Russia’s president lays out impossible conditions for U.S.-backed ceasefire while advancing in Kursk Oblast and threatening NATO’s eastern flank in a day that reveals the stark gap between peace talks and battlefield reality
Summary of the Day – March 13, 2025
As the diplomatic dance between Washington and Moscow intensifies, Putin has responded to the U.S.-backed 30-day ceasefire proposal with what Ukrainian President Zelensky calls “predictable manipulations” – demanding Ukraine halt mobilization and cease receiving Western aid during any truce. This diplomatic shadowboxing plays out against the backdrop of significant Russian advances in Kursk Oblast, where Moscow claims to have recaptured the strategic town of Sudzha, and growing security concerns in the Baltic region. Meanwhile, Ukraine struck a covert Russian drone production facility, highlighting the technological aspect of this evolving conflict. The sudden inclusion of the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in peace discussions adds yet another complex variable to negotiations that already face seemingly insurmountable obstacles, as Russia appears committed to continuing hostilities while extracting maximum concessions from a fracturing Western alliance.
Putin’s Diplomatic Dodge: Deflection Rather Than Rejection
Russian President Vladimir Putin offered what appears to be a carefully crafted non-rejection of the U.S.-proposed 30-day ceasefire on March 13, laying out conditions that effectively undermine the proposal’s core purpose. Speaking alongside Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, Putin claimed to support the “good idea” in principle while demanding guarantees that would effectively disarm Ukraine during any pause in fighting.
“Putin is afraid to say directly to President Trump that he wants to continue this war, that he wants to kill Ukrainians,” Zelensky said in his evening address. “That’s why they in Moscow demand such preconditions for a ceasefire that will make it impossible or will postpone it as long as possible.”
The Kremlin’s response aligns with earlier reporting from Russian insider sources who indicated Putin would “stretch the timeline” and demand “impossible conditions” to which Ukraine cannot agree. By requiring Ukraine to halt mobilization, training, and receipt of military aid during the ceasefire – while making no such commitments for Russia – Putin has effectively rejected the U.S. proposal while maintaining plausible deniability.
The diplomatic impasse comes days after Ukraine and the United States reached an agreement in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where Kyiv accepted Washington’s ceasefire proposal. The U.S. simultaneously restored critical military aid and intelligence sharing that had been suspended following a tense meeting between Zelensky and Trump in Washington.
Trump characterized Putin’s statement as “very promising” but “incomplete,” indicating his willingness to meet the Russian leader. The U.S. president’s approach to the negotiations remains a wild card, as he has previously threatened Russia with “devastating” financial consequences while also pressuring Ukraine to accept territorial concessions.
Sudzha Falls: The Strategic Cost of U.S. Aid Interruption
In a significant battlefield development, Russian forces have claimed to retake Sudzha, a key Ukrainian stronghold in Russia’s Kursk Oblast. The town, captured by Ukrainian troops at the start of their cross-border incursion in August 2024, sits approximately 10 kilometers from Ukraine’s border and represents a major setback for Kyiv.
“The Russian military almost entirely destroyed Sudzha with airstrikes,” said Andrii Kovalenko, an official at Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council. “The town and its surroundings were destroyed, and few civilian buildings survived.”
Military analysts from DeepState and the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) have confirmed Russia’s capture of Sudzha. The Russian Defense Ministry has published footage of the ruined settlement, though its authenticity could not be immediately verified.
The loss comes amid a rapid Russian advance that has significantly diminished Ukrainian territorial gains in the border region. Valery Gerasimov, chief of the Russian General Staff, claimed on March 12 that Russia has recaptured over 86% of the territory in Kursk Oblast previously seized by Ukraine.
The timeline of Russian advances correlates directly with the temporary suspension of U.S. intelligence sharing and military support to Ukraine, highlighting the critical importance of Western backing to Kyiv’s military capabilities.
Behind Enemy Lines: Ukrainian Drones Target Covert Russian UAV Plant
Ukrainian military intelligence carried out a precision drone strike on a camouflaged drone production facility in Russia’s Kaluga Oblast late on March 12, according to HUR sources who confirmed the operation. The target was a covert drone manufacturing operation hidden within an aerated concrete plant in the village of Obukhovo.
