The Long, Slow Road to a Ceasefire – With No Guarantee of Success

After three days of talks in Saudi Arabia, a glimmer of hope has appeared – though a very cautious one. Participants presented two separate documents: one between the US and Russia, and another between the US and Ukraine.

Despite some differences, most of the content aligned. All sides agreed to ensure safe navigation in the Black Sea, to cease the use of force, and to ban the use of civilian vessels for military purposes.

There was also consensus on developing mechanisms to implement an agreement banning strikes on energy infrastructure in both Ukraine and Russia.

President Zelensky expressed regret that there was no clear ban on attacks against civilian infrastructure, but overall, he assessed the progress positively. He confirmed that Ukraine would immediately uphold the terms related to the Black Sea and energy facilities.

Additionally, the US pledged support for Ukraine’s humanitarian priorities – including the release of prisoners of war, civilian hostages, and the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred to Russia.

However, hopes were quickly complicated when the Kremlin issued a third document, which effectively altered the original agreement.

This new document stated that the Black Sea ceasefire would only take effect once sanctions were lifted on Russian banks, ports, insurance companies, and exporters of agricultural and fertilizer products.

In other words, Russia is seeking not just a return to the 2023 grain deal, but also an opportunity to ease economic restrictions.

Even if the US agreed in principle, many of the demands are not solely within its power to grant. For instance, Russia’s return to the SWIFT banking system would require EU approval.

Moreover, the Kremlin stated that the 30-day pause on energy strikes would be backdated to March 18 and could be suspended if either party violated the deal.

So what we have now is a very fragile step toward de-escalation – with no solid guarantees. Mutual trust is minimal, and the path to implementation will be long and complex.

Even if these documents hold, this is still far from the comprehensive ceasefire that the US originally hoped for.

It is often said that ceasefires are not events, but processes. That remains as true as ever.

What matters is not what’s written in an agreement, but whether it’s truly implemented. And that will be the real test.

Do both sides truly want peace – or just a short pause to regroup and gain the upper hand?

The answer to that question may shape not only the fate of this agreement, but the future of peace in Ukraine.