February 16, 2026

Institute for the Study of War: Russia will focus on territorial demands in Geneva peace talks 

Institute for the Study of War

Russian officials are unlikely to deviate from their original war demands during the upcoming February 17 to 18 trilateral US-Ukrainian-Russian talks in Geneva, Switzerland. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stated on February 16 that Russian Presidential Aide Vladimir Medinsky will head the Russian delegation at the upcoming trilateral meetings.[1] Peskov noted that the Russian delegation will also include Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin and Russian General Staff’s Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) First Deputy Head Lieutenant General Vladimir Kostyukov.[2] Peskov stated that Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) CEO Kirill Dmitriev will be in Geneva but will be attending a working group on economic cooperation, likely referring to the US-Russian bilateral economic group.[3]

Peskov stated that the Geneva talks would discuss a “broader” range of issues than previous talks in Abu Dhabi and would particularly discuss territorial issues.[4] Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov stated that the Kremlin has instructed the Russian delegation to act within the framework that Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump allegedly agreed to during the August 2025 Alaska Summit.[5] Kremlin officials have previously claimed that the Alaska Summit agreed to principles based on Putin’s June 2024 speech to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), in which Putin insisted on capitulation to Russia’s demands of both Ukraine and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).[6] The Kremlin has repeatedly demonstrated its full commitment to achieving its original war aims, including those not related to territory in eastern Ukraine.[7]

Russia may try to exploit another temporary moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure to falsely claim that Russia is making a concession. Ukrainian Defense Council Secretary Rustem Umerov stated on February 14 that Ukraine will raise the issue of another temporary energy strikes ceasefire in the Geneva meetings.[8] Russia has previously used temporary moratoriums on energy strikes in March-April 2025 and in January-February 2026 to stockpile drones and missiles for subsequent devastating strikes.[9] The Kremlin agreed to the January-February 2026 moratorium on strikes against some Ukrainian energy infrastructure only after inflicting severe damage to Ukraine’s national energy grid. The Kremlin will likely again try to portray its adherence to any future short-term moratorium as a significant concession, even though the Kremlin will likely use those days to stockpile weapons for larger strike packages. Russian forces have also already degraded Ukraine’s energy grid such that Ukraine faces major power issues even when Russia temporarily stops its strikes. Ukraine’s energy grid suffered significant shutdowns during the January-February 2025 strikes moratorium due to the months and years worth of damage the grid had already sustained.[10] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky reported on February 14 that Russian strikes have damaged every power plant in Ukraine, and Ukraine may again face major power issues during a future moratorium.[11]

At least one Ukrainian FP-5 Flamingo cruise missile did not cause damage to Russia’s Kapustin Yar launch site in Astrakhan Oblast in January 2025. A Ukrainian open-source intelligence (OSINT) outlet published on February 16 satellite imagery collected on an unspecified date showing a six-meter crater near the fence of a preparation area at Kapustin Yar.[20] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces conducted a strike series that included Flamingo missiles against Kapustin Yar in January 2025 and later stated that the strikes damaged a technical facility that serviced missiles, an assembly building, and a logistics warehouse.[21] This recent satellite imagery suggests that at least one of the Flamingo missiles reached Kapustin Yar but that it either missed its intended target or that Russian forces intercepted the missile. The available satellite imagery is limited in scope, and other Ukrainian missiles may have struck other areas of Kapustin Yar. A Russian milblogger claimed on February 16 that Ukrainian forces launched four total Flamingo missiles in the strike package.[22]

Key Takeaways

  1. Russian officials are unlikely to deviate from their original war demands during the upcoming February 17 to 18 trilateral US-Ukrainian-Russian talks in Geneva, Switzerland.
  2. Russia may try to exploit another temporary moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure to falsely claim that Russia is making a concession.
  3. Russia appears to be investing in centralized incubators for drone technology and is setting up bespoke roles and units to support specific drone capability development efforts. These drone capability development efforts include supporting drone units’ ability to conduct tactical tasks that support Russia’s battlefield air interdiction (BAI) campaign, as well as drone-based air defense.
  4. The Kremlin appears to be adapting its tactics to conduct sabotage attacks in Europe.
  5. At least one Ukrainian FP-5 Flamingo cruise missile did not cause damage to Russia’s Kapustin Yar launch site in Astrakhan Oblast in January 2025.  
  6. Ukrainian forces recently advanced in the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area. Russian forces recently advanced in the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area and near Pokrovsk.
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.