February 9, 2026

Institute for the Study of War: Russia blames U.S. for lack of progress in peace talks

Institute for the Study of War

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov explicitly blamed the United States on February 9 for the lack of progress in ending Russia’s war against Ukraine. Lavrov used a February 9 interview with TV BRICS, a Russian outlet covering BRICS states and candidate states, to accuse the United States of reneging on the peace proposals the United States itself allegedly proposed at the August 2025 US-Russia Alaska Summit by imposing new sanctions on Russia, seizing Russian shadow fleet tankers, and placing secondary tariffs on importers of Russian oil.[1] Lavrov claimed that the United States and Russia “seemingly…resolv[ed]” the war at the Alaska Summit and moved toward “broad and mutually beneficial collaboration,” but the United States has since “creat[ed] artificial barriers” to cooperation. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov similarly claimed on February 9 that the United States and Russia reached a “number of understandings” in Alaska, which Peskov claimed could lead to a “breakthrough” in peace negotiations.[2] The Kremlin has been exploiting the lack of publicly available documents from the Alaska Summit to claim that Russia and the United States came to an understanding to end the war during the meeting.[3] Kremlin officials have claimed that the Alaska Summit agreed to principles based on Russian President Vladimir Putin’s June 2024 speech to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), in which Putin insisted on capitulation to Russia’s original war demands of both Ukraine and NATO.[4] Kremlin officials have been trying to push the United States to abandon the recent US-led negotiations with Ukraine and Europe in favor of a US-Russian settlement based almost entirely on Russia’s demands.[5]

Lavrov reiterated Russia’s demand for effective control over Ukraine’s post-war government and the size and composition of its military. Lavrov stated that he has “no doubt” that Russia will prevent the deployment of “any weapons that threaten [Russia] on Ukrainian territory” in order to ensure Russia’s security.[6] The Kremlin has long demanded Ukraine’s “demilitarization” to prevent Ukraine from being able to defend itself.[7] Lavrov’s February 9 statement demonstrates that Russia wants to dictate not only the number of troops in Ukraine’s post-war military but also the weapons and equipment in Ukraine’s arsenal, a position codified in the 2022 Istanbul Protocols, to which the Kremlin periodically refers as the appropriate basis for a peace agreement.[8] The limitations in the Istanbul Protocols would have left Ukraine helpless against future Russian aggression. Lavrov’s demand about Western weapons would likely prohibit any meaningful Western military assistance to post-war Ukraine in the future, rejecting US-backed efforts to stand up a strong Ukrainian military to guarantee Ukraine’s security after a peace settlement. Lavrov further claimed that a peace settlement must eliminate Ukraine’s “Nazi roots” in order to ensure Russia’s security and the rights of ethnic Russians and Russian-speakers in “Crimea, Donbas, and Novorossiya.”[9] The Kremlin has called for the “denazification” of Ukraine since 2022 in order to demand the removal of the current Ukrainian government and its replacement with a pro-Russian puppet government. Lavrov’s reference to “Novorossiya” – an amorphous invented region in southern and eastern Ukraine that extends beyond Crimea and the four oblasts that Russia has illegally annexed – continues to demonstrate that Russia’s territorial demands go beyond Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts.[10] Lavrov also stated that Russia must ensure its security in the face of an alleged European threat to “unleash a war” against Russia.[11] Russia issued ultimatums to NATO in 2021, demanding “security guarantees” from the United States and NATO that amounted to the destruction of the current NATO alliance, with demands that NATO reverse the deployment of forces or weapons systems to member-states that joined NATO after 1997.[12] Lavrov’s February 9 statements are all implicit reiterations of Putin’s original war aims from 2021 and 2022 that amount to complete Ukrainian and NATO capitulation, effectively signaling that any peace deal that does not address Russian demands of not only Ukraine but also of NATO and the West will not satisfy Russia. The Kremlin’s insistence on these demands are calls for the United States to discard the negotiations process that the United States has conducted with Ukraine and Europe since the publication of the US-proposed 28-point plan.

The United States seized another Russian shadow fleet oil tanker. The US Department of Defense (DoD) reported on February 9 that the United States conducted a right-of-visit, maritime interdiction, and boarded the Aquila II on the night of February 8 to 9 in the area of responsibility of US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM).[27] The DoD stated that the vessel was violating the US quarantine of sanctioned vessels in the Caribbean Sea and noted that the DoD tracked the vessel from the Caribbean Sea to the Indian Ocean. Data from the Starboard Maritime Intelligence ship-tracking platform indicates that the Aquila IIsailed under the Panamanian flag and briefly transmitted its automatic identification systems (AIS) signal in the Indian Ocean on February 8. Starboard data indicates that the ship’s last AIS transmission before that was near the Strait of Hormuz on March 10, 2025. The United States sanctioned Sunne Co Limited, which owns the Aquilla II, in 2025 for its involvement in illegally transporting Russian oil above the G7 price cap.[28]

Key Takeaways

  1. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov explicitly blamed the United States on February 9 for the lack of progress in ending Russia’s war against Ukraine.
  2. Lavrov reiterated Russia’s demand for effective control over Ukraine’s post-war government and the size and composition of its military.
  3. Russian State Duma deputies are explicitly demanding that the United States concede to all Russian demands.
  4. Russian forces are likely falsely claiming that Ukrainian forces are conducting a “counteroffensive” near the Dnipropetrovsk-Zaporizhia Oblast administrative border to rectify earlier false reports about alleged Russian advances in the area.
  5. Russian and Ukrainian sources recently reported that Russian forces have increased the range of their guided glide bombs to 200 kilometers, but this is not a new Russian innovation.
  6. India will reportedly dramatically decrease or halt its direct and indirect purchases of Russian oil.
  7. The United States seized another Russian shadow fleet oil tanker.
  8. Likely Belarusian balloons violated Polish airspace on the night of February 8 to 9.
  9. Ukrainian forces recently advanced near Velykyi Burluk. Russian forces recently advanced in northern Sumy Oblast, near Velykyi Burluk, Kupyansk, Slovyansk, and in the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area
Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.