French President Emmanuel Macron has once again positioned himself at the forefront of Western diplomatic pressure on Russia, demanding that Moscow accept a 30-day ceasefire proposal brokered by the United States and Ukraine. The demand comes amid continued hostilities in Ukraine and growing tensions between Russia and NATO. However, the proposal raises several critical questions: Is this ceasefire a genuine step toward peace, or is it a strategic maneuver aimed at buying time for Ukraine and reinforcing Western leverage against Moscow? More importantly, can a ceasefire work if it does not address the root causes of the conflict?

According to reports, the proposed ceasefire was negotiated between Washington and Kiev in Saudi Arabia, without the involvement of any European Union (EU) member states. The absence of European representation in the talks underscores a growing rift between American and European approaches to the conflict. It also raises concerns about whether this ceasefire is truly an international peace initiative or merely another attempt by Washington to dictate the terms of engagement in Ukraine.

Under the proposal, Ukraine has agreed to halt hostilities for 30 days, but the conditions attached to the ceasefire remain vague. If past ceasefires are any indication, such agreements are often used by belligerents to regroup, resupply, and strategize. For Russia, accepting a temporary halt in fighting without guarantees of long-term security or political concessions would be a significant risk. President Vladimir Putin acknowledged that Russia is willing to discuss a ceasefire but emphasized the need for clear terms to ensure that it leads to a “stable and permanent peace.”

Following the ceasefire proposal, Macron took a firm stance, declaring that “Russia must now accept the US-Ukrainian proposal for a 30-day........

© Blitz