Russia could use a 30-day ceasefire with Ukraine as an opportunity to continue its military actions with political means, according to Armands Astukevičs, a researcher at the Eastern Europe Policy Research Center, in an interview with LETA news agency.
It was reported that on Tuesday, a meeting between US and Ukrainian delegations took place in Saudi Arabia, after which the US and Ukraine released a joint statement, in which Kyiv expressed its readiness to accept the US proposal to immediately implement a temporary 30-day ceasefire, which could be extended by mutual agreement and adopted and implemented simultaneously by Russia.
Commenting on the US and Ukrainian delegations’ meeting, Astukevičs emphasized that one of the goals of the US is to achieve quick, measurable, and demonstrable victories. Therefore, implementing such a ceasefire would allow the US to demonstrate to its public and internationally that the talks and the strategy formed by US President Donald Trump for further peace are progressing. Additionally, the ceasefire would provide a platform for more constructive negotiations when the ceasefire is put in place.
From Ukraine’s perspective, Astukevičs pointed out that one must consider the context of the past week, as well as the tense US-Ukrainian relations. He mentioned that Ukraine wants to be on the “good list” of countries in the US, so it would be willing to agree to a ceasefire. In the researcher’s opinion, this is strategically advantageous for Ukraine for several reasons.
According to Astukevičs, it presents an opportunity to improve relations with the US.
The US has already made statements regarding the restoration of military aid and intelligence data exchange. This, he noted, is a way for Ukraine to reorganize its position regarding the ongoing front, where Russia has the upper hand. These discussions also place pressure on Russia, which now must decide whether it is ready to agree to such conditions and move toward more constructive negotiations with Ukraine, in cooperation with the US.
“In my opinion, Ukraine’s bet is that Russia will find it difficult to agree to the ceasefire. And that could create tension between the US and Russia. There has been a relatively positive dynamic in relations between the two countries and their leaders recently. This is a strategically advantageous maneuver for Ukraine, understanding that this is not about a long-term peace. However, it may give Ukraine a respite and shift the further initiative to Russia,” explained Astukevičs.
There is a perception that Russian dictator Vladimir Putin is a tactician.
Asked what his reaction might be to the US offer for a 30-day ceasefire with Ukraine, Astukevičs said that Putin is currently in a somewhat awkward position. Over the past week, Russia has tried to establish seemingly constructive relations with the US, aiming for cooperation that is favourable toward the US President and his administration.
According to the researcher, as a result, the US administration has made various statements suggesting that Russia wants peace and is ready for talks. Astukevičs emphasized that these were Russia’s strategic moves, which had tangible outcomes, including the potential removal of US-imposed sanctions against Russia, and possibly the restoration of economic cooperation and diplomatic relations. He concluded that, in a way, this would be advantageous for Russia. It would serve as a means to rehabilitate Putin on the international stage and improve Russia’s position.
Astukevičs further explained that, on the one hand, it will be difficult for Russia to reject the US offer, as Russia and Putin will want to maintain the image of a constructive partner in the eyes of the US. Russia will not want to worsen relations with the US administration, as it would give an opportunity for improving US-Ukrainian relations. Astukevičs noted that in the case of heightened tensions between Russia and the US, there could be more decisive action against Russia by the US, such as additional support for Ukraine, which Russia would certainly not want.
The researcher emphasized that there are also practical considerations: the situation on the front lines, where Russia currently holds the initiative, and it will certainly want to maintain that. One of the issues might be Kursk and the Kursk region, where Russia has been making significant advances in recent weeks, hoping to liberate these territories from Ukrainian forces. Astukevičs suggested that this could be one of the key questions in any decision regarding a ceasefire—whether Russia would agree to the 30-day ceasefire if Ukrainian troops withdraw from this territory.
“During the talks, we have heard the Kremlin’s maximalist positions regarding Ukraine, so there is a possibility to pause military actions along the front lines but continue to insist on its demands in the political dimension. Russia believes that in these talks, it is in a better position than Ukraine,” said the researcher.
Asked if, in the event of both sides agreeing to a 30-day ceasefire, provocations could arise in which Russia would blame Ukraine to discredit it in the eyes of the US,
Astukevičs confirmed that such scenarios cannot be excluded. He noted that Russia skillfully operates in the information space and also conducts various “false flag” operations. The researcher provided a theoretical example: if a “provocation” were to occur, Russia would be forced to respond, trying to place the blame for any ceasefire violations on Ukraine.
“We cannot rule out such ‘provocations,’ but currently, we do not have enough information on the ceasefire conditions or whether there are any hidden risks. However, a month is not too long for a ceasefire to be implemented. The main question is about the long-term perspectives,” said the researcher.
Astukevičs believes it is clear that Russia’s imperial ambitions and desires regarding Ukraine have not disappeared. He argued that the question is whether Russia currently sees achieving its goals through military means or in the political dimension. He also added that, in some cases, the US might be willing to compromise on certain Russian demands, such as holding new presidential elections in Ukraine or not returning occupied territories to Ukraine.
“Russia will use the opportunity to continue the war in the political dimension with political means. If Russia sees that it cannot achieve its goals this way, the fighting might resume. Of course, there are still many speculations and variables, given that since the new US administration took office, it has been very unpredictable, so we can still expect much,” concluded Astukevičs.