September 1, 2025

Institute for the Study of War: Kremlin continues to deny plans for Putin-Zelenskyy meeting

Institute for the Study of War

Kremlin officials continue to deny White House statements about the prospect of a bilateral Ukrainian-Russian or trilateral US-Ukrainian-Russian meeting in the near future. Russian Presidential Aide Yuriy Ushakov stated on September 1 that “there was no agreement” on a bilateral meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin, or a trilateral meeting between US President Donald Trump, Zelensky, and Putin.[1] Ushakov stated on August 16, after the US-Russian Alaska summit, that he did not know when Trump and Putin would meet again and that the leaders had not discussed the prospect of a trilateral meeting.[2] US President Donald Trump stated on August 18, however, that he was planning a bilateral meeting between Zelensky and Putin with a subsequent meeting between Trump, Zelensky, and Putin.[3] Ushakov’s reiteration of Russia’s refusal to commit to Trump’s desired bilateral and trilateral meetings undermines Trump’s ongoing diplomatic efforts to achieve a peace settlement in Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to demonstrate his unwillingness to compromise on his unwavering demands for Ukraine’s full capitulation. Putin claimed on September 1 at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin, People’s Republic of China (PRC), that the “crisis” in Ukraine arose from the Western-provoked “coup” in Ukraine in 2014 (referring to Ukraine’s democratically organized Revolution of Dignity), not “as a result of Russia’s attack on Ukraine.”[4] Putin also claimed that the war in Ukraine stemmed from the West’s constant attempts to bring Ukraine into NATO, which Putin claimed would pose a direct threat to Russian security. Putin claimed that the 2014 “coup” eliminated the political leadership of Ukraine that did not support Ukrainian membership in NATO. Putin claimed that peace in Ukraine can only be sustainable and long-term if the settlement eliminates the ”root causes” of the war, which Kremlin officials have repeatedly defined as Ukraine’s alleged discrimination against Russian-speakers in Ukraine and NATO expansion.[5] The Kremlin has often used this “root causes” narrative to call for the replacement of the current Ukrainian government with a Russian puppet government, Ukraine’s commitment to neutrality, and the revocation of NATO’s Open Door Policy.[6] Putin’s claim that the 2014 “coup” “eliminated” Ukrainian leaders is also a reference to the Kremlin’s repeated narrative that the current Ukrainian government is illegitimate and should not be in power.[7] Putin is reiterating these Kremlin narratives in his own voice, indicating that Putin maintains his original war goals.

The Russian military command reportedly redeployed relatively “elite” naval infantry and airborne (VDV) forces to Donetsk Oblast from northern Sumy Oblast and the Kherson direction.A Ukrainian drone unit operating in the Pokrovsk direction reported that the Russian military command redeployed several units from Kursk Oblast, including elements of the 155th Naval Infantry Brigade (Pacific Fleet), to reinforce Russian offensive operations toward Dobropillya.[12] A Russian milblogger reportedly affiliated with the Russian Northern Group of Forces claimed on August 18 that the Russian command redeployed elements of the 177th Naval Infantry Regiment and the 155th and 40th naval infantry brigades from northern Sumy Oblast to another unspecified direction.[13] An OSINT analyst on X (formerly Twitter) reported on August 30 that the Russian command redeployed elements of the 40th and 155th naval infantry brigades (both of the Pacific Fleet) and likely elements of the 177th Naval Infantry Regiment (Caspian Flotilla) to Donetsk Oblast.[14] The OSINT analyst also stated that there are reports that elements of the 11th Separate VDV Brigade and 76th VDV Division were “spotted nearby” in Donetsk Oblast after the Russian military command “urgently” deployed these elements to ”the hottest direction.” The OSINT source noted that the exact axis of attack of the redeployed VDV elements is still unclear. The Russian command also reportedly redeployed elements of the 70th Motorized Rifle Regiment (42nd Motorized Rifle Division, 58th Combined Arms Army [CAA], Southern Military District [SMD]) from Kherson Oblast to Bakhmut, possibly to reinforce Russian offensive efforts in Kostyantynivka or Siversk.[15] ISW previously observed reports that elements of the 40th and 155th naval infantry brigades, 11th Separate VDV Brigade, and 76th VDV Division were operating in northern Sumy Oblast as of late August 2025.[16] ISW previously observed reports that elements of the 177th Naval Infantry Regiment were operating in northern Sumy Oblast as of August 11.[17] ISW previously observed reports in November 2024 that the 11th VDV Brigade formed a special battalion staffed by North Korean troops for combat operations in Kursk Oblast, and ISW assessed at the time that North Korean troops training in Russia were likely training with elements of the 155th Naval Infantry Brigade and 11th VDV Brigades.[18]

