When Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a surprise 36-hour Easter ceasefire in Ukraine, the world took notice—but not everyone bought it. Was this a genuine olive branch, or just another move in Moscow’s high-stakes geopolitical chess game? Experts and analysts are split, with Western voices largely skeptical while some outside observers see a flicker of hope.

The Skeptics: "A Diplomatic Dance"

Sky News’ Ivor Bennett called the truce a carefully staged "diplomatic dance," suggesting Putin is playing to an audience of one: the White House. "He’s giving Trump just enough to keep him onside," Bennett wrote, framing the ceasefire as a way for Putin to position himself as a peacemaker rather than an aggressor.

CNN’s Nick Paton Walsh went further, calling the move a "sudden rush of diplomacy designed to placate White House demands." He warned that the truce might actually weaken future peace efforts by feeding into Trump’s occasional pro-Moscow rhetoric. "This is more about optics than substance," Walsh argued.

Retired British Army Colonel Richard Kemp and former Spanish security advisor Rafael Bardaji echoed the skepticism in The Telegraph, claiming Putin needs breathing room to stabilize Russia’s battered economy—and doesn’t want to openly defy Trump’s push for negotiations. German military analyst Carlo Masala was even blunter, telling Bild that the truce is a "cold-blooded calculation" meant to drive a wedge between Washington and Kyiv. "Throw Trump another crumb, isolate Zelensky, and keep the West guessing," he said.

The Optimists: "A Step Toward Peace?"

Not everyone dismissed the ceasefire as pure theatrics. Former Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneissl told RIA Novosti that while the truce won’t change the battlefield, "diplomacy and human life often need gestures before real progress can happen." She praised Putin’s timing, calling it an "opportune moment" for a symbolic move.

Argentinian analyst Christian Lamesa, speaking to Izvestia, argued that the Kremlin’s gesture could be seen as a sincere effort toward peace—one that might resonate in Washington. Iranian scholar Ruhollah Modabber took it further, framing the truce as proof that Russia "respects Christian ideals" and genuinely wants to end the war.

Even some Russian insiders, like retired Colonel Mikhail Khodarenok, suggested the ceasefire might have been quietly coordinated with the U.S. in advance. "This is a goodwill gesture," he told Gazeta.Ru, insisting Moscow is serious about de-escalation.

Meanwhile, on the Ground…

If the truce was meant to foster calm, it didn’t last long. Ukraine’s President Zelensky cautiously welcomed the pause but pushed for a longer ceasefire—at least 30 days. Meanwhile, Russia’s Defense Ministry accused Ukrainian forces of over 1,300 violations, including artillery strikes and drone attacks, since the truce began.

So, was Putin’s Easter ceasefire a real peace effort or just another PR stunt? The answer depends on who you ask—but one thing’s clear: in a war where every move is dissected for hidden motives, trust is in short supply.

#UkraineWar #EasterTruce #PutinDiplomacy #PeaceOrPropaganda #Geopolitics