's largest refineries and can process up to 12 million tons of oil per year, supporting Russian military needs in southern Russia and in the Black Sea.[31] Kovalenko stated that Ukrainian drone strikes also damaged multiple unspecified facilities in Moscow Oblast on the morning of March 14. Russian authorities and sources claimed that downed Ukrainian drones damaged residential areas in Moscow Oblast while en route to Moscow City and did not report damage to other facilities, however.[32] Footage published on March 14 shows a drone striking a building near the 333rd Combat Training Center in Mulino, Nizhny Novgorod Oblast.[33] Elements of the Russian 47th Tank Division (1st Guards Tank Army [GTA, Moscow Military District [MMD]) are also based in Mulino.[34] Sources in Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) told Ukrainian state-news outlet Ukrinform on March 14 that SBU drones recently struck gas compressor stations in Saratov and Tambov oblasts and a storage facility for S-300/S-400 air defense missiles near Radkovka, Belgorod Oblast.[35]
Kovalenko stated that Ukrainian drones were able to successfully infiltrate Moscow City's airspace and strike infrastructure in the area despite Russia's efforts to concentrate air defenses around Moscow Oblast.[36] Kovalenko suggested that Russian authorities have concentrated air defense systems around Moscow City at the expense of other areas in Russia due to a significant shortage of radars and air defense systems. Kovalenko noted that Ukrainian drone strikes have destroyed a significant number of air defense systems and radars both along the front line and within rear areas in Russia and in occupied Ukraine, highlighting that tactical Ukrainian drone strikes have likely significantly degraded Russia's ability to effectively defend strategic-level military and industrial assets in deep rear areas.
The Ukrainian military reorganized the Ukrainian 3rd Separate Assault Brigade into the 3rd Army Corps, further showcasing Ukraine's force efforts to transition to a corps structure. Ukraine's 3rd Separate Assault Brigade announced on March 14 that the Ukrainian military command restructured the unit as the 3rd Army Corps.[37] Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief General Oleksandr Syrskyi stated on February 3 that Ukraine started implementing organizational reforms to transition the Ukrainian military into a "corps structure."[38] ISW continues to assess that Ukraine's efforts to form an echelon between Ukraine’s brigades and operational groups of forces and create a command staff headquarters at this new intermediary echelon will likely improve command and control for Ukrainian brigades and facilitate more effective operations.
Ukraine's European allies continue to provide military assistance and technical support and demonstrate interest in strengthening bilateral cooperation. Swedish Defense Minister Pål Jonson announced on March 13 an artillery package for Ukraine worth three billion Swedish Kroner (roughly $300 million), including 18 additional Archer artillery systems, five ARTHUR counter-battery radar systems, and financial support for the Ukrainian shell initiative and domestic artillery production.[39] Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov signed a bilateral agreement with Spanish Defense Minister Margarita Robles on March 14 to strengthen defense cooperation and support Ukrainian military training.[40] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met with Dutch Representative Dilan Yeşilgöz-Zegerius to discuss the US-Ukrainian 30-day ceasefire proposal and possible future supply of F-16 jets, drones, and ammunition and Dutch support in further developing Ukrainian weapons production.[41]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 13, 2025
Click here to read the full report
Angelica Evans, Christina Harward, Olivia Gibson, Daria Novikov, George Barros, and Frederick W. Kagan with Nate Trotter and William Runkel
March 13, 2025, 9:00 pm ET
Note: The data cut-off for this product was 12:15 pm ET on March 13. ISW will cover subsequent reports in the March 14 Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment.
Russian President Vladimir Putin rejected the ceasefire proposal that the United States and Ukraine recently agreed upon in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and offered an alternative proposal that undermines US President Donald Trump's stated goal of securing a lasting peace in Ukraine. Putin claimed on March 13 that he "agrees" with the temporary ceasefire proposal and that the "idea itself is correct" but that the cessation of hostilities "should be such that it would lead to long-term peace and eliminate the initial causes" of the war.[1] Putin thus rejected one of the main principles of the US-Ukrainian proposal — that the temporary ceasefire precede formal negotiations to end the war.[2] Putin also claimed that there are questions that "require painstaking research from both sides." Putin questioned several aspects of the US-Ukrainian temporary ceasefire proposal. Putin asked what would happen to the remaining Ukrainian salient in Kursk Oblast and whether Ukraine would be allowed to continue to mobilize forces, train newly mobilized soldiers, and receive military aid from its partners and allies. Putin questioned the control and verification measures of a temporary ceasefire and who would give the orders to stop fighting. Putin suggested that he may call President Trump to discuss the "issues" involved in the ceasefire proposal. Putin postured military strength during his rejection of the ceasefire proposal, highlighting recent Russian successes in pushing Ukrainian forces out of Kursk Oblast and claiming that Russian forces are advancing in "almost all areas of combat."
