Skip to content
Welcome, thoughtbot's Giant Robots listeners!Start here
Institute for the Study of War
AI-generated illustration
OrganisationUS

Institute for the Study of War

Washington think tank publishing daily open-source battlefield assessments on Ukraine and Iran conflicts since 2007.

Citing Russian military bloggers, the Institute for the Study of War assessed on 12 September that Ukrainian troops had erased Russia's salient north of Lyman, while stressing the absence of Independent confirmation.

Last refreshed: 22 September 2026 · Appears in 3 active topics

Key Question

How many consecutive net-loss weeks has ISW now documented for Russia, and does the front hold?

Timeline for Institute for the Study of War

#27 12 Sept
#27 10 Sept

assessed the likely mobilisation form

Russia-Ukraine War 2026: Ivashchenko says generals asked Putin for 800,000 troops
View full timeline →

Background

The Institute for the Study of War is a Washington think tank that publishes open-source assessments of the Russia-Ukraine and Iran conflicts. Its relevance lies in turning claims, battlefield reports and available visual evidence into dated assessments that readers can test against its stated caveats.

Founded in 2007, the Institute is best known for daily battlefield analysis and control maps. On 7 June, it confirmed Russia's use of North Korean rocket launchers mounted on Russian robotic ground vehicles near Kharkiv.

Its work also covers the Iran conflict. On 20 July, it assessed an Iranian statement thanking the Jordanian people as a cover narrative linked to reported strikes in Jordan. The Institute matters because it distinguishes verified evidence, reported claims and unresolved uncertainty across fast-moving wars.

Key Issues
Battlefield verification

Its assessments test Russian claims

In its 12 September assessment, the Institute for the Study of War judged that Ukraine had erased Russia's position north of Lyman. It cited Russian military bloggers conceding the ground, but said no Independent primary source had confirmed the result.

That caution is central to the Institute's role. On 18 July, it found no evidence that Russian troops had entered five settlements listed by General Staff chief Valery Gerasimov. The finding recorded an absence of corroboration, rather than claiming a geolocated refutation.

Force generation

It tracks Russia's recruitment strain

On 10 September, the Institute assessed that Russia was more likely to use rolling call-ups than a single mass mobilisation. The judgement followed a reported request for 800,000 additional troops, which Ukraine's military intelligence said could not be met in one intake.

The assessment places recruitment within a wider measure of battlefield pressure. On 23 June, the Institute described eastern Ukraine's front as barely shifted and found neither side able to secure a decisive breakthrough. Its work therefore links force generation to a war measured in sustained attrition and limited territorial movement.

Common Questions

Reference

How does ISW differ from the Harvard Belfer Center on Ukraine analysis?
ISW produces the underlying daily battlefield data: event logs, control maps, and order-of-battle. The Harvard Belfer Center's Russia Matters project synthesises ISW's raw data into longer-run trend analysis. The two organisations collaborated directly on the February-March 2026 territorial assessment.Source: ISW / Harvard Belfer Center
Is ISW reliable for Ukraine war reporting?
ISW is widely cited by Western governments, military staffs, and major news outlets as a primary source for battlefield analysis. Russia disputes its findings, calling it a Western-funded propaganda outlet. ISW’s assessments are corroborated by Ukrainian General Staff data and, in the 2026 territorial study, by the Harvard Belfer Center.Source: ISW
Does ISW analyse the Iran conflict as well as Ukraine?
Yes, jointly with the Critical Threats Project, applying the same daily open-source assessment methodology it uses for the Russia-Ukraine war.
Is the Institute for the Study of War politically biased?
ISW describes itself as non-partisan, though some Western commentators characterise its institutional stance as hawkish. Its raw battlefield data is nonetheless treated as a primary Independent reference by Western governments and militaries.
What is the Institute for the Study of War?
ISW is a Washington, D.C.-based non-partisan defence research organisation founded in 2007 by Kimberly Kagan. It publishes daily battlefield assessments of the Russia-Ukraine war used by Western governments and military staffs.Source: ISW
Who founded the Institute for the Study of War?
ISW was founded in 2007 by Kimberly Kagan, a military historian and Foreign Policy analyst. It is based in Washington, D.C., and has become the primary external reference for tracking the Russia-Ukraine war.Source: ISW

Recently resolved

Did ISW confirm Russia’s spring 2026 offensive?
Yes. In March 2026 ISW assessed that Russia’s spring-summer offensive was under way, corroborating Ukrainian General Staff data showing 619 ground attacks over four days from 17 to 20 March, with 163 directed at the Pokrovsk axis alone.Source: ISW / Syrskyi briefing
What did ISW find about Russian territorial gains in early 2026?
ISW data, compiled with the Harvard Belfer Center, showed Russia’s advance rate had decelerated fivefold between mid-2025 and February 2026, from 130-150 sq km per week to 33-50 sq km per week. Russia recorded its first sustained net territorial loss since 2023 in the period 17 February to 17 March 2026.Source: ISW / Harvard Belfer Center
Has Russia captured Kostiantynivka?
No. ISW's July 2026 roll-up still lists Kostiantynivka as unseized, Russia's main unmet effort on the eastern front.Source: Institute for the Study of War
How much territory did Russia gain in July 2026?
ISW confirmed just 37.85 sq km of Russian ground taken in July 2026 (121.56 sq km including infiltration), down from 455.74 sq km in July 2025, even as Russia fired a record 376 missiles and suffered its worst monthly casualty toll of the year at 42,860.Source: Institute for the Study of War
What is the casualty ratio at Kostiantynivka?
ISW assessed the loss ratio at three Ukrainian dead for every 53 Russian, meaning the fortress-city defence keeps imposing a steep cost on each Russian push.Source: ISW
Has the Ukraine war front line stopped moving?
ISW judged the roughly 1,000km front essentially static on 22 July 2026, with net Russian territorial gains running at a fraction of the previous year's pace.Source: ISW
What has ISW said about Iran's IRGC thanking Jordan?
ISW assessed on 20 July 2026 that the IRGC's public thanks to Jordan for intelligence support was likely a cover narrative, a reading Jordan has neither confirmed nor denied.Source: event
Did ISW report North Korean weapons in Ukraine in 2026?
On 7 June 2026, ISW reported the first sighting of North Korean Type-75 107mm MLRS mounted on Russian Unmanned Ground Vehicles in the Kharkiv direction, the first confirmed combat integration of DPRK rocket artillery on an autonomous platform.Source: ISW
How accurate are ISW's Russia-Ukraine war maps?
In April 2026, ISW verified ~340 km² of Russian gains against Gerasimov's claimed 1,700 km², documenting a 5:1 exaggeration ratio in Russian battlefield claims. ISW's assessments are treated as the external ground-truth reference by Western governments.Source: ISW
Source Material