DONATE

Current News

Archives

Focus Areas

< Back

February 10, 2026

Institute for the Study of War: Russia accuses US of operating ‘in bad faith’ in Ukraine war negotiations

Institute for the Study of War

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov continued to explicitly blame the United States on February 10 for the lack of progress in ending Russia’s war against Ukraine and reinvoked the Spring 2022 Istanbul talks to justify Russia’s rejection of Ukraine receiving meaningful security guarantees. Lavrov used a February 10 interview with Russian state outlet NTV to accuse the United States of acting in bad faith during peace negotiations by imposing new sanctions on Russia and placing secondary tariffs on importers of Russian oil, reiterating his February 9 criticism that the United States is to blame for the lack of progress to end the war.[1] Lavrov claimed that US policies toward Russia under US President Donald Trump are “moving in the wrong direction.” Russian State Duma International Affairs Committee First Deputy Head Alexei Chepa echoed Lavrov’s criticism of US policies toward Russia, noting that US “actions rather than words” demonstrate that the United States remains an “adversary” to Russia.[2] Lavrov also explicitly referred to Russia’s position codified in the 2022 Istanbul Protocols, to which the Kremlin periodically refers to as the appropriate basis for a peace agreement, to justify Russia’s continued rejection of meaningful security guarantees for Ukraine.[3] Lavrov specifically called for the composition and decision-making framework of the guarantees proposed in the 2022 Istanbul Protocol draft document. The 2022 Istanbul Protocol draft document stipulated that Russia – the aggressor in the war in Ukraine – would be treated as a neutral ”guarantor state” of Ukraine; that Russia and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) would have veto power over a mechanism to respond to future aggression in Ukraine; and that Ukraine commit to neutrality, severe restrictions on military size and composition, and never accepting military assistance from its allies.[4] The Kremlin has been attempting 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, which have not changed over the course of the war.[5]

The Kremlin throttled Telegram on February 9 and 10 – a significant intensification of Russia’s three-year campaign to reassert control over the Russian information space.Website and online services monitoring platforms registered a significant rise in complaints about access and usage of Telegram in Russia on the morning of February 9, declining on the evening, and rising again on the morning of February 10.[6] Russian outlet RBK claimed on February 10 that a source in the Russian IT industry and two sources in unspecified “relevant” Russian agencies stated that Russian federal censor Roskomnadzor decided to start throttling Telegram on February 10.[7] Roskomnadzor confirmed to Russian business outlet Kommersant that it is restricting Telegram’s operations in order to force it to comply with Russian laws.[8] Roskomnadzor claimed that Telegram needs to protect Russian citizens from fraud and create conditions to combat extremism and terrorism. Russian authorities began to restrict calls on Telegram in August 2025, but the February 9-10 throttling marks a more significant Kremlin effort to block access to the platform. Russian opposition outlet Verstka reported that sources close to the Russian Presidential Administration stated that the recent throttling of Telegram is a “test” and that Russian authorities may completely block Telegram ahead of the September 2026 State Duma elections, as the Kremlin fears a negative domestic reaction to the United Russia Party winning 70 percent of the vote.[9] A Verstka source stated that the Kremlin may completely block Telegram due to worries about society’s mood about the upcoming Duma elections and attitudes toward the war in Ukraine, but a source claimed to Verstka that the Kremlin has not yet decided to fully block Telegram.

Key Takeaways

  1. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov continued to explicitly blame the United States on February 10 for the lack of progress in ending Russia’s war against Ukraine and reinvoked the Spring 2022 Istanbul talks to justify Russia’s rejection of Ukraine receiving meaningful security guarantees.
  2. The Kremlin throttled Telegram on February 9 and 10 – a significant intensification of Russia’s three-year campaign to reassert control over the Russian information space.  
  3. Russia’s ability to acquire foreign machine tools despite Western sanctions is reportedly allowing Russia to increase its production of tank and artillery barrels- a key constraining factor on Russia’s defense industrial base (DIB).  
  4. Unconfirmed media reports suggest that Japan may fund non-lethal military aid to Ukraine through the Prioritized Ukrainian Requirements List (PURL) initiative.  
  5. NATO jets intercepted another Russian fighter jet close to NATO airspace in the Baltic Sea in late January 2026.  
  6. Ukrainian forces recently advanced in the Dobropillya tactical area. Russian forces recently advanced in northern Sumy Oblast, in the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area, near Hulyaipole, and in western Zaporizhia Oblast.
Share the Post:
Close

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.