Putin vs. Zelensky: Decoding the "Ceasefire War" Charade

-Analysis-

PARIS — The term 'ceasefire war' appears contradictory, combining opposing ideas. However, conflict can occur during a ceasefire much like in active warfare. On Saturday, Vladimir Putin unexpectedly declared a brief two-day truce for Easter. Volodymyr Zelensky promptly accepted this pause in hostilities. Nevertheless, both Moscow and Kyiv documented numerous breaches of the Easter truce along all fronts, though significant Ukrainian urban areas remained relatively undisturbed throughout those two days.

Get On This Day In History sent directly to your email 📧 every day! Sign up here .

This isn’t the first disagreement regarding the ceasefire. About five weeks prior, during a discussion involving the United States in Saudi Arabia, Ukraine consented to an "unconditional" 30-day cease-fire agreement. At this point, the responsibility fell upon Russia; however, they failed to act accordingly. Consequently, no armistice took place—partial or otherwise. Instead, just eight days back, the relentless shelling of Sumy served as a stark signifier of escalated attacks from Russia, particularly targeting evidently non-military sites.

These declarations of a ceasefire primarily serve as a means of communicating with Donald Trump. In Saudi Arabia, Ukrainian officials surpassed what was requested by the Americans by stating they were ready for an unconditional halt in hostilities. This move aimed to reclaim territory lost following the unsuccessful talks in the Oval Office. Although the ceasefire did not materialize, renewed discussions with Washington have proven successful—the mineral agreement that wasn’t finalized during Zelensky’s visit to Washington is anticipated to be completed later this week.

This time, it was Putin who sent a message to Trump.

A full day prior to Russia's statement, the U.S. President was concerned about the slow pace of talks aimed at concluding the conflict in Ukraine. The "master of agreements," who pledged tranquility within a day, appears to be faltering, with his team threatening to withdraw from discussions unless significant headway is achieved.

Talks are going nowhere

Moscow and Kyiv are thus intensifying their attempts to make sure that, should negotiations falter, the "other" side will be held responsible.

Actually, these discussions aren’t making any progress.

Moscow has kept its conditions intact, insisting not only on retaining its captured territories but also crucially ensuring that post-conflict Ukraine will be demilitarized and thus defenseless.

Ukraine and its allies in Europe reject these terms as they amount to surrender.

Where Washington stands

The U.S. is emitting mixed messages. While it largely adopts Russia’s talking points and appears detached from subsequent events, simultaneously, it has restarted conversations with European allies—last Thursday in Paris and this week in London—with an unprecedented vigor indicating varied perspectives coexisting within this administration.

This does not bode well for a quick resolution of the conflict.

This all suggests a protracted conflict is likely. However, it also raises questions about how the U.S. would respond should efforts fail. Would America abandon Ukraine, despite seeming as though Russia is the one refusing negotiation?

What's fundamentally at issue in the present diplomatic upheaval is Europe regaining a part to play in supporting Ukraine, where survival is crucial. An announcement made late Sunday from Kiev indicated that Ukraine is prepared for a temporary ceasefire. However, the "ceasefire battle" has yet to conclude.

Like our content? Follow us for more.

The article initially appeared on The News Pulse It was translated and adapted by The News Pulsepartnership with FRANCE INTER.

To stay updated with the most recent news and perspectives from all corners of the globe, The News PulseToday stands as the singular genuinely worldwide newsletter. Sign up here .