April 7, 2025

Institute for the Study of War: Ukraine ’not a legitimate negotiating partner,’ claims Russia

Institute for the Study of War

Institute for the Study of War: Ukraine ’not a legitimate negotiating partner,’ claims Russia

The Kremlin continues to deny the legitimacy of the Ukrainian government as part of efforts to claim that Ukraine is not a legitimate negotiating partner and to demand Ukrainian regime change and demilitarization. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov claimed on April 7 that Russian President Vladimir Putin supports the idea of a ceasefire in Ukraine but claimed that several issues “are hanging in the air.”[1] Peskov claimed that these issues include the “lack of control” over the Ukrainian government and the Ukrainian government’s alleged inability to control the actions of unspecified extremist and nationalist units that “simply do not obey” the Ukrainian government’s orders. Peskov claimed that these units are connected to “plans for the further militarization” of Ukraine. Peskov is promoting Putin’s March 28 narrative falsely claiming that the current Ukrainian government is illegitimate and incapable of combatting neo-Nazi groups, which Putin claimed have the “actual power in their hands.”[2] These Kremlin statements are part of a broader effort to undermine the Ukrainian government’s legitimacy and repackage Russia’s long-standing demands for regime change and demilitarization in Ukraine. Putin and other Russian officials previously temporarily paused promoting claims about Ukraine’s alleged illegitimacy following Putin’s phone call with US President Donald Trump on February 12, but later resumed these claims on March 28.[3] Trump recently expressed dissatisfaction with Putin’s disparaging remarks attacking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s legitimacy and expressed a willingness to impose additional sanctions on Russia if the United States and Russia are unable to “make a deal.”[4]

Ukrainian officials did not report any Russian long-range missile or drone strikes on the night of April 6 to 7 or during the day on April 7 following Russia’s largest strike package in over a month on the night of April 5 to 6. It remains unclear why the Russian forces did not conduct any long-range strikes, after having done so daily since December 12, 2024.[5] Russia used the large-scale missile and drone strike series on the night of April 5 to 6 to experiment with its strike packages to increase their effectiveness, and Russia may be preparing to conduct another large-scale strike package in near future.[6]

Ukraine’s European allies continue to ramp up domestic materiel production and address shortages inhibiting artillery ammunition production. German arms manufacturer Rheinmetall announced on April 7 that the company will acquire and repurpose German nitrocellulose producer “Hagerdorn-NC” for weapons production as part of ongoing efforts to increase Rheinmetall’s capacity for manufacturing ammunition propellants, particularly for 155mm artillery shells.[7] Nitrocellulose, also known as guncotton, is a crucial component of propellants for modern artillery ammunition and other munitions that use gunpowder.[8] Rheinmetall currently produces nitrocellulose at facilities in Switzerland, Spain, and South Africa and plans to increase its production of gunpowder by over 50 percent by 2028.[9] Rheinmetall subsidiary Nitrochemie Aschau — which produces nitrocellulose, other gunpowder components, and dynamite — has increased its production capacity by 60 percent since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and plans for another 40 percent increase by mid-2025.[10] Rheinmetall CEO Armin Papperger and Saab CEO Micael Johansson warned in April 2024 that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) supplied an overwhelming majority of European ammunition components, including those necessary for nitrocellulose, resulting in bottlenecks inhibiting European artillery ammunition production.[11] Bloomberg reported in March 2025 that Rheinmetall expanded its sourcing of cotton linters — a key component for nitrocellulose production that faced a critical shortage in Spring 2024 — from Europe and countries friendly to the European Union (EU) and built up a stockpile of several years’ worth of linters.[12] NATO General Secretary Mark Rutte told CBS News on April 7 that he has urged US and European leaders to ramp up defense spending and defense industrial production amid concerns of future Russian aggression against Europe.[13] Rutte noted that NATO states combined manufacture four times fewer ammunition rounds than Russia manufactures on its own, despite the fact that NATO’s combined economy is 20 times larger than Russia’s.

Key Takeaways:

  • The Kremlin continues to deny the legitimacy of the Ukrainian government as part of efforts to claim that Ukraine is not a legitimate negotiating partner and to demand Ukrainian regime change and demilitarization.
  • Ukrainian officials did not report any Russian long-range missile or drone strikes on the night of April 6 to 7 or during the day on April 7 following Russia’s largest strike package in over a month on the night of April 5 to 6.
  • Ukraine’s European allies continue to ramp up domestic materiel production and address shortages inhibiting artillery ammunition production.
  • Russian authorities likely facilitated the removal of a prominent Russian insider source from Telegram as part of continued efforts to crack down on the Russian information space.
  • Russian forces recently advanced in Belogorod Oblast and near Siversk, Toretsk, Pokrovsk, and Velyka Novosilka and in western Zaporizhia Oblast.
  • The Kremlin continues to use its “Time of Heroes” program to militarize regional governments and society in occupied Ukraine.
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.