Kaluga Oblast Governor Vladislav Shapsha reported that 25 drones were downed over the region overnight, with wreckage setting fire to an unspecified industrial facility in Dzerzhinsky district. One employee reportedly suffered minor injuries before the fire was extinguished.
Local residents described powerful explosions and a significant fire at the plant on social media. The incident prompted authorities to suspend flights at Kaluga Airport from 9 p.m. on March 12 until 6 a.m. on March 13 under the “Carpet” security protocol.
The Russian Defense Ministry claimed its air defenses downed 77 drones overnight across multiple regions, including 30 over Bryansk Oblast alone. An infrastructure facility in Voronezh Oblast reportedly sustained damage in a separate attack, with local Telegram channels identifying it as part of the region’s gas infrastructure.
These strikes represent Ukraine’s ongoing campaign to degrade Russia’s military-industrial complex, particularly its drone production capabilities, which have become increasingly crucial to Moscow’s war effort.
Nuclear Chess: Zaporizhzhia Plant Emerges as Key Negotiating Piece
In a surprising development, U.S. President Donald Trump revealed that Washington has discussed control of the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant with Ukraine as part of potential peace negotiations. This marks the first time the facility has been explicitly mentioned as a bargaining chip in the diplomatic process.
“We have been discussing with Ukraine land and pieces of land that would be kept and lost and all of the other elements of a final agreement,” Trump said from the Oval Office. “There’s a power plant involved, a very big power plant involved. Who is going to get the power plant, and who is going to get this and that, and so you know it’s not an easy process. But phase one is the ceasefire.”
The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, Europe’s largest nuclear facility, has been under Russian occupation since 2022. While currently not generating electricity, its strategic and symbolic importance cannot be overstated, as its status represents one of the most sensitive aspects of any potential settlement.
Trump’s revelation suggests territorial negotiations are more advanced than previously disclosed and may involve complex arrangements beyond simple border adjustments. The inclusion of critical infrastructure in these discussions points to the multifaceted nature of any eventual peace deal, which must address security, resource, and energy concerns alongside territorial claims.
Baltic Warning Signs: Patrushev’s Ominous Historical Reference
In a particularly alarming statement, Russian Presidential Aide Nikolai Patrushev claimed in an interview published on March 13 that NATO is “traditionally” using threats as its main instrument in interstate relations. These comments employ narratives strikingly similar to those used to justify Russia’s invasions of Ukraine.
Patrushev specifically targeted Finland, claiming that the Gulf of Finland has a historical “geographic affiliation with Russia” and warning that “it should not be forgotten that Finland was part of the Russian Empire.” This rhetoric eerily echoes justifications used before Russia’s invasions of Ukraine, with Patrushev attempting to draw parallels between the current situation and the Soviet-Finnish Winter War of 1939-1940.
“The West is again turning [Finland] into a springboard for aggression against Russia,” Patrushev claimed, while also asserting that the UK is “orchestrating” efforts to block Russia in the Baltic region.
These statements appear designed to drive wedges between the United States and its European allies while setting the stage for potential future aggression. The Kremlin’s pattern of using historical grievances and security concerns to justify territorial ambitions now extends beyond Ukraine to NATO’s eastern flank.
War Crimes Continue: Execution of Ukrainian POWs in Kursk
Evidence of Russian forces executing Ukrainian prisoners of war continues to mount, with Ukrainian Ombudsman Dmytro Lubinets reporting on March 13 that footage shows five unarmed Ukrainian POWs allegedly executed in an unspecified area. Russian opposition outlet Astra reported that the incident was filmed near Kazachya Loknya in Kursk Oblast.
These executions represent a systemic trend in the Russian military, with commanders either complicit in or directly enabling such atrocities. The incident follows Putin’s March 12 visit to Kursk Oblast, where he declared that Ukrainian personnel captured in the region “will be treated as terrorists.”
The UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine has documented a sharp increase in extrajudicial killings of Ukrainian POWs, with 79 such executions recorded across 24 separate incidents since August 2024. These actions constitute clear violations of international law and the Geneva Conventions, adding another layer of complexity to any potential peace negotiations.
Belarus Integration Accelerates: Russian Military Bases Expansion
Russia will likely expand its permanent military presence in Belarus following the March 13 ratification of a Russian-Belarus Union State treaty on security guarantees. The agreement, signed by Putin and Lukashenko in Moscow, permits Russia to establish military bases and infrastructure in Belarus, significantly enhancing its force posture against NATO’s eastern flank.
Putin noted that the treaty defines mutual allied obligations to ensure defense and security using “the entire available arsenal of forces and means.” He highlighted the existing deployment of a joint Regional Group of Forces, modern Russian defense systems, and tactical nuclear weapons on Belarusian territory, claiming these assets “reliably cover” the western borders of both countries.
This development represents a significant step in Russia’s strategic effort to de facto annex Belarus, using the Union State framework to integrate the country more deeply into Moscow’s security architecture. The expanded military presence will increase Russia’s capacity to threaten NATO’s eastern flank and project power into the Baltic region.
Economic Warfare: Trump Tightens Oil Sanctions
The Trump administration intensified economic pressure on Moscow on March 13 by declining to renew an exemption that had allowed Russian banks to access U.S. payment systems for energy transactions. The move, which comes as Washington awaits Putin’s response to the ceasefire proposal, will make it more difficult for countries to purchase Russian oil and likely lead to higher global energy prices.
This action aligns with Trump’s March 7 statement that he is considering imposing sweeping banking sanctions and tariffs on Russia until a ceasefire and peace agreement are reached. The previous exemption had applied to transactions involving natural gas, oil, petroleum products, coal, uranium, and similar commodities.
The economic measures represent one of Washington’s most powerful leverage points in negotiations with Moscow, potentially causing significant damage to Russia’s energy-dependent economy. However, their effectiveness may be limited by Russia’s efforts to establish alternative payment systems and trading relationships with partners like China.
European Unity Test: Coalition-Building Without Washington
European powers are stepping up their coordination on Ukraine’s security, with London and Paris leading discussions among 37 countries on measures to shield Ukraine against future Russian aggression in case of a peace settlement. This “coalition of the willing,” first presented by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer at the March 2 London summit, would provide security guarantees to Kyiv through various forms of support.
The initiative has expanded beyond NATO and Europe, with officials from Australia, Japan, and New Zealand joining a follow-up meeting in Paris on March 11. Notably absent from these discussions is the United States, which seeks to scale back its involvement in the Russia-Ukraine war.
European participants hope to form a unified strategy to present to Trump and persuade him to commit to some form of security guarantees for Ukraine. The coalition aims to create a “reassurance force” with flexible participation options, allowing members to contribute according to their capabilities and political constraints.
The effort demonstrates Europe’s growing recognition that it may need to take primary responsibility for Ukraine’s long-term security, particularly as Washington signals a desire to reduce its commitments. This shift represents one of the most significant geopolitical realignments resulting from Russia’s invasion.
Canada Delivers: First G7 ERA Funds Reach Ukraine
Ukraine has received the first tranche of 2.5 billion Canadian dollars (about $1.7 billion) from Ottawa under the G7’s Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) initiative, the Ukrainian Finance Ministry announced on March 13. The ERA mechanism, totaling $50 billion, provides loans to Ukraine that will be repaid using future profits from frozen Russian assets.
“Canada is a reliable and steadfast partner of Ukraine. I am grateful for the support of the ERA mechanism. It is a fair and necessary tool to hold Russia financially accountable for its crimes in Ukraine,” Ukrainian Finance Minister Serhii Marchenko said.
Canada’s contribution comes amid increased financial pressure on Ukraine due to its recent battlefield setbacks and the temporary suspension of U.S. military aid. The funds will directly support Ukraine’s state budget, addressing a deficit that amounts to approximately 20% of the country’s GDP.
