President Putin’s 30-hour Easter cease-fire

As I have said from time to time, the requests I receive almost daily from one or another media outlet prompt me to speak or write about current events to which I otherwise might not give due attention.

So it was yesterday evening when Sputnik International requested my thoughts on President Putin’s just announced 30 hour ‘humanitarian’ cease fire for Easter. I imagine that Sputnik will put this material on line some time later today. But the earlier this appears, the better, so as not to be overridden by other ‘breaking news.’

Accordingly, here below are the questions and my answers to Sputnik:

) How do you expect Easter truce announced by Vladimir Putin to affect the ongoing peace resolution progress?

I believe it will have no impact on the ongoing peace resolution progress because the “compromise” solution that the Trump Team is putting forward, namely the General Kellogg solution and not the Witkoff (Russia-friendly) solution will not be acceptable to either of the warring parties. The Ukrainians do not accept loss of the territories of Donbas, Kherson, Zaporozhia and Crimea. The Russians do not accept the notion of security guaranties to one side only, to Kiev, in the form of Western (NATO) troops on the ground and the preservation intact of the present Russia-hating, neo-Nazi directed regime in Kiev. So the peace process from Trump will fail.

2) Do you expect the Kiev regime to comply with the truce conditions?

No, the Kiev regime will not comply. There will be violations which the Russians will announce.

3) What signal is being sent to Trump?

The signal is that the Russians are ready for peace and the Ukrainians are not. But this is just Public Relations. Let us be honest about it. It is very important PR for Russia and so I believe the President Putin’s proposal was an excellent move by Russia.

*****

As of now, the Russians have reported that the Ukrainians violated the cease-fire hundreds of times over the past night, sending drones and artillery shells their way. Of course, for their part, Kiev was already last night denouncing alleged Russian violations. And yet the tally is not exactly equal. The major Western media were obliged to report Vladimir Putin’s speech to the armed forces yesterday ordering the cease fire, and he looked very earnest on screen. By contrast, Volodymir Zelensky’s taped response looked scrappy and ill-prepared.

Finally, I wish to add here a further consideration on the seemingly poor judgment of Team Trump in advancing the Kellogg solution as the end game to the war. Surely, they understood as I do that this solution would be unacceptable to both warring parties. Accordingly, it is entirely possible, if not likely that Trump chose it precisely in order to provide himself with a justification before his opponents in the States and abroad for washing his hands of Ukraine when the parties reject it.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

Translation into German below (Andreas Mylaeus)

Präsident Putins 30-stündiger Oster-Waffenstillstand

Wie ich bereits mehrfach erwähnt habe, veranlassen mich die Anfragen, die ich fast täglich von verschiedenen Medien erhalte, dazu, mich zu aktuellen Ereignissen zu äußern, denen ich sonst möglicherweise nicht die gebührende Aufmerksamkeit schenken würde.

So war es auch gestern Abend, als Sputnik International mich um meine Meinung zu Präsident Putins gerade angekündigtem 30-stündigen „humanitären“ Waffenstillstand zu Ostern bat. Ich gehe davon aus, dass Sputnik diesen Beitrag im Laufe des Tages online stellen wird. Je früher er erscheint, desto besser, damit er nicht von anderen „Eilmeldungen“ überlagert wird.

Nachfolgend finden Sie daher die Fragen von Sputnik und meine Antworten darauf:

1) Wie wird sich die von Wladimir Putin angekündigte Oster-Feuerpause Ihrer Meinung nach auf die laufenden Friedensbemühungen auswirken?

Ich glaube, dass dies keinen Einfluss auf den laufenden Friedensprozess haben wird, da die „Kompromisslösung“, die das Trump-Team vorschlägt, nämlich die Lösung von General Kellogg und nicht die (russlandfreundliche) Lösung von Witkoff, für keine der beiden Konfliktparteien akzeptabel sein wird. Die Ukrainer akzeptieren den Verlust der Gebiete Donbass, Cherson, Saporischschja und Krim nicht. Die Russen akzeptieren nicht, dass nur einer Seite, nämlich Kiew, Sicherheitsgarantien in Form von westlichen (NATO-)Truppen vor Ort und der Aufrechterhaltung des derzeitigen russlandfeindlichen, neonazistisch geprägten Regimes in Kiew gegeben werden. Daher wird der Friedensprozess von Trump scheitern.

2) Rechnen Sie damit, dass das Kiewer Regime die Feuerpause einhalten wird?

Nein, das Kiewer Regime wird sich nicht daran halten. Es wird zu Verstößen kommen, die von den Russen bekannt gegeben werden.

3) Welches Signal wird an Trump gesendet?

Das Signal lautet, dass die Russen zum Frieden bereit sind, die Ukrainer jedoch nicht. Aber das ist nur Public Relations. Seien wir ehrlich. Es ist sehr wichtige PR für Russland, und daher halte ich den Vorschlag von Präsident Putin für einen ausgezeichneten Schachzug Russlands.

