Russian President Vladimir Putin’s surprise announcement of a unilateral 30-hour Easter ceasefire has sparked international debate. The move, declared on state television, cited humanitarian reasons, allowing civilians in conflict zones to rest and observe religious rites. However, the lack of prior consultation or agreement with Ukraine raised eyebrows.
A Ceasefire Without Consensus
The ceasefire, which began at 6 pm on Saturday and ended at midnight on Sunday, was criticized for its lack of clear mechanisms or mutual understanding between the warring parties. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy swiftly responded, calling it a “political stunt” and a “game with human lives.” He counter-proposed a permanent ceasefire, suggesting a 30-day halt to missile, drone, and civilian infrastructure attacks to pave the way for meaningful negotiations.
The US State Department welcomed the possibility of extending the ceasefire, urging all parties to seize the opportunity to advance peace talks. However, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense reported that Russia continued to attack various areas during the 30-hour period, including drone and missile strikes on the front lines, with over 3,000 ceasefire violations.
Pressure from Washington
Putin’s announcement came after US President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (not Marco Rubio, who is a former US Senator) called on Russia to demonstrate concrete commitment to peace negotiations, warning that the US might withdraw from its mediating role if no tangible progress was seen. Putin’s ceasefire declaration was seen as a tactical move to alleviate pressure from Washington.
As soon as the ceasefire ended, Russia resumed heavy attacks on Ukraine’s eastern and southern regions, unleashing over 90 drones and multiple missiles. Ukrainian forces managed to intercept some of the attacks, but the resumption of intense fighting prompted Zelenskyy to condemn Russia’s actions as a “game with people’s lives.” He reiterated his proposal for a genuine 30-day ceasefire to prove which side truly seeks peace.
A Stalemate
Russia’s response was to consider Ukraine’s proposal while maintaining accusations that Ukraine uses civilian infrastructure as a military base. The stalemate continues, with no progress on a permanent ceasefire. The international community remains watchful, as the conflict’s trajectory hangs in the balance.
- Putin’s Easter ceasefire announcement was met with skepticism due to its unilateral nature.
- Ukraine and the US questioned Russia’s commitment to peace, citing continued attacks during the ceasefire.
- The conflict resumed with intensity after the ceasefire ended, with both sides trading blame.