The ERA initiative represents a creative approach to leveraging the approximately $300 billion in frozen Russian sovereign assets held by G7 countries since the 2022 invasion. By using profits from these assets to finance Ukraine’s defense and reconstruction, Western allies have found a way to make Russia indirectly fund resistance to its aggression.
French Parliament Steps Up: Pro-Ukraine Resolution Passes
France’s National Assembly passed a resolution on March 13 calling for increased support for Ukraine and the seizure of frozen Russian assets. The non-binding measure, which passed with 288 votes in favor, urges the European Union to use the frozen Russian assets “to support the Ukrainian resistance and reconstruction of Ukraine.”
The resolution also encourages the European Union to “build independent European defense capabilities” and calls on NATO and other allied countries to “continue and increase their political, economic, and military support for Ukraine.” French lawmakers further amended the text to explore the possibility of deploying a European peacekeeping force to Ukraine once hostilities end.
While symbolic in nature, the resolution increases pressure on French President Emmanuel Macron and Prime Minister Francois Bayrou to reconsider France’s position on seizing frozen Russian assets. Macron has previously voiced opposition to such a move, arguing it would violate international agreements, but recent statements suggest Paris may be reconsidering this stance.
The parliamentary action reflects growing European determination to support Ukraine independently of Washington’s fluctuating commitment. A recent Elabe Institute poll found that roughly two-thirds of the French public favor maintaining or increasing aid to Ukraine, as well as deploying peacekeepers after a ceasefire.
Russia’s Diesel Disruption: Ukrainian Attacks Impact African Exports
Russian diesel exports to African countries nearly halved in February, dropping from 1.27 million tons in January to 684,000 tons, according to analysts cited by Russian pro-state media outlet RBC on March 13. The decline comes in direct response to repeated Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian oil refineries.
Exports to Brazil fell by 41%, while deliveries to Turkey, Russia’s largest diesel export market, declined by 12% to 1.13 million tons. Analysts attributed the decline directly to “an increase in the number of incidents at refineries,” referencing Ukraine’s strategic targeting of Russia’s energy infrastructure.
On March 10, Ukrainian military intelligence confirmed striking the Novokuybyshevsk oil refinery in Russia’s Samara Oblast, while a Ukrainian drone reportedly hit an oil depot in Cheboksary, Chuvashia Republic, the day before – marking the first attack on that region.
Ukraine considers Russian oil infrastructure legitimate military targets, arguing that fossil fuel revenues fund Moscow’s war effort. The measurable impact of these strikes on Russia’s export capacity demonstrates their effectiveness in pressuring Moscow economically while limiting its ability to finance military operations.
Breakfast Diplomacy: McDonald’s Menu Returns to Western Ukraine
In a symbolic demonstration of business confidence in Ukraine’s resilience, McDonald’s announced the return of its breakfast menu in six Ukrainian cities on March 13. The comeback follows the menu’s disappearance after Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022 and months of viral social media campaigns from customers requesting its return.
The breakfast service is now available in six western Ukrainian cities – Lviv, Lutsk, Ternopil, Ivano-Frankivsk, Yaremche, and Kovel – with plans to expand to other locations in the coming weeks. However, the menu will remain unavailable in eastern regions closer to the front line due to frequent air raids and related operational difficulties.
“Around 60% of goods and products for McDonald’s in Ukraine come from local suppliers. The company provides stable and large-scale orders, helping create new jobs and increasing tax revenues,” said Oleksandr Bohorodov, CFO of McDonald’s Ukraine.
Currently, 109 McDonald’s restaurants operate in 36 cities across Ukraine, the same number as before the invasion, employing around 10,000 people. Fifteen locations in Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Mykolaiv, and Sumy remain closed due to their proximity to active fighting.
The development reflects a broader trend of Western companies resuming or expanding operations in Ukraine despite the ongoing conflict. Retailers like H&M, Zara, and IKEA have all reopened stores in the country, signaling corporate confidence in Ukraine’s future despite Russia’s continued aggression.
