The Russian flag flies on the dome of the Kremlin Senate building behind Spasskaya Tower, in central Moscow, Russia, May 4, 2023. REUTERS/Stringer/File Photo
May 3, 2025
The Kremlin on Saturday demanded a definitive response from Ukraine to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s offer of a three-day ceasefire next week, criticizing Kyiv’s reaction as ambiguous and dismissive of historical significance.
Ceasefire Proposal and Commemorative Context
Putin earlier this week proposed a ceasefire from May 7 to 9 to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War II. The gesture, according to the Kremlin, was intended to test Ukraine’s willingness to pursue peace in the ongoing war.
Ukraine Rejects Short-Term Truce
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy responded by saying that only a ceasefire of at least 30 days would be meaningful, effectively rejecting the Russian proposal. He emphasized that a brief truce would not contribute to a lasting solution and warned that Ukraine could not guarantee the safety of foreign dignitaries attending the May 9 Victory Day celebrations in Moscow due to the ongoing conflict.
Russian Reactions and Escalatory Rhetoric
The Russian Foreign Ministry labeled Zelenskiy’s remarks a “threat,” while Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, issued a stark warning, stating that Kyiv’s survival beyond May 10 could not be guaranteed if it launched attacks on Moscow during the commemorations.
In a special press briefing, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reiterated that the ceasefire offer was a test of Kyiv’s sincerity in seeking peace. He called for clear and unambiguous actions from Ukraine and accused the Ukrainian leadership of embracing “neo-Nazism” and downplaying the importance of the Allied victory in World War II—accusations that Kyiv has repeatedly rejected as unfounded propaganda.
Controversy Over International Commemorations
Peskov also criticized reports that Ukrainian soldiers would participate in World War II memorial events in the United Kingdom, calling such involvement “sacrilege” and questioning the appropriateness of their presence at such ceremonies amid the current conflict.
COMMENTS