The reported redeployments suggest that the Russian Fall 2025 offensive will focus on efforts to seize the remainder of Donetsk Oblast, particularly in the Dobropillya, Pokrovsk, and Kostyantynivka areas. The Russian command’s redeployment of forces from northern Sumy Oblast to Donetsk Oblast suggests that Russia is deprioritizing its offensive operations in Sumy Oblast. Russian forces have intensified efforts to envelop Pokrovsk, advance toward Dobropillya, and bypass Ukraine’s Donetsk Oblast fortress belt from the west.[19] These efforts have resulted in significant manpower losses, likely requiring the Russian military command to redeploy forces to the area.[20] Russia’s Fall 2024 offensive also focused on offensive operations in the Pokrovsk direction – demonstrating Russia’s slow progress in achieving its objectives on the battlefield at tremendous human and material costs.[21]

Likely Russian GPS jamming affected a plane carrying European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on September 1. The Associated Press (AP) reported on September 1 that European Commission spokesperson Adrianna Podestà confirmed that a plane carrying von der Leyen suffered problems from GPS jamming while flying to Bulgaria and noted that Bulgarian authorities suspect “blatant” Russian interference.[22] Podestà stated that von der Leyen’s plane landed safely at Plovdiv Airport in central Bulgaria after flying from Warsaw, Poland. The Financial Times (FT) reported on September 1 that the pilot flying von der Leyen’s plane landed the plane using paper maps, and a knowledgeable official source confirmed that GPS in the airport’s vicinity “went dark.”[23] Bulgarian Air Traffic Services Authority stated that there has been a notable increase in GPS jamming since February 2022 and that there have been issues with spoofing more recently. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov claimed in response to a question from FT that their “information is incorrect.”[24] ISW previously observed reports that Russian electronic warfare (EW) interference significantly impacted flights in the Baltics, Poland, and Finland, particularly in early 2024.[25] Russia notably likely jammed the satellite signal of a Royal Air Force (RAF) jet transporting then-UK Defense Secretary Grant Shapps, his staff, and select journalists back to the UK from Poland in March 2024.[26] The latest reports of likely Russian GPS jamming indicate that Russia is continuing its hybrid operations in Europe, and Russia could continue to target Western political and military officials as part of these operations. Von der Leyen has notably been leading discussions with European and US officials about possible European troop deployments as part of security guarantees for Ukraine after the war.[27]

Key Takeaways:

  • Kremlin officials continue to deny White House statements about the prospect of a bilateral Ukrainian-Russian or trilateral US-Ukrainian-Russian meeting in the near future.
  • Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to demonstrate his unwillingness to compromise on his unwavering demands for Ukraine’s full capitulation.
  • The Kremlin likely timed the publication of a video address by former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych to coincide with Putin’s SCO speech in order to lend legitimacy to Putin’s demand for regime change in Ukraine.
  • Putin’s demands for regime change in his SCO speech are not new, but rather the reiteration of his pre-war demands that he has been pursuing throughout the war.
  • The Russian military command reportedly redeployed relatively “elite” naval infantry and airborne (VDV) forces to Donetsk Oblast from northern Sumy Oblast and the Kherson direction.
  • The reported redeployments suggest that the Russian Fall 2025 offensive will focus on efforts to seize the remainder of Donetsk Oblast, particularly in the Dobropillya, Pokrovsk, and Kostyantynivka areas.
  • Likely Russian GPS jamming affected a plane carrying European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on September 1.
  • Ukraine reportedly conducted its first strike with its domestically produced FP-5 Flamingo cruise missile on August 30 against occupied Crimea.
  • Ukrainian authorities reportedly collected new evidence of Chechen Republic Head Ramzan Kadyrov endorsing war crimes against Ukrainian prisoners of war (POWs).
  • Ukrainian forces advanced near Pokrovsk. Russian forces advanced near Kupyansk and Novopavlivka and in western Zaporizhia Oblast.
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.