Putin’s tactical pause

Though  a welcome step towards de-escalation, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to halt attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure for 30 days is far from being the breakthrough for lasting peace. While President Donald Trump promotes this partial truce as progress, the reality is more complex. By refusing a full ceasefire and demanding an end to western military aid to Ukraine, Putin is setting terms that serve only Moscow’s interests. The ceasefire focusses solely on energy infrastructure, and even that commitment appears shaky. Mere hours after Putin’s call with Trump, Russian drones struck Ukrainian cities, including a hospital in Sumy. Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, though supporting the limited truce, remains cautious. His concerns are valid.

The White House’s handling of negotiations raises red flags. The upcoming peace talks in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, lack clarity on Ukraine’s direct participation. Trump’s claim that military aid to Ukraine was "not discussed" contradicts the Kremlin’s assertion that it is central to Russia’s demands. European leaders, including Germany’s Olaf Scholz and France’s Emmanuel Macron, remain wary. They rightly emphasise that Ukraine must be fully involved in any settlement. A deal that legitimises Russian territorial gains or weakens Ukraine’s military standing would only prolong the conflict and embolden future aggression.

Yet, dismissing talks entirely would be a mistake. This brutal war has stretched into its third year, leaving hundreds of thousands dead, displacing millions and devastating cities. A lasting peace must be the ultimate goal — not just a fragile truce that prolongs suffering. Diplomacy must aim beyond temporary ceasefires to secure Ukraine’s sovereignty and regional stability. Peace must emerge from negotiations that uphold international law. Without a firm commitment to a just resolution, the war will continue at immense human and economic cost.