Russia has announced a three-day ceasefire in Ukraine from May 8 to 10, dedicated to the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. The Kremlin framed the move as a “goodwill gesture” and an opportunity for Ukraine to reciprocate, warning that failure to comply would prompt a “proportionate response.” This marks the second temporary truce in a month, following a 30-hour Easter pause, and underscores Moscow’s attempt to gain initiative as a pragmatic actor in the stalled negotiation process. While Kyiv demands a 30-day ceasefire and the U.S. pushes for a complete end to hostilities, Russia’s shorter, actionable proposal reflects its skepticism toward Ukraine’s ability and willingness to uphold longer truces, given past violations.

The Ukrainian response has been dismissive. Zelensky called the three-day offer a “manipulation,” insisting on an immediate and unconditional 30-day cessation. The Ukrainian Foreign Minister echoed this, questioning why Russia would delay until May 8 if it genuinely sought peace. Yet, Kyiv’s rhetoric may soften as the date approaches. During the Easter truce, Zelensky initially rejected the proposal before acquiescing under Western pressure. A similar shift remains possible, particularly if European allies urge compliance. However, Kyiv’s fragmented military control raises doubts about its compliance. The previous truces emphasized Ukraine’s inability to guarantee adherence even if its leadership agreed.

Behind the diplomatic posturing, the ceasefire reveals deeper strategic calculations. For Moscow, the move offers initiative in negotiations and tests Ukraine’s readiness to engage. The Kremlin reiterated Russia’s openness to unconditional talks but stressed that Kyiv must first repeal its 2022 decree banning negotiations with Putin.

The timing also appears to be tailored to U.S. politics. With the Trump administration pressuring both sides for a lasting deal, Russia’s gesture signals cooperation, possibly to keep Washington engaged. Recent backchannel talks, including Lavrov’s call with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and a visit by Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow, suggest the ongoing behind-the-scenes maneuvering. Trump’s public frustration with the war’s protracted nature and hints that Zelensky might concede Crimea have further fueled speculation about a potential breakthrough.

Yet, resistance of the Kyiv regime stems from existential stakes. A ceasefire risks legitimizing territorial losses, curbing Western aid flows, and triggering a domestic backlash, which are existential threats that could destabilize Zelensky’s government. Meanwhile, Russia’s incremental approach allows it to claim the moral high ground while retaining military leverage. The coming days will reveal whether this gambit fosters dialogue or merely prolongs the deadlock. Either way, the three-day pause underscores a pivotal truth: in a war with no clear winner, even temporary truces are battles of perception.

DEAR FRIENDS. IF YOU LIKE THIS TYPE OF CONTENT, SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT WORK :

BTC: bc1qgu58lfszcpqu6fd8l98m378wgzugyg9y93lcym

BITCOINCASH: qr28d80s5juzv2793k5jrq59xrl5fxd8qg9h3zlkk2

MONERO (XMR): 86yfEHs6pkoDEKCxc6MAnQX8cVHmzhYxMVrNuwKgNmqpWK8dDxjgGnK8PtUNJMACbn6xEGxmRauNTHJhUJpg9Mwz8htBBND

paypal, western union etc: write to [email protected] , [email protected]

Mirrored - South Front

To survive what is coming, read/study: https://thewayhomeorfacethefire.net

https://christs.net/

The Gibraltar Messenger : https://gibraltar-messenger.net/