March 6, 2026

Institute for the Study of War:Russian shares intell on US forces with Iran

Institute for the Study of War

Russia is reportedly sharing intelligence with Iran to support Iranian attacks against US forces in the Middle East in contrast to the Kremlin’s recent attempts to frame Russia as a potential US ally and US-Russia relations as increasingly friendly. Three officials told the Washington Post on March 6 that Russia has given Iran the locations of US military assets, including warships and aircraft, since the US-Israeli February 28 strikes against Iran.[1] One of the officials characterized Russia’s provision of targeting information to strike US forces in the Middle East as a “pretty comprehensive effort.” The Washington Post noted that analysts indicated that Russia’s reported intelligence sharing fits the pattern of Iran’s strikes against US command and control infrastructure, radars, and temporary structures. The Center for Naval Analyses (CNA) Principal Research Scientist Mike Peterson stated that Russia could be giving Iran high-quality satellite imagery with which Iran could identify what bases the United States and its allies are currently using and other information, such as the location of aircraft, intelligence stations, and logistics flows.[2] Iran may not have regular access to high-quality satellite imagery, even from commercially available sources, and may be relying on Russia to get such imagery. Prominent commercial publisher of satellite imagery Planet Labs enacted a policy on March 6 subjecting all new imagery collected over the Gulf States and adjacent conflict zones, excluding Iran, to a mandatory 96-hour delay before making it publicly available, and other companies have held policies to never release images of US or allied bases.[3] Russian intelligence sharing, thus, may be supporting Iranian strikes on US military assets.

Ukraine continues to share its expertise and support air defense efforts in countering Iranian Shahed drone strikes in the Middle East. The Telegraph reported on March 4 that the UK sent Ukrainian-trained British drone operators to the Middle East as of March 3 to defend British bases in the region, and that the UK plans to deploy more later in the week.[9] One Western official told The Telegraph that these British drone operators have experience working in Ukraine, where they learned about layering sensing, warning, and targeting drones. Reuters reported on March 5, citing a source familiar with the matter, that US and Qatari officials are in talks with Ukraine to purchase Ukrainian interceptor drones to down Iranian Shahed drones.[10] The source stated that parties are also discussing the transfer of Ukrainian technologies that ”listen out“ for incoming enemy drones and ”disrupt their communication signals,” likely referring to acoustic sensors and electronic warfare (EW). Ukraine manufactures and relies on relatively cheap Shahed interceptor drones that cost only a few thousand dollars each to produce.[11] Ukraine has years of experience defending against almost nightly large-scale Russian drone and missile strike packages, which have included Iranian-origin strike drones much like those the United States and its allies currently face in the Middle East.[12] Ukraine also has a reported 90 percent interception rate of such drones.[13]

Ukrainian forces continue to liberate territory in southern Ukraine. ISW has observed evidence to assess that Ukrainian forces have liberated 244 square kilometers in the Hulyaipole and Oleksandrivka directions since January 1, 2026, while Russian forces seized 115 square kilometers in the same period. ISW’s mapping methodology may underestimate Ukrainian advances. Recent reports and geolocated footage indicate that Ukrainian forces have made significant gains south of the Vovcha River in the area southwest, south, and southeast of Oleksandrivka and west of the Haichur River in areas north of Hulyaipole. Ukrainian military observer Kostyantyn Mashovets reported on March 6 that Ukrainian forces likely consolidated positions in Ternove (southeast of Oleksandrivka), partially pushed Russian forces out of Berezove (just southwest of Ternove), and advanced into central Novomykolaivka (south of Berezove).[29] Mashovets added that Ukrainian forces advanced further south into Novohryhorivka and to Solodke (both southeast of Oleksandrivka and northeast of Hulyaipole). Mashovets reported that Ukrainian forces cleared Russian forces from areas west of the Haichur River, indicating that Ukrainian forces likely liberated Ternuvate and Kosivtseve (both northwest of Hulyaipole) and that Russian claims that Russian forces seized Rizdvyanka (southwest of Ternuvate) are false. Mashovets also reported that Ukrainian forces maintain positions in Tsvitkove (northwest of Hulyaipole), Krynychne, and Staroukrainka (both west of Hulyaipole) in areas where ISW previously assessed that Russian forces advanced in. Geolocated footage published on March 5 also indicates that Ukrainian forces recently advanced northeast of Andriivka (southwest of Oleksandrivka).[30] ISW has also refined its assessment of Russian advances within Hulyaipole as Mashovets also reported that Ukrainian forces maintain positions in central Hulyaipole.[31]

Communications disruptions and the thinly held nature of Russian lines likely facilitated recent Ukrainian gains. Ukrainian forces exploited the February 1 blocking of Starlink that disrupted Russian communications and command and control (C2) to launch the counterattacks in the Oleksandrivka and Hulyaipole directions.[32] The spokesperson of a Ukrainian brigade operating in the Oleksandrivka direction noted on February 26 that the Russian military command’s focus on frontline infiltrations to generate informational effects in late 2025 led to a failure to establish strongpoints or defensive lines in the near rear that contributed to Ukrainian forces’ recent advances in the area.[33] Mashovets reported that the Ukrainian counterattacks have forced the Russian Eastern Grouping of Forces to commit elements of its operational reserve to combat — likely disrupting Russian preparations for a potential offensive from Hulyaipole toward Orikhiv or Zaporizhzhia City during Spring and Summer 2026.[34] The recent Ukrainian gains could force the Russian Eastern Grouping of Forces command to choose between prioritizing offensive efforts west of Hulyaipole or protecting Russian ground lines of communications (GLOCs) toward Hulyaipole from Ukrainian counterattacks from the north.

Russia and Ukraine conducted civilian prisoner and prisoner of war (POW) exchanges on March 5 and 6.Russian and Ukrainian authorities announced on March 5 and 6 that Russia and Ukraine exchanged a total of 500 prisoners over two days in accordance with an agreement from recent trilateral US-Ukrainian-Russian talks in Geneva.[35] Russian and Ukrainian officials reported that each side returned 200 POWs on March 5 and 300 POWs on March 6. Russia also returned two Ukrainian civilians on March 6.[36] Russian authorities stated that the United States and United Arab Emirates (UAE) mediated the exchanges.[37]

Key Takeaways

  1. Russia is reportedly sharing intelligence with Iran to support Iranian attacks against US forces in the Middle East in contrast to the Kremlin’s recent attempts to frame Russia as a potential US ally and US-Russia relations as increasingly friendly.
  2. Russian President Vladimir Putin called on the United States to halt its ongoing military operation in the Middle East while refusing any meaningful ceasefire in Ukraine.
  3. Ukraine continues to share its expertise and support air defense efforts in countering Iranian Shahed drone strikes in the Middle East.
  4. Russian President Vladimir Putin publicly addressed the Kremlin’s recent restrictions against Telegram for the first time and the widespread complaints about battlefield communications issues that ensued.
  5. The Kremlin continues its wider efforts to prevent Russians from using foreign platforms and virtual private networks (VPNs).
  6. Ukrainian forces continue to liberate territory in southern Ukraine.
  7. Russia and Ukraine conducted civilian prisoner and prisoner of war (POW) exchanges on March 5 and 6.
  8. Ukrainian forces recently advanced near Kupyansk, Oleksandrivka, and Hulyaipole. Russian forces recently advanced near Pokrovsk and Hulyaipole.
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.