Russia pledges not to attack Kyiv until Sunday

MoscowOnce again, the script repeats itself: Donald Trump asks Vladimir Putin for a truce, and instead of rejecting it, the Russian president, surprised, accepts a watered-down version to appease him. Meanwhile, the supposed beneficiary of the initiative, Volodymyr Zelensky, learns of the news by surprise and is forced to put on a brave face, aware that it is a purely cosmetic measure, but that he must show gratitude for the gesture of the US president.

This is exactly what has happened. Finally, the Kremlin has confirmed an agreement with the White House to, at Trump's request, not bomb Kyiv until Sunday. However, the spokesman for the Russian president, Dmitry Peskov, declined to specify whether it is a truce on energy infrastructure, whether it only affects the Ukrainian capital, or when it came into effect (the last attack on the city was on Wednesday). He simply explained that he seeks to "create favorable conditions for the Abu Dhabi peace talks," scheduled for Sunday, barring any unforeseen circumstances.

Earlier, Zelenskyy clarified that this is neither a negotiated nor an official pause. "It's not an agreement, but an opportunity. If Russia doesn't attack us, we won't retaliate," he stated. But Moscow did attack on Friday, launching a missile and over a hundred drones into Ukrainian territory. However, these attacks primarily targeted border areas and those near the front lines, shifting from energy infrastructure to railways and logistical infrastructure. Therefore, relying on the vagueness of the agreement with the US president, Putin can argue that he hasn't bombed Kyiv or cities in western Ukraine.

Another paradox of the truce is that Trump proposed it. in anticipation of the "extraordinary cold" that is expected to arrive in the region in the coming daysAnd yet, it expires on Sunday, just when the steepest drop in temperatures is expected, with lows remaining below -20 degrees Celsius until Wednesday. Furthermore, it is impossible for Ukrainian authorities to restore heating, electricity, and water services to the thousands affected in such a short period.

When rumors began circulating Thursday morning about a pause in the bombing of energy infrastructure, pro-war Russian bloggers were outraged. They couldn't understand why Putin would relinquish the main lever of pressure on Zelensky. However, their perspective has shifted as they realize the truce is short-lived and won't even give the enemy a chance to catch their breath. Meanwhile, some analysts argue that, once the Ukrainian energy system is crippled, refraining from attacking Kyiv in exchange for Ukraine ceasing drone strikes against Russian refineries, depots, and oil tankers could be a beneficial move for the Kremlin.

The latest unilateral truce breaks down

In the past year, Trump, with the support of Zelensky and European allies, has tried unsuccessfully, albeit intermittently, to get Putin to agree to a temporary ceasefire. However, since the summer, the United States has no longer advocated for a truce, but has instead aligned itself with Russia in defending a long-term solution to the conflict prior to the end of hostilities. This approach diminishes the ambition of any proposal to halt fighting or bombing, although previous attempts had also failed to produce results. In March 2025, the White House leader invited his counterpart to a moratorium on attacks against civilian infrastructure and ships in the Black Sea. The Russian president did not refuse, but what he unilaterally announced was a thirty-day ceasefire only on energy facilities. During the following weeks, Russians and Ukrainians systematically accused each other of violating the initiative. In April and May, Moscow also brokered two short-lived truces without notifying Ukraine: the first, lasting 36 hours, coinciding with Easter, and the second, lasting three days, to prevent drones from Kyiv from disrupting the Victory Day celebrations in the Kremlin. In all cases, as in the current situation, the truces had no impact on the course of the war: they did not facilitate troop rotation or rearmament, they were not the result of negotiations, nor did they foster trust between the warring parties. Putin's sole objective was, and remains, to demonstrate to Trump the utmost commitment to peace without letting up on the front lines. Zelensky, for his part, has no choice but to welcome the measure despite his deep distrust of Moscow's intentions, and to make it clear that Ukraine has always supported a ceasefire.