When is a ceasefire a real attempt to ensure peace? When is it just a PR?

This question has been asked a lot recently.

It is mainly related to the Russian president.

A brief ceasefire is becoming a matter for the Kremlin.

First, Vladimir Putin announced the cessation of 30 hours of hostilities during Easter, portraying it as a gesture of “humanitarianism”.

Now, the Kremlin leaders have announced a three-day unilateral truce in early May. It will take place from May 8 to May 10, which coincides with the events of the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II.

The Kremlin said in a statement that within 72 hours, all military operations will be stopped. It once again cites the consideration of “humanitarianism” and makes it clear that Moscow expects Ukraine to follow suit.

In response to the proposal, Ukraine questioned why Russia could not immediately commit to a ceasefire and demanded that it be implemented for at least 30 days.

Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said: “If Russia really wants peace, it must stop the fire immediately.

So, is this a sincere effort to end the battle among the Russian president who began a full-scale invasion of Ukraine three years ago?

Or is it just the Kremlin that impressed Donald Trump?

Kremlin critics will doubt PR.

In a very brief so-called Easter ceasefire, Ukraine accused Russian troops of repeatedly violating it.

Moscow announced a 30-hour pause in the battle, sending a signal to the White House: In this war, Russia is the peacemaker and the invader Kief. It accused Ukraine of ignoring Moscow's performance as an olive branch and extending the war.

Trump's recent comments suggest that the U.S. president has not purchased it.

Trump wrote in an article on the weekend's truth social platform that "Putin has no reason" in the past few days, shooting missiles at civilians, towns (Ukraine) culture.

He added: "It made me think, maybe he didn't want to stop the war, he was just laughing at me and had to deal with it differently through 'banking' or 'secondary sanctions'? Too many people are dying!!"

A prompt to announce another Russian ceasefire today. This one is slightly longer than: three days. Similarly, “humanitarian” concerns the claim.

Another attempt to signal Washington that the Kremlin only has the best intentions? Is Russia really a good person for all of these?

If so, it doesn't seem to work. Not immediately. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt pointed to the proposed temporary ceasefire proposal in Moscow, but said: “The President (Donald Trump) made it clear that he wanted to see a permanent ceasefire first to stop the killing and stop bleeding.

"He is getting more and more frustrated with the leaders of both countries," Levitt said.

This shows that despite spending most of his public criticism on President Zelensky in recent months, the U.S. president may now lose patience with the Kremlin.

Last month, the Trump administration was pushing Russia and Ukraine to agree to a 30-day full unconditional ceasefire. Ukraine has signed this. Russia does not.

Senior Russian officials have used President Putin's three-day ceasefire proposal to try to abandon Ukraine with a bad eye.

"It is doubtful that (President) Zelensky will support our president's decision and accept the ceasefire," Vyacheslav Volodin, spokesman for the lower house of the Russian parliament, told Russian state television.

Soon after another brief ceasefire was announced, there was little encouragement.