By signaling its openness to a ceasefire, Ukraine has handed the Kremlin a difficult challenge at a time when the Russian military has the upper hand within the war: Should Moscow accept a truce and abandon hopes of constructing recent gains, or should it reject the offer and risk derailing a cautious rapprochement with Washington?
Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly ruled out a brief break in hostilities, saying it could only profit Ukraine and its Western allies by letting them replenish their arsenals. He has insisted Moscow wants a comprehensive agreement that may ensure an enduring settlement.
The Kremlin responded cautiously to the news of Ukraine accepting the U.S.-proposed truce during Tuesday’s talks in Saudi Arabia, saying that it must know details of the discussions before expressing its view.
The careful approach reflects Putin’s awareness of the chance that a blunt rejection of the offer could upset tentative efforts to normalize Russia-U.S. ties.
Observers say that as a substitute of an outright rejection, Putin will likely propose linking the truce to certain conditions that may protect Moscow’s interests.
Why would the Kremlin oppose a ceasefire?
The Russian military held the battlefield initiative last 12 months, making slow but regular gains along several sections of the 1,000-kilometer (600-mile) front line. The tempo of Russian advances accelerated in the autumn, when Moscow’s forces captured probably the most territory for the reason that start of the war.
Ukraine has sought to retake the initiative with a surprise foray into Russia’s Kursk region that began in August, searching for to distract Moscow’s forces from their offensive in eastern Ukraine and make gains that potentially might be exchanged for Russia-occupied areas in peace talks. The incursion, nevertheless, has diverted Ukrainian resources from defending the Donetsk region within the east and it didn’t stem Russian advances there. Now Ukrainian forces are on the verge of losing their last remaining bridgehead in Kursk under the brunt of a swift Russian counteroffensive.
Moscow also ravaged Ukrainian energy infrastructure with waves of missiles and drones, destroying much of its power-generating capability.
Putin has repeatedly said a brief halt to hostilities at a time when Russian forces firmly hold the initiative would only allow exhausted Ukrainian troops a break to rest and rearm.
Get each day National news
Get the day’s top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.
“As for the settlement of the situation, I would really like to emphasise that it shouldn’t be geared toward a transient truce — some form of a break for regrouping troops and rearmament with the intention to proceed the conflict — but a long-term peace,” Putin has said.
Moscow has made it clear it wouldn’t accept any troops from NATO members as monitors under a prospective peace deal.
Putin key goals remain what he declared when he launched the full-scale invasion on Feb. 24, 2022: Ukraine resign joining NATO, sharply cut its army, and protect Russian language and culture to maintain the country in Moscow’s orbit. On top of that, he now wants Kyiv to withdraw its forces from the 4 regions Moscow has seized but doesn’t fully control.
Russian officials even have said that any prospective peace deal should involve unfreezing Russian assets within the West and lifting other U.S. and European Union sanctions. The Trump administration has put a possible sanctions relief on the table.
Together with that, Putin has repeatedly emphasized the necessity to “remove the foundation causes of the crisis,” a reference to the Kremlin’s demand to roll back a NATO military buildup near Russian borders it describes as a significant threat to its security.
The Kremlin leader has argued that Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whose term expired last 12 months, lacks the legitimacy to sign a peace deal. Kyiv maintains that elections are unattainable to carry amid a war. U.S. President Donald Trump has spoken of the necessity for Ukraine to carry an election in comments that echoed Moscow’s view.
What more could Moscow demand?
Some observers noted that as a substitute of an outright rejection of the proposed truce, Putin could recommend several conditions.
Pro-Kremlin commentator Sergei Markov suggested Moscow could conform to a truce if Ukraine’s allies halt arms supplies to Kyiv. The U.S. said it resumed weapons shipments and intelligence sharing with Kyiv after it agreed to a truce Tuesday in Saudi Arabia.
“Russia could say ‘yes, but’ to a ceasefire offer, accepting a 30-day truce provided that an embargo is imposed on arms supplies to Ukraine,” Markov wrote.
One other Moscow wish is a presidential election in Ukraine, which could be possible after Ukraine lifts martial law.
“Peace would allow Russia to influence Ukrainian politics and use peaceful means to make sure friendly relations,” Markov said.
Moscow-based foreign policy expert Alexei Naumov also predicted that Russia would likely accept the ceasefire offer if it results in an election in Ukraine.
“There may be a paradox in these talks and peace initiatives – Ukraine and Russia are each vying for Donald Trump’s attention and searching for to enhance their positions along with his help,” Naumov said in a commentary.
Sam Greene of the Washington-based Center for European Policy Evaluation said it could be hard to assume Putin saying a categoric “no” to the ceasefire proposal, adding that the Kremlin leader “has already achieved in some ways more through this negotiation process … then he achieved in an extended time on the battlefield,” describing a transient halt within the U.S. military assistance to Ukraine and the speak about rolling back sanctions as “big wins” for Russia.
Putin’s statements against a brief truce mean simply that Russia is “not prone to conform to a ceasefire without extracting various things along the best way,” Greene said.
“The form of ceasefire that it could be enthusiastic about is kind of clearly not the sort of ceasefire that the Ukrainians or the Europeans could be enthusiastic about, although the Americans could also be more malleable on that,” he added.
“Moscow has every reason to consider that … if this process lands anywhere, it should land in a spot that’s kind of on Russia’s terms, so long as the method is being driven by Washington,” Greene said.
© 2025 The Canadian Press