Kursk Counterpoint: Broader Russian Ambitions Emerge
Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief General Oleksandr Syrskyi stated on March 12 that he ordered Ukrainian forces to withdraw from some positions within the Kursk salient and move to more advantageous defensive positions to preserve Ukrainian lives.
Beyond Sudzha, Russian forces have reportedly captured Podol, Goncharovka, Zaoleshenka, Rubanshchina, and Molovoi, while Ukrainian forces maintain positions in Oleshnya, Gogolevka, Guyevo, and Gornal. Russian milbloggers claim that renewed Ukrainian HIMARS strikes are slowing the rate of Russian advances south of Sudzha.
Russian forces have also made marginal advances in northern Sumy Oblast, with geolocated footage indicating progress northwest of Basivka. Syrskyi confirmed that Russian airborne and Spetsnaz forces are attacking along the international border and attempting to advance further into Ukrainian territory.
Some Russian military analysts speculate that Moscow may launch an organized offensive operation into northern Sumy Oblast in the coming weeks, potentially extending to Chernihiv Oblast. Putin asked Gerasimov during a visit to a Russian command post in Kursk Oblast on March 12 to “think in the future about creating a security zone” along the Ukrainian-Russian international border, suggesting preparations for a more permanent military presence in the region.
ECHR Ruling: Ukraine Failed to Prevent 2014 Odesa Clashes
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled on March 13 that the Ukrainian government failed to prevent and adequately investigate deadly clashes between EuroMaidan supporters and opponents in Odesa in May 2014. The ruling addresses seven applications filed by 28 individuals – 25 relatives of victims and three survivors.
Forty-eight people died in the violence on May 2, 2014, when pro-Russian activists attacked a pro-EuroMaidan rally but retreated to the Trade Unions House after the ensuing confrontation. Forty-two people died after the building caught fire as the two groups exchanged petrol bombs.
The court noted “authorities’ failure to do everything that could reasonably be expected of them to prevent the violence in Odesa on 2 May 2014, to stop that violence after its outbreak, to ensure timely rescue measures for people trapped in the fire, and to institute and conduct an effective investigation into the events.”
While the ECHR acknowledged that Russian propaganda helped instigate the clashes and has since distorted the events for political purposes, it found merit in the applicants’ complaints regarding Ukraine’s prevention and investigation failures. The Ukrainian state was ordered to pay compensation to the victims’ families.
The ruling represents a complex legal challenge for Ukraine, as the Odesa events have been heavily exploited by Russian propaganda to vilify the EuroMaidan Revolution and falsely portray the movement as extremist. The ECHR noted that “enhanced transparency in the related investigative work by the Ukrainian authorities might have helped to prevent or counteract that propaganda effectively.”
Conclusion: The Diplomatic Deadlock Deepens
As the thirteenth day of March draws to a close, the gap between diplomatic rhetoric and battlefield reality in Ukraine has never seemed wider. Putin’s carefully calibrated response to the U.S. ceasefire proposal – appearing to accept it in principle while attaching conditions that render it unworkable – underscores the fundamental disconnect between Moscow’s stated openness to peace and its actual war aims.
The Kremlin continues to advance militarily in Kursk Oblast while simultaneously positioning itself as a reasonable negotiating partner, a contradiction that tests the coherence of Western diplomacy. Meanwhile, Russian economic vulnerability to sanctions is becoming increasingly evident, particularly in its energy export sector, even as Moscow expands its military footprint in Belarus and issues thinly veiled threats against NATO members.
For Ukraine, the day brings mixed signals – resumed American military aid and intelligence sharing, alongside the loss of Sudzha and growing uncertainty about territorial concessions. European powers are working to construct a security framework that can function without American leadership, but questions remain about its sufficiency to deter renewed Russian aggression.
As Trump awaits Putin’s formal response to the ceasefire proposal, the diplomatic chess match continues – with Ukrainian lives and sovereignty hanging in the balance. The path to genuine peace remains obscured by maximalist demands, strategic ambiguity, and the brutal reality of a conflict that has defied all previous attempts at resolution.