Putin Halts Attacks on Ukrainian Energy Facilities for 30 Days

Russia and Ukraine are currently in the middle of development, and according to that, Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to stop attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure for 30 days. ‘The conversation with the U.S. President Donald Trump was very good and productive,’ Trump wrote on Twitter during a phone conversation which lasted nearly two hours. But the pause does not extend into what Ukrainian officials and many international observers have long demanded – a full ceasefire.

Agreement Focuses on Energy Infrastructure

During the call, President Trump stated that both leaders promised to suspend immediate strikes on energy and infrastructure sites in Ukraine. Trump said the agreement was supposed to be the first step toward a complete ceasefire. Trump said a ‘full ceasefire’ will come into force at the end of a war already known to be an instantaneous ceasefire of all energy and infrastructure.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tass that an order had been given for Russian forces to refrain from attacking areas of raised civilian population, ‘to prevent escalation’. Thus, the breakthrough is so clear and obvious, but the other side has denied it saying it’s only a tactical step to achieve real peace. 

Mixed Reactions from Kyiv and International Observers

As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy initially tentatively backed the 30 day pause, he considered if it could minimise the impact of regularly recurring power outages and other problems affecting civil life. Zelenskyy, however, soon expressed his worries about how wide a deal would be. Instantly ending attacks on energy infrastructure would ease current hardships, but would continue to interrupt the rest of the conflict in the country, as he added. Ukrainian officials fear the lull leaves Moscow time to rearm or reposition its forces to Kyiv’s disadvantage.

There has been a skeptical reaction amongst others in European allies as well. Several Western leaders praised any attempts to de-escalate as irrelevant to resolving the larger military aspects of the conflict and were greeted with any moves to do so. By this ruling, they claim, a key stakeholder whose security hangs in the balance has been effectively sidelined in the first round of negotiations.

Strategic Implications and Diplomatic Concerns

‘One way of potentially relieving civilian hardship while hitting an important target from a military perspective might be to intensify efforts to destroy Russia’s energy infrastructure,’ said Emil Dall, assistant professor of international relations at the University of Southern California’s Dornsife School of International Studies. By selectively stopping attacks on energy facilities, Russian forces will be given the opportunity to regroup or fortify themselves elsewhere than in these energy facilities. They view this as a brief cessation of hostility to give Putin a boost of prestige and permit him to keep up with his style of work.

There is no shortage of debate about the Trump administration’s dealings with Moscow in Washington. But some critics say such agreements cut by Moscow, with insufficient Ukrainian involvement, could favour Moscow’s strategic interests. Trump, however, has repeatedly said his administration is willing to work towards an even bigger peace process. We will take a pause after this, (but) he suggested further talks about a complete cease in hostilities and a Black Sea maritime ceasefire.

The way to look forward to negotiations

It is only a potentially positive step that the attacks on energy infrastructure cease for 30 consecutive days but the effect of utilizing this instrument will probably have only limited impact on achievements in general with a total stand still of hostile operations. The international community wants to see if there will not be too much violation and if the pause can be kept. Initial reports that new aggression under the deal was sporadic means there are questions about enforceability.

The U.S. and Russia are said to continue the diplomacy over the next weeks. This might include discussing technical issues with regard to monitoring the ceasefire, and establishing verification mechanisms or commenting on broader political and security issues. Of course, the most desirable outcome in Kyiv and for Ukraine’s allies was always that these talks would end with guarantees to preserve Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

To conclude, today’s announcement is a welcome glimmer of hope in a conflict yet unresolved, but also shows the hard road remaining till a conflict which already has many human and economic costs is brought to an end. For many a temporary pause in attacks is a small step, the beginning of something which will require further much more inclusive talks in order to produce lasting peace.