Putin's rejection of the ceasefire is consistent with March 12 reports from Russian insider sources about the Kremlin's likely response to the proposal.[3] Bloomberg reported on March 12 that sources familiar with the Kremlin's thinking and the situation stated that Putin will "stretch the timeline" for agreeing to the temporary ceasefire in order to ensure that his stipulations "are taken into account." A source close to the Kremlin stated that Russia may demand a halt to weapons supplies to Ukraine as a condition of the temporary ceasefire. Russian opposition outlet Verstka reported on March 12 that a source close to the Russian Presidential Administration stated that the Kremlin would "formally" give a "positive response" to the temporary ceasefire proposal but would also demand "impossible conditions" to which Ukraine cannot agree. The source stated that Putin wants to remove Ukraine from talks so that Russia can engage in negotiations with the United States alone while also "correcting the situation on the front" to strengthen Russia's negotiating position. ISW assessed on March 12 that these Russian insider source leaks may have been intentional and part of a Russian negotiating strategy that aims to push the United States to renegotiate its deal with Ukraine on the temporary ceasefire.[4] Putin's response to the ceasefire offer suggests that they may also have been at least partially accurate.
Putin is offering an alternative ceasefire agreement that is contrary to the intentions and goals of the US-Ukrainian ceasefire proposal. The US-Ukrainian ceasefire proposal calls for a renewable 30-day cessation of combat operations along the entire frontline, a moratorium on long-range missile and drone strikes, and a cessation of operations in the Black Sea.[5] The proposal allows for Russia and Ukraine to extend the ceasefire and assumes the continuation of US intelligence sharing and US and other military assistance to Ukraine. The US-Ukrainian ceasefire proposal was explicitly aimed at allowing Russia and Ukraine to demonstrate their willingness to make peace and separates the temporary ceasefire from future negotiations to end the war.
Putin's envisioned ceasefire agreement would grant Russia greatly disproportionate advantages and set conditions for the Kremlin to renew hostilities on terms extremely favorable to Russia. Putin's envisioned ceasefire agreement would likely require the United States and Ukraine's other supporters to pause military assistance to Ukraine and require Ukraine to stop recruiting and training personnel. Such a ceasefire agreement would begin to disarm Ukraine if renewed for a long period of time by preventing its military from reconstituting, training, and equipping itself and would cause Ukraine and the West to surrender significant leverage to Russia. Putin did not suggest that Russia would also cease military recruitment efforts, the production of military equipment, and the receipt of military aid from Russia's allies. Russia's ability to continue these measures during a potential ceasefire while preventing Ukraine from doing so would allow Russia to resume offensive operations with better manned and equipped units at a time of its choosing. Russian forces are currently on the offensive across the theater, as Putin observed, so demands that would prevent Ukrainian forces from reconstituting can only be intended to preserve or enhance Russia's ability to resume the offensive at a later date. Such demands would seem a clear indication that Putin is not, in fact, committed to making peace.
Putin's attempts to introduce a new ceasefire agreement on terms that asymmetrically benefit Russia ignore Trump's stated intention that the ceasefire set conditions for negotiations toward a more comprehensive peace agreement in the future. An agreement along the lines Putin appears to be offering would undermine the Trump administration's stated objective of bringing about a sustainable peace in Ukraine, would reinforce Putin's belief that Russia can militarily defeat Ukraine, and would incentivize Putin to resume military operations against Ukraine rather than making any concessions in formal negotiations to end the war.
Putin is holding the ceasefire proposal hostage and is attempting to extract preemptive concessions ahead of formal negotiations to end the war. Putin refused to accept the US-Ukrainian ceasefire proposal on its own terms and is instead demanding additional conditions that would contribute directly to the Kremlin's war aims. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated on March 11 that the US will "know what the impediment is to peace" in Ukraine if Putin rejected the ceasefire proposal.[6] ISW continues to assess that Putin is disinterested in good faith peace negotiations to end the war.[7] Putin remains committed to accomplishing his long-term goals of installing a pro-Russian puppet regime in Ukraine, undermining Ukraine's ability to defend itself against future Russian aggression and preventing Ukraine's accession to NATO. Putin's rejection of the ceasefire proposal underscores Putin's commitment to securing his objectives in Ukraine, particularly Ukraine's demilitarization, and disinterest in any pause in fighting that does not result in Ukrainian capitulation or at least set conditions for a successful renewal of Russian offensive operations in the future.
