Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

Putin declared "his" ceasefire — a week after Ukraine requested it

The Kremlin seized the initiative from Zelenskyy and presented an Easter ceasefire as its own decision. Ukraine agreed to mirror the move — but a year ago, the same scenario ended with nearly three thousand violations in 30 hours.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 11, 2026 · 2 min read

Putin declared "his" ceasefire — a week after Ukraine requested it
Володимир Зеленський (Фото: Офіс президента)

On April 9, the Kremlin announced that Putin is introducing an "Easter ceasefire" — from 4:00 PM on April 11 to the end of April 12, 2026. Defence Minister Belousov and Chief of the General Staff Gerasimov received orders to halt operations across all front lines. Russia noted that it "expects similar steps from Ukraine."

The problem lies in the chronology: Zelensky publicly proposed an Easter ceasefire as early as March 30. On April 6, Kyiv officially transmitted this proposal to Moscow through American intermediaries. That same day, Kremlin spokesperson Peskov rejected it as "poorly formulated." Yet on April 9 — the morning of the same day Putin "suddenly" announced the ceasefire — Peskov was still saying that no decision had been made.

A Mirror with Memory

Zelensky responded with restraint, but without illusions.

"Ukraine has repeatedly stated that we are ready for mirror steps. We proposed a ceasefire during Easter holidays this year and will act accordingly."

— President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky, April 9, 2026

He also added that Russia has a chance not to return to strikes after the holidays — hinting at the possibility of a 30-day ceasefire, which Kyiv has been proposing for several weeks.

The 2025 Precedent: Numbers That Are Hard to Ignore

A year ago, a similar scenario already played out. Putin announced a 30-hour Easter ceasefire in 2025 — and violations from both sides quickly emerged. According to the Ukrainian side, just on Sunday, April 20, 2025, Russians violated the ceasefire regime 2,935 times. Zelensky wrote at the time: "Either Putin does not control his army, or Russia has no intention of making a genuine step toward ending the war."

  • Ukrainian brigades documented that, under cover of the ceasefire, Russians were laying routes for heavy equipment and clearing crossing points for armored columns.
  • Strikes by FPV drones on an evacuation vehicle of a humanitarian mission were recorded.
  • Russia, in response, accused Ukraine of more than 1,000 violations — and claimed that its forces "strictly adhered" to the ceasefire.

Who Benefits and Why Now

CNN analysts noted back in 2025: Putin's sudden ceasefires are calculated primarily for Washington — to show Trump that Russia "is not an obstacle to peace." The 2026 scenario repeats this logic: the Kremlin seizes the initiative from Kyiv, repackages it as its own gesture of goodwill, and addresses it not to Zelensky, but to the American audience.

At the same time, no mechanism for ceasefire verification is provided — no monitoring mission, no clear definition of a "violation," no accountability for the side that first resumes fire. This distinguishes the "Easter ceasefire" from any real ceasefire agreement.

If the number of violations this time proves comparable to 2025 — the question of whether these ceasefires are a tool for peace or a tool for PR will receive an answer that will be hard to refute even in Washington.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026