Russian President Vladimir Putin has signalled that Russia is open to a ceasefire in Ukraine but insists that any cessation of hostilities must be based on conditions favourable to Moscow.
His remarks came during a joint press conference with Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko on 13 March, just an hour after he first publicly addressed the ceasefire proposal that had been agreed upon in negotiations between US and Ukrainian delegations in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Putin’s comments were made before his scheduled meeting with Steve Witkoff, the special representative of US President Donald Trump, who had arrived in Moscow for consultations with Russian officials.
Moscow’s Position: Ceasefire as a Tool for Strategic Gains
Putin stated that while Russia does not reject the idea of a ceasefire, it must lead to a “long-term peace” and address the “root causes of the conflict.” However, his conditions indicate that Moscow views the ceasefire as an opportunity to consolidate territorial gains and impose restrictions on Ukraine that could severely weaken its defensive capabilities.
Among the key demands outlined by Putin:
- A halt to Ukraine’s mobilisation efforts. Moscow insists that Ukraine must stop recruiting new soldiers, which would leave its military in a weaker position while Russian forces remain free to continue their own recruitment and reinforcement.
- A complete stop to Western arms supplies to Kyiv. Putin explicitly stated that military aid from the United States and other Western nations must be halted. This would significantly impact Ukraine’s ability to defend itself, while Russia would retain its supply lines and domestic production.
- Mechanisms to monitor ceasefire violations along the 2,000-kilometre front line. Putin raised concerns over how ceasefire breaches would be determined and who would oversee compliance, hinting at Moscow’s reluctance to allow international observers.
- The status of Ukrainian troops in Russia’s Kursk region. Putin questioned what should be done about Ukrainian forces that had entered Russian territory. He suggested that under a ceasefire, they would either have to surrender or be allowed to withdraw without resistance, a demand that could serve as a pretext for further Russian actions against captured Ukrainian troops.
Putin’s Framing: Ukraine as a US-Controlled Entity
Throughout his speech, Putin reinforced the Kremlin’s long-standing narrative that Ukraine is not an independent actor in the conflict but rather a territory controlled by the United States. Notably, he did not mention any direct negotiations with Ukrainian officials. Instead, he framed the ceasefire talks as an issue to be resolved with Washington.
By excluding Kyiv from the discussion, Putin sought to diminish Ukraine’s sovereignty on the international stage and reinforce Moscow’s view that the war is a geopolitical struggle between Russia and the West rather than a conflict between two independent states.
The Belarusian Role: Lukashenko as a Kremlin Proxy
The press conference was also strategically significant due to the presence of Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, a close ally of Putin. Lukashenko used the platform to echo Kremlin talking points, portraying Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as an inexperienced leader manipulated by Western advisors. He also blamed former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for allegedly failing to implement the Minsk agreements, a claim frequently used by Russian propaganda to justify military action against Ukraine.
Lukashenko also warned that failure to reach an agreement between Russia and the US would have the greatest impact on Europe. His remarks implied that Moscow continues to view energy diplomacy as a powerful leverage tool, using the prospect of renewed access to Russian natural gas as a bargaining chip to push European governments toward concessions on Ukraine.
US-Russia Talks and Trump’s Position
Putin’s remarks preceded his anticipated meeting with Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, who arrived in Moscow for consultations with Russian officials. While the details of these discussions remain undisclosed, Trump has already indicated that negotiations between his administration and the Kremlin are actively underway.
The US president has stated that his goal is to secure a comprehensive ceasefire but acknowledged that several contentious issues remain unresolved. Reports suggest that discussions have included:
- Territorial concessions—whether certain areas currently under Russian occupation should remain under Moscow’s control.
- Ukraine’s NATO aspirations—Trump has been vocal in his opposition to Ukraine joining NATO, a position that aligns with Russian demands.
- Energy agreements—Putin hinted that discussions could include potential cooperation on energy supplies, which may be used as leverage in broader negotiations.
Trump’s approach has raised concerns among Ukraine’s European allies. While he has publicly expressed a desire to end the war, the specifics of his proposed deal remain unclear. Some speculate that his administration may seek a compromise that limits Ukraine’s military capabilities in exchange for a temporary halt in Russian aggression.
The Strategic Risks for Ukraine
If implemented under Moscow’s conditions, the proposed ceasefire could have severe consequences for Ukraine. A halt to mobilisation and Western arms supplies would leave Ukraine in a vulnerable position, while Russia would be free to continue its military build-up.
Furthermore, if Russian forces maintain control over occupied territories while Ukraine ceases offensive operations, the ceasefire could effectively serve as a tactical pause that allows Moscow to strengthen its grip on key regions. Given Russia’s historical pattern of violating agreements, there is concern that any pause in fighting could merely serve as a prelude to a renewed offensive.
Putin’s emphasis on ceasefire monitoring mechanisms adds another layer of complexity. Russia has consistently opposed the deployment of international peacekeeping forces in Ukraine, meaning any monitoring would likely be conducted under Russian influence. This raises the possibility that Moscow could unilaterally accuse Ukraine of ceasefire violations, using such claims as a justification to resume hostilities on its own terms.
European Skepticism and Alternative Proposals
European leaders have expressed doubts over the feasibility of a full-scale ceasefire under current conditions. French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer have reportedly advocated for a more limited approach, such as a cessation of air and naval strikes. They argue that a comprehensive ceasefire along the entire front line would be nearly impossible to monitor effectively.
However, the US delegation in Jeddah aligned with the broader ceasefire proposal agreed with Ukraine, indicating potential differences in approach between Washington and its European allies.
Conclusion: A Fragile Diplomatic Standoff
Putin’s remarks indicate that while Moscow is open to ceasefire discussions, it intends to dictate the terms in a way that maximises Russian strategic gains. His decision to group Trump alongside BRICS leaders suggests an attempt to reshape global alliances and redefine the framework of negotiations.
With US-Russia talks ongoing, the key question is whether Washington will push back against Moscow’s demands or exert pressure on Ukraine to accept them.
Read also:
The Disarmament of Ukraine: How the West Funded the Reduction of Ukraine’s Military Capacity