Russian forces continue to clear Ukrainian forces from Sudzha and its environs as Russian troops advance closer to the border in Kursk Oblast slowed on March 13 compared to recent days. Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief General Oleksandr Syrskyi stated on March 12 that he ordered Ukrainian forces to withdraw from some unspecified positions within the Kursk salient and move to more advantageous defensive positions in Kursk Oblast in order to save Ukrainian lives.[8] The Russian Ministry of Defense's (MoD) Main Military-Political Directorate Deputy Head and Akhmat Spetsnaz Commander, Major General Apti Alaudinov, claimed that Russian forces seized and cleared Sudzha and are attacking the remaining settlements along the international border.[9] Russian sources claimed that Russian forces are clearing Sudzha and seized Podol (immediately south of Sudzha), Goncharovka (just west of Sudzha), Zaoleshenka (just northwest of Sudzha), Rubanshchina (west of Sudzha), and Molovoi (south of Sudzha).[10] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces are advancing towards Oleshnya (southwest of Sudzha immediately on the Russian-Ukrainian border) and that Ukrainian forces maintain positions in Oleshnya, Gogolevka (northeast of Oleshnya), Guyevo (south of Sudzha), and Gornal (southwest of Guyevo immediately on the Russian-Ukrainian border).[11] A Russian milblogger continued to claim that renewed Ukrainian HIMARS strikes are slowing the rate of Russian advances south of Sudzha.[12] Drone operators from the "Rubikon" Center for Advanced Unmanned Technologies are reportedly operating near Sudzha.[13]
Russian forces also marginally advanced in northern Sumy Oblast. Geolocated footage published on March 12 indicates that Russian forces advanced northwest of Basivka (northeast of Sumy City).[14] Syrskyi stated that Russian airborne (VDV) and Spetsnaz forces are attacking along the international border and attempting to advance further into Sumy Oblast.[15] Ukraine's State Border Service Spokesperson Andriy Demchenko stated on March 12 that Russian forces are attempting to interdict Ukrainian ground lines of communication (GLOCs) along the international border near Novenke (northeast of Sumy City).[16] A Ukrainian source affiliated with Ukrainian military intelligence stated on March 13 that Russian forces are using all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) in northern Sumy Oblast and are attempting to leverage their manpower advantage to advance in the area.[17] Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces are counterattacking near Zhuravka, Basivka, and Novenke (all northeast of Sumy City).[18]
Russian milbloggers theorized on March 13 that Russian forces may launch an organized offensive operation into northern Sumy Oblast in the coming weeks and months and may also attack into Chernihiv Oblast — in line with Russian President Vladimir Putin's March 12 statements.[19] One Russian milblogger claimed that an offensive into Sumy Oblast would significantly strengthen Russia's position in future peace negotiations.[20] Putin asked Russian Chief of the General Staff General Valery Gerasimov during a visit to a Russian command post in Kursk Oblast on March 12 to "think in the future about creating a security zone" along the Ukrainian-Russian international border.[21] Putin and other Kremlin officials previously justified Russia's offensive operation into northern Kharkiv Oblast as an attempt to establish a "buffer zone" to protect Belgorod City from Ukrainian shelling.[22] Putin may assess that Russian forces can make significant advances into northern Ukraine following their relatively quicker advances in Kursk Oblast over the previous week, despite the fact that Russian forces have failed to make significant advances in northern Kharkiv Oblast over the last ten months.
Kremlin officials continue to use narratives similar to those that the Kremlin has used to justify its invasions of Ukraine to set informational conditions to justify future aggression against NATO member states. Russian Presidential Aide and former Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev claimed in an interview with Russian national security-focused magazine National Defense published on March 13 that NATO "traditionally" uses threats as its main instrument in interstate relations and that NATO's "European wing" is continuing its policy on "blocking" Russia in the Baltic region. Patrushev claimed that the United Kingdom (UK) is "orchestrating" NATO's "aggravation of the situation" as part of efforts to disrupt negotiations on Ukraine and Russian and American attempts to normalize their bilateral relations. Patrushev also claimed that the Finnish population, unlike Finnish authorities, is friendly to Russia and that the UK has approved Finnish authorities to "do everything to deprive their country [Finland] of its sovereignty." Patrushev threateningly claimed that the Gulf of Finland has a historical "geographic affiliation with Russia" and that "it should not be forgotten that Finland was part of the Russian Empire." Patrushev claimed that the Russian Empire "respected" and "preserved" the Finnish people and language in the Grand Duchy of Finland. Patrushev appeared to try to compare Russia's current war against Ukraine to the Soviet-Finnish Winter War in 1939–1940. Patrushev claimed that Finnish attempts to seize Soviet lands and "actively militarize" created a threat to the USSR and that Finland was "indiscriminately exterminating" the Slavic population in Karelia. Patrushev claimed that the West is "again turning [Finland] into a springboard" for aggression against Russia. The Kremlin has used similar false narratives about the Ukrainian government's discrimination of Russian-speaking minorities in Ukraine and the military threats that Ukraine supposedly poses to Russia in order to justify Moscow's invasions of Ukraine. Patrushev's claims that the UK is "orchestrating" Finland's and the Baltic states' allegedly threatening behavior are likely part of the Kremlin's ongoing efforts to drive wedges between the United States and Europe and to weaken NATO[23] The Kremlin appears to be using the same general narrative playbook that it has used against Ukraine and other former Soviet states but is adjusting its narratives to exploit any tensions among Western states.
