In a reprieve from the conflict, Russia and Ukraine have agreed to halt the hostilities for three days and exchange 1,000 prisoners from each side. The request for the ceasefire came from Russia to commemorate the Allied victory over Nazi Germany in World War II in 1945. Ukraine demands a permanent ceasefire, a condition Russia refuses to accept without a formal peace deal. Nonetheless, they have agreed to a short-term ceasefire, raising expectations of a long-term ceasefire.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin announced a ceasefire preceding Victory Day, celebrated annually on May 9. The day honours the defeat of Nazi Germany in the Great Patriotic War. It signifies a landmark moment in the nation’s collective memory, showcasing a story of resistance against fascism, a demonstration of its military might, and an indomitable determination to sacrifice for the nation’s security.
Just to put things in perspective, an estimated 75 million people died in World War II. Out of this, about 26 million people were from the Soviet Union. In other words, one-third of all deaths in this war were from the Soviet Union. Within the Soviet Union, about 5.7 million of the military casualties were ethnic Russians, and 1.3 million were ethnic Ukrainians. The war was so devastating that it wiped out a significant portion of the younger population, leaving a severe shortage of marriageable men in the post-War period.
The Great Patriotic War, the term used for World War II in Russia, occupies a foundational space in Russia’s historical memory. Ukraine is an equal inheritor of this legacy. However, in its attempt to distinguish itself from the Soviet Union and Russia, it downplays the significance of collective struggle and suffering. Instead, it focuses on its own sacrifices against the Nazis. Aligning its policies with Europe, it celebrates May 8 as a day of Remembrance and Reconciliation, in contrast to Russia’s Victory Day on May 9.
Ukraine was initially hesitant to honour the Russian request for a temporary ceasefire, but US President Donald Trump persuaded it to accept the deal. It is temporary, and in all likelihood hostilities will resume, but a long-term ceasefire is possible, for three reasons, if serious attempts are made.
First, the Russia-Ukraine war is caught in a deadlock. Both sides claim to be making incremental territorial gains, but neither is in a position to achieve its ultimate objective. Russia cannot push Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy out of power and install a favourable regime, nor does Ukraine have the military capabilities to push the Russian military out of the territories that the latter has occupied. Russia will not cede territories that it has occupied in Crimea, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk and Luhansk. Both sides are incurring heavy military casualties without making significant territorial or military gains.
Second, Trump is unwilling to commit more resources to Ukraine given the US’s preoccupation with West Asia. Ever since his re-election, Trump has put pressure on Ukraine to accept an unfavourable deal. He has also stalled the supply of weapons and financial support to Kyiv. Without Washington’s support, Ukraine can neither expect to win against Russia nor does it have great chances of retaining its NATO membership. It might, instead, lose more territories to Russia if the war continues. Therefore, there is an incentive for Ukraine to go for a peace deal.
Third, European states are under pressure to reach an amicable resolution. European economies are faltering due to Trump’s tariffs and wars in Ukraine and Iran. Though the European Union has committed $100 billion in loans to Ukraine, there are signs of fatigue in Europe. The escalating cost of living, rising unemployment, and Trump’s threats to retreat from NATO have pushed European leaders to recalibrate their security strategy. For instance, European Council President, António Costa, stated recently, “We cannot change the geography. We are in Europe, we are neighbours of Russia, and of course we need to talk with them about the future of the security architecture of Europe”.
Other European leaders have expressed similar sentiments. French President Emmanuel Macron, addressing the Munich Security Conference in February 2026, underlined the importance of an autonomous European security architecture and hinted at negotiations with Russia at some point, given the shared geography. Europe will face more economic and geopolitical troubles if the war continues in Ukraine. There are compelling reasons for Europe to favour a peace deal. However, its political leadership is weak and fragmented, undermining its ability to shape the outcome independently.
Finally, Russia has also begun to respond positively to European overtures on potential negotiations. Responding to a question, Putin expressed his willingness to begin talks with Europe over Ukraine and the broader security architecture. Russia prefers a long-term peace deal over a temporary ceasefire. It wants Europe to recognise its security concerns and abandon the idea of Ukraine’s NATO membership. It also wants Europe to recognise the territories that it has occupied in Ukraine.
These are difficult demands, and Ukraine will not readily accept them. However, they do not preclude the possibility of a ceasefire, provided that European leaders initiate direct talks with Russia. Having outsourced its security to Washington for a long time, it is time for Europe to reclaim control over its own security framework and peace deals. Europe’s role is critical to restoring peace in the region. Like every conflict in history, the Russia-Ukraine war will ultimately be resolved through negotiations. An imperfect peace is far better than a perfect war.
The writer is professor, School of International Studies, JNU, New Delhi
