Meanwhile, Ukraine has been experiencing a wave of drone attacks. These strikes followed a two day Easter truce, which Russian President Vladimir Putin declared on Saturday. The truce, lasting 30 hours, began at 16:00 BST on Saturday and concluded at 22:00 BST on Sunday. Originally, this temporary cessation of hostilities had been carefully timed to coincide with the Easter holiday. This milestone would be of immense importance for Ukraine as well as Russia.
The situation only gets worse as the escalation comes after Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky suggested a Ukraine-Russia ceasefire of more duration targeting long-range missile and drone attacks. Kyiv was the first to accept an offer by the United States for a 30-day ceasefire. Moscow not only rejected, but answered with counterconditions. There are some calls for an immediate ceasefire in Donetsk and Luhansk. Pressures called for the Ukrainian authorities to re-establish complete sovereignty over its international border.
The Easter truce was an important litmus test of Russia’s sincerity about making peace. It didn’t go further than its initial window. In response, Washington was hoping for a much longer pause in the fighting. Fighting restarted soon after the temporary ceasefire ended at midnight local time Sunday.
Even without clear evidence, Russia’s losses were important enough for Ukraine’s general staff to advertise the truce period. On Easter Sunday, the Russian military’s losses were estimated at nearly 670 military personnel. Russia’s military equipment had suffered severe losses. They lost two lone tanks, two armored fighting vehicles, and ten artillery systems.
From Kyiv to Kharkiv, Ukraine’s air defense units proved their mettle by knocking down 42 Shahed drones over Ukrainian territory. They claimed to have shot down 47 of the drones in areas where no harm would come to Ukrainian forces. This feeds the worries that the truce was used by Russia to achieve tactical benefits on the battlefield.
Matthew Savill, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) in London, stated, “Russia has never seriously entered into any talk about a cessation of hostilities with the intent of actually ceasing hostilities.” This negative attitude is in line with the wariness about whether Russia even wants to participate in real peace talks.
Savill noted, “Russia has tried to use previously declared ceasefires to gain advantage on the battlefield and provoke a response from the Ukrainians.” This last observation leads to an important point that most experts consider a hallmark of Russia’s approach to ceasefires.
Vitaliy Shevchenko, Russia editor for BBC Monitoring, pointed out that “Russia bears the brunt of the blame for broken truces, even though Ukraine bears some responsibility, too.” This statement may highlight the convoluted nature of accountability in this fluid and protracted war.
The expiration of the Easter truce has exacerbated an already fraught situation between the two countries. Now that both sides have restarted military activities, it remains unclear what the next stages of negotiation may look like or where a peace agreement might lead. Analysts continue to monitor developments closely.
Leave a Reply