Russian forces continue to execute Ukrainian prisoners of war (POW) in violation of international law. Ukrainian Ombudsman Dmytro Lubinets reported on March 13 that there is footage of Russian forces allegedly executing five unarmed Ukrainian POWs in an unspecified area.[24] Russian opposition outlet Astra reported on March 13 that there is footage reportedly filmed near Kazachya Loknya (north of Sudzha in Kursk Oblast) showing five deceased Ukrainian POWs.[25] ISW has observed and reported on numerous instances of Russian servicemembers executing Ukrainian POWs along the frontline in Ukraine and Kursk Oblast and continues to assess that this is a systemic trend in the Russian military and that Russian commanders are either complicit in or directly enabling their subordinates to conduct such atrocities.[26]
Russia will likely expand its permanent military basing in Belarus to enhance Russia’s force posture against NATO’s eastern flank. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko met in Moscow on March 13 and ratified the Russian-Belarus Union State treaty on security guarantees.[27] The treaty permits Russia to establish military bases and infrastructure in Belarus.[28] Putin noted that the treaty on security guarantees defines Russia's and Belarus' mutual allied obligations to ensure their defense and security using "the entire available arsenal of forces and means." Putin noted that Russia has deployed a joint Regional Group of Forces, modern Russian defense systems, and tactical nuclear weapons to Belarusian territory — all of which Putin claimed "reliably covers" the western borders of Belarus and Russia. ISW forecasted in 2021 that Russia may deploy a permanent Russian force presence in Belarus in order to increase Russia's capacity to threaten NATO's eastern flank and continues to assess that the Kremlin is using the Union State framework to advance its strategic effort to de facto annex Belarus.[29]
Key Takeaways:
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, March 12, 2025
Click here to read the full report
Christina Harward, Nicole Wolkov, Grace Mappes, Daria Novikov, George Barros, and Frederick W. Kagan with William Runkel
March 12, 2025, 8:00 pm ET
Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov offered a vague response on March 12 to the US-Ukrainian 30-day ceasefire proposal. Peskov responded to a question about Russia's response to the joint temporary ceasefire proposal, stating that "we don't want to get ahead of ourselves."[1] Peskov stated that Russia expects US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz to inform the Kremlin about the details of the US-Ukrainian negotiations.[2] Russian opposition outlet Verstka reported on March 12 that its sources in the Russian government stated that the US-Ukrainian temporary ceasefire proposal surprised the Kremlin, and a source close to the Russian presidential administration stated that the Kremlin expected the United States to discuss such a proposal with Russia in private before publicly announcing it, thereby providing the Kremlin time to formulate a prepared response.[3]
Russian President Vladimir Putin may hold hostage the ceasefire proposal to which Ukraine has agreed in order to extract preemptive concessions before formal negotiations to end the war have started. Reuters reported on March 12 that senior Russian sources stated that a deal on the temporary ceasefire would have to "take into account" Russia's advances on the battlefield and "address [Russia's] concerns."[4] Bloomberg reported on March 12 that sources familiar with the Kremlin's thinking and the situation stated that Putin will "stretch the timeline" for agreeing to the temporary ceasefire in order to ensure that his stipulations "are taken into account."[5] A source close to the Kremlin stated that Russia may demand a halt to weapons supplies to Ukraine as a condition of agreeing to the temporary ceasefire, but did not specify whether such a halt would include all international weapons provisions to Ukraine or only those from select countries. Suspending US or other military assistance to Ukraine during a ceasefire would be extremely advantageous to Russia, which continues to receive critical supplies and assistance from Iran, North Korea, and the People's Republic of China.[6] Such an enormous concession would also destroy US leverage in future negotiations, in addition to violating the conditions under which Ukraine agreed to the ceasefire in the first place.[7]
Russian opposition outlet Verstka reported on March 12 that a source close to the Russian Presidential Administration stated that the Kremlin would "formally" give a "positive response" to the temporary ceasefire proposal but would also demand "impossible conditions" to which Ukraine cannot agree.[8] The source stated that Putin wants to remove Ukraine from talks so that Russia can engage in negotiations with the United States alone while also "correcting the situation on the front" to strengthen Russia's negotiating position. The source added that the conditions of the temporary ceasefire "must suit Russia" and that Russia's agreement to a temporary ceasefire during which Ukraine continues to receive weapons and financing from its partners and allies is "stupid." These leaks may be intentional and part of a Russian negotiating strategy that aims to push the United States to renegotiate its deal with Ukraine on the temporary ceasefire.
