The long, slow road to a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire

After a three -day conversation in Saudi Arabia, there is a little progress.

Two separate texts briefly explain the agreement between the United States, Russia, the United States and Ukraine.

There was a slight difference, but it was the same. All sides agreed to “guarantee safe voyages, eliminate the use of power, and to prevent the use of commercial vessels for military purposes in the Black Sea.”

They also agreed to develop the implementation measures to prohibit strikes on energy facilities in Russia and Ukraine.

President Zelen Ski regretted that there was no explicit ban on attacks on civilian infrastructure, but it sounded extensively.

He said that Ukrainian journalists will immediately implement the Black Sea and Energy truce.

He also nodded with the US agenda. The United States said, “We will do our best to help the return of war prisoners, the release of private prisoners, and the forced Ukrainian children.

But the third document published by the Kremlin came out, which made water flooded.

It imposes conditions that do not appear in the original agreement between the United States and Russia.

The Black Sea ceasefire will only enter into force if sanctions on Russian banks, insurance companies, companies, port and ships can be exported more agricultural and fertilizers.

In other words, they saw not only the revival of the old black sea grain initiative that withdrew this transaction in 2023, but also the opportunity to roll back a large number of economic sanctions.

However, it takes time to do this and can delay the maritime armistice.

Also, you may not be able to get a gift from the American gift to make all the changes that Russia has requested.

For example, EU approval is required to return to a quick financial messaging system.

Kremlin also said that a 30 -day suspension of energy strikes will begin on March 18 and can be suspended if one side violates the transaction.

In other words, the agreement is a weak step toward a slight reduction in the fight in Ukraine, but it does not guarantee success in the mutual unbelief atmosphere.

Even if today’s agreement will survive, the United States is still in the original comprehensive national armistice.

Often ceasefire is a process, not an event. And it is the same in this contract than ever.

The important thing is not the announcement of the ceasefire, but how it is implemented and how it is implemented. In other words, the evidence of pudding will be in meals.

Will both sides do this deal and live accordingly? In response to these questions, we will learn a lot about what both sides actually want.

Do they want a truce to long -term peace? Or do you want a trading while gaining an edge on the battlefield?