Putin’s “Truce” as a Political Stunt: Kyiv and the West Remain Unmoved
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s latest proposal for a three-day ceasefire, timed to coincide with the Kremlin’s Victory Day on May 9, is being widely dismissed as a cynical attempt to regroup militarily under the guise of peace.
According to Ihor Petrenko, founder of the United Ukraine think tank and Doctor of Political Sciences in his article for The Gaze, Putin’s so-called truce follows a well-known Soviet-era playbook:
“The three-day ceasefire, like most of the Kremlin’s proposals in recent years, is an example of political mimicry: looking peaceful to an international audience while not conceding any real position.”
Western leaders echoed this view. U.S. Special Envoy Keith Kellogg dismissed the proposal as “absurd,” emphasizing that Washington backs a comprehensive 30-day ceasefire covering land, air, sea, and infrastructure.
Finnish President Alexander Stubb added that “President Trump is not to be trifled with,” highlighting growing U.S. impatience with Moscow.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, for his part, underlined Kyiv’s firm stance:
“We will not give the enemy a single chance to regroup or get a break under the guise of a truce. Real peace cannot last for three days. Real peace is the end of the occupation and the withdrawal of Russian troops from our land.”
Petrenko concludes that the world has become more alert to Russian tactics:
“Three days is a moment. But a wrong reaction to it could cost Ukraine its future. It seems that for the first time in a long time, the world has not fallen for a beautiful wrapper with no real content.”
Read the full article by Ihor Petrenko on The Gaze: What lies behind Putin’s second so-called ceasefire