Senior US and Ukrainian officials have said that the purpose of the temporary ceasefire is for Russia and Ukraine to demonstrate their willingness for peace and that the temporary ceasefire and negotiations to end the war are separate matters, whereas the Kremlin may intend to conjoin them. The US-Ukrainian joint statement announcing the temporary ceasefire proposal on March 11 noted that Ukraine and the United States intend to name their negotiating teams and immediately begin negotiations toward an enduring peace — noting the distinction between their March 11 temporary ceasefire proposal and future peace negotiations.[9] US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated on March 11 following the US-Ukrainian talks in Jeddah that the best goodwill gesture Russia can give would be to accept the ceasefire proposal and that if Russia says no, "then we'll know the impediment to peace."[10] Rubio characterized Ukraine's agreement to the ceasefire as the "kind of concession you would need to see in order to end the conflict."[11] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated on March 12 that Ukraine will use the 30-day ceasefire to prepare agreements with partners regarding a sustainable peace and long-term security guarantees.[12] The Kremlin's reported intention to make demands supporting its overall war objectives before agreeing to the temporary ceasefire violates the stated purpose of the ceasefire and the sequence of negotiations that US President Donald Trump has laid out. If the Kremlin holds the ceasefire hostage to demand preemptive concessions while continuing to pursue battlefield victories, that would strongly indicate that Russia lacks any urgency about ending the war and is uninterested in making any meaningful concessions.
Russian insider reports about the demands that the Kremlin may make before agreeing to the temporary ceasefire are in line with Russian officials' public statements in the past months. Putin outlined in June 2024 — and reiterated in December 2024 — his prerequisite demands for agreeing to a ceasefire.[13] These demands include the full Ukrainian withdrawal from the territory in Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts that Russian forces currently do not occupy and Ukraine's official abandonment of its goal of joining NATO. Kremlin officials have repeatedly insisted that any peace negotiations to take into consideration the "realities on the ground," and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov notably claimed on February 24 that Russia would only stop military activity in Ukraine when peace negotiations bring about a "solid, stable result that suits Russia" and account for the "realities" of the battlefield.[14] Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told Russian state newswire RIA Novosti on February 24 that Russia will not agree to a ceasefire that does not address the "root causes" of the war.[15] Kremlin officials, including Putin, have repeatedly claimed that any peace agreement must take into account the "root causes" of the war, which the Kremlin has defined as NATO's alleged violation of obligations not to expand eastward and the Ukrainian government's alleged discrimination against ethnic Russians and Russian language, media, and culture in Ukraine.[16]
A leaked February 2025 document from a think tank close to the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) that outlined a possible Kremlin negotiating strategy is largely in line with the Kremlin's recent public rhetoric and the March 12 Russian insider source reports. The Washington Post reported on March 12 that a European intelligence service obtained a document from a Russian think tank close to the Russian FSB's Fifth Service (which oversees operations in Ukraine among other things) written in the week before the February 18 US-Russian talks in Saudi Arabia.[17] The document states that a peace settlement to the war in Ukraine "cannot happen before 2026," rejects the deployment of peacekeepers to Ukraine, and calls for recognition of Russia's sovereignty over occupied Ukraine. The document calls for the creation of a buffer zone on the international Ukrainian-Russian border, including near Bryansk and Belgorod oblasts, and a "demilitarized zone" in southern Ukraine near Odesa Oblast and occupied Crimea. The document also states that Russia needs to "completely dismantle" the current Ukrainian government and rejects a possible Ukrainian commitment to not join NATO or to hold elections that include pro-Russian parties as insufficient measures. The document rejects any US plans to continue supplying weapons to Ukraine after any future peace deal and any Ukrainian plans to maintain its current number of military personnel. The document outlines ways in which Russia can strengthen its negotiating position by exacerbating tensions between the United States and both the People's...
[Short citation of 8% of the original article]