Brussels – International pressure to end the war in Ukraine appears to be growing. A few hours ago, Vladimir Putin proposed a three-day truce in early May, indirectly responding to recent exhortations from Donald Trump, who is impatient with the stalemate in negotiations. Moscow and Kyiv could start direct talks soon, resuming a diplomatic channel that has been interrupted for three years. However, there are still many unknowns, both on the battlefield and at the negotiating table, and the coming days are shaping up to be diplomatically intense.
Putin’s announcement
In the very early afternoon today (April 28), the Kremlin announced that it would suspend the fighting between May 8 and May 11 for “humanitarian reasons,” believing that Kyiv too “should follow suit.” The ceasefire would come into effect to coincide with the 80th anniversary celebrations of the Red Army’s victory over the Nazi-fascists in World War II (called the Great Patriotic War in Russia).
On May 9, the so-called “Day of Victory,” a grand ceremony will be held in Red Square in Moscow, attended by some 20 high-level guests—including Chinese leader Xi Jinping the Belarusian dictator Alexandr Lukashenko and even the Slovak premier Robert Fico—and, understandably, Vladimir Putin wants to keep everyone safe from potential attacks by Ukrainian drones, which have proven particularly effective.
“In the event of a ceasefire violation by Ukraine, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will provide an appropriate and effective response,” reads the Kremlin statement released on Telegram. It also adds that Moscow “once again declares its readiness for peace negotiations without preconditions, aimed at eliminating the root causes of the Ukrainian crisis, and constructive interaction with international partners.”
The reactions of Kiev and Washington
The Russian proposal for a temporary truce was coolly received in Kyiv. Ukraine’s foreign minister, Andrij Sybiha, pointed out that “if Russia really wants peace, it must cease fire immediately” and for at least 30 days, showing that this is a “real commitment, not just for a parade.” After all, Moscow’s soldiers recently violated the 30-hour break proposed by Putin himself at Easter.
On the other side of the Atlantic, in Washington, there is an insistence on the need for a permanent ceasefire. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt reiterated that Donald Trump “remains optimistic that an agreement can be reached” and that he “wants to be a peacemaking president.” But she also stressed that the tycoon is “increasingly frustrated with the leaders of both countries,” who should move to “negotiate their way out” of the conflict.
If Russia truly wants peace, it must cease fire immediately.
Why wait until May 8th? If the fire can be ceased now and since any date for 30 days—so it is real, not just for a parade.
Ukraine is ready to support a lasting, durable, and full ceasefire. And this is what we are…
– Andrii Sybiha (@andrii_sybiha) April 28, 2025
Returning to the U.S. after his trip to the Vatican, where he had a brief meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky at Pope Francis’ funeral on April 26, Trump had urged the Russian president to silence his guns and sit down at the negotiating table. “He had no reason to fire missiles into civilian areas and cities over the past few days,” he wrote on his social Truth, adding that Putin’s attitude “makes me think that maybe he doesn’t want to stop the war, that he’s playing me and that he needs to be treated differently,” such as resorting to new sanctions.
“I want him to stop shooting, sit down, and sign an agreement,” he concluded. Only hours earlier, Trump had claimed that the two belligerents would be “very close to an agreement,” and the two sides should now meet at a very high level to “get it over with,” since “there is an agreement on most of the main points.”
The knot of occupied territories
In fact, on at least one key point, there is still deep disagreement between Moscow and Kyiv. In recent hours, the Kremlin’s chief of diplomacy, Sergei Lavrov, has repeated that international recognition of Russia’s territorial claims—involving Crimea and the occupied portions of the oblast’ of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Cherson—will be “imperative” in any peace negotiations. In the aftermath of his meeting with Zelensky, the U.S. president was convinced that Kiev would cede Crimea, which the Federation has occupied since 2014, to Moscow.
However, for Ukraine, formal recognition of the occupied regions is a red line, both politically and legally. To this end, the Constitution would have to be amended, and a popular referendum organised, which would have little chance of success. According to observers, Kyiv will at best be able to endorse a de facto recognition of the occupation, but only temporarily (in the hope of regaining it in the future, militarily or diplomatically) and without accepting de jure Moscow’s sovereignty.
The same argument applies, at least in principle, to the other Ukrainian regions partially occupied by the Russian army. Above all, the Ukrainians insist that any discussion regarding possible territorial cessions must be initiated only after a “complete and unconditional” ceasefire has taken effect, suspending land, air, and sea fighting.
What peace for Ukraine?
This would be, at least according to journalistic rumors, one of the central elements in the Kyiv proposal to mitigate some aspects of the controversial peace plan drafted by the star-studded administration, judged too unbalanced in favour of Russia, which Zelensky reportedly briefly discussed with Trump at St. Peter’s.
Main Ukrainian demands include the removal of any clause limiting the size of the national armed forces and, simultaneously, the admission of a European military contingent (a “reassurance force” that Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer are trying to assemble through a coalition of the willing) to ensure security. The U.S. president would appear to be open to considering the provision of logistical support and, most importantly, to share intelligence with such a European contingent, as Paris, London, and Kyiv have long demanded.
The infamous agreement on critical Ukrainian raw materials, on the other hand, appears to be close to signing (perhaps, this time, for real), after being bounced around for months between Washington and Kyiv. Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal confirmed that “the document does not consider assistance provided prior to its stipulation,” as Trump (who demanded $500 billion compensation from Zelensky for aid sent by his predecessor Joe Biden) would have demanded, and specified that the clauses of the contract will not violate the obligations that the country must comply with in terms of free competition with European companies with a view to EU accession.
In the words of Marco Rubio, Washington’s Secretary of State, the one just beginning will be a “decisive week” for negotiations on the conflict. The White House, he says, will assess in the coming days “whether both sides really want peace.” “There are reasons to be optimistic, but also to be realistic,” the star-studded diplomatic chief added, noting that “we are close (to an agreement, ed.) but not close enough.” Last week, for the first time in three years, Putin opened up the possibility of direct talks with the Ukrainian leadership to reach a negotiating understanding.
We shall see. What is certain is that if it is true that the small portion of the Russian oblast’ of Kursk captured by the Ukrainians last summer has indeed been liberated, Putin will be able to sit at the negotiating table from an even stronger position. Just this morning, moreover, Moscow and Pyongyang officially confirmed that the Russian counteroffensive was also attended by North Korean soldiers, whose “heroism” was publicly praised by the Federation’s General Staff.
English version by the Translation Service of Withub