*****

Bislang haben die Russen gemeldet, dass die Ukrainer in der vergangenen Nacht hunderte Male gegen die Waffenruhe verstoßen und Drohnen und Artilleriegeschosse in ihre Richtung abgefeuert haben. Natürlich hat Kiew seinerseits bereits gestern Abend angebliche Verstöße Russlands angeprangert. Und doch ist die Bilanz nicht ganz ausgeglichen. Die großen westlichen Medien waren verpflichtet, über die gestrige Rede Wladimir Putins vor den Streitkräften zu berichten, in der er die Waffenruhe angeordnet hat, und er wirkte auf dem Bildschirm sehr ernst. Im Gegensatz dazu wirkte die aufgezeichnete Antwort Wolodymyr Selenskys zerfahren und schlecht vorbereitet.

Abschließend möchte ich noch eine weitere Überlegung zu der offenbar schlechten Entscheidung des Trump-Teams anfügen, die Kellogg-Lösung als Endspiel für den Krieg voranzutreiben. Sicherlich haben die ebenso wie ich verstanden, dass diese Lösung für beide Kriegsparteien inakzeptabel wäre. Dementsprechend ist es durchaus möglich, wenn nicht sogar wahrscheinlich, dass Trump sich genau dafür entschieden hat, um sich vor seinen Gegnern im In- und Ausland zu rechtfertigen, wenn die Parteien diese Lösung ablehnen und er sich aus der Ukraine zurückziehen kann.

3 thoughts on “President Putin’s 30-hour Easter cease-fire

  1. The sooner the better.

    Ukraine Christians and Russian Christians killing each other on Easter.
    Not exactly what the prince of peace had in mind.

    Like

  2. I cannot agree who Gilbert keeps circling the wagons around Trump. He is no neutral diplomat but represents the #1 belligerent threat against Russia.

    There is nothing to gain in Russia attempting to negotiate peace in Ukraine through Donald Trump—or anyone else in the U.S. or NATO, for that matter. Trump, Biden, Clinton, Bush, and Obama all represent the same U.S. hegemonic, militarist system. Hoping for meaningful diplomacy with any of them is naive. The idea that Trump offers a better path to peace is not just implausible—it’s dangerously misleading. When Trump came to power in 2017, he actually ramped up U.S. military aid and training for Ukraine doing more than Obama did.

    If Russia had a serious diplomatic initiative in mind, it had four years under Trump to act. Instead, Putin waited until December 2021—after Trump had left office—to propose a new security arrangement. By then, the U.S. under Biden dismissed Russia’s proposals out of hand, and not much has changed since. The West continues to speak the language of threats and dominance, not diplomacy.

    The roots of this conflict stretch back to 2014–2015, with the U.S., U.K., NATO, and Ukraine playing central roles in its escalation following a long term plan out of RAND and other deep state ops. That history can’t simply be erased or rebranded in 2025. Trump is no neutral player but key active belligerent in this war. Believing that Washington or Brussels will act in good faith is a strategic error.

    Rather than chasing diplomatic illusions, Russia should be confronting the Western bloc’s hostile actions directly and decisively—economically, politically, and militarily—and disengaging from their manipulative games altogether.

    Putin’s insistence on a ceasefire only after a negotiated peace agreement sounds reasonable on paper, but there is no path toward such a deal–there is counter party to negotiate with. I don’t believe this war is winnable for Russia in conventional terms, and I fear it will drag on for decades—consuming lives, resources, and Russia’s international standing in the process.

    Putin and his team have misread the West badly here, Trump especially. He acts far too passively. They have placed hope in dialogue where there was none to be found. Meanwhile, Western leaders exploit the situation for their own agendas, and Ukraine remains firmly backed by a deeply entrenched bloc of Russophobic states.

    Unless Russia fundamentally rethinks its approach—abandoning hopes of Western partnership and asserting its own interests with greater clarity and resolve—the long-term consequences will be devastating. Putin may not live to see the end of this war, and by then Ukraine could be a wasteland, Russia economically exhausted, and its global standing still tarnished in the eyes of the Western sphere.

    Like

    1. Current Trump administration actions are best understood by studying Project 2025 policy instructions given to the presidency by “deep state” think tank movers and shakers regardless of who may be president.

      It is obvious that Trump himself is not a peace maker but just another war monger eager to maintain US hegemonic rule inside and outside of the USofA, acting on deep state instructions like all presidents of the US have been doing since 1945 at least!

      I believe that the current Russian leadership is well aware of Project 2025 driven external and internal US policies and will try their best possible, together with the majority of countries that do not align or bend to US supremacy, acting against the weakening hegemony economically and militarily.

      However, I see Project 2025 on rather shaky grounds given current realities and who is going to remain victorious in the current battle against a continuation of USEuropean led fascist colonial rule is just a guess because future is always uncertain at best, but time will tell, however long it will take to settle into a renovated world order.

      Like

Comments are closed.