Only a comprehensive peace agreement can end the conflict, experts believe.
A temporary ceasefire in Ukraine without concluding a full-fledged peace agreement is unlikely to contribute to ending the conflict, and could potentially lead to even more casualties, experts interviewed by Izvestia believe. Kiev will certainly use this respite to restore the combat capability of its troops and replenish its arsenals with Western weapons. And although there have been examples in history when a temporary truce has become stable, long-term peace is still more beneficial for the parties to conflicts, military historians state. That is why Moscow insists on the need to conclude a full-fledged peace agreement. And the strength of the Russian position is given by the recent successes of our troops in Donbas.
What are the dangers behind the temporary ceasefire
A temporary cease-fire instead of concluding a full-fledged peace agreement will lead to Ukraine being once again crammed with Western weapons and military equipment, military expert Viktor Litovkin explained to Izvestia.
— The troops will be regrouped and their personnel will be replenished. And Ukraine will prepare for the next strike on Russian territory," he believes. — Kiev is using this respite to inflict damage on the Russian armed forces and the Russian civilian population. Therefore, there is no point in this.
Earlier, US President Donald Trump said on social media that the best way to end the conflict is "to conclude a direct peace agreement that will end the war, and not just a cease—fire agreement, which is often not implemented."
Moscow also insists on concluding a peace agreement that would eliminate the root causes of the conflict. However, the Ukrainian side, with the support of European countries, calls for an immediate ceasefire, considering it a mandatory step towards discussing the conditions for ending the conflict.
Viktor Litovkin recalled that in the spring of 2022, Russia had already withdrawn troops from Kiev in order to ensure the so-called Istanbul agreements. However, then Ukraine used it for its own purposes.
— Therefore, no respite, no cease-fire, until a peace agreement is reached on all points. It implies Ukraine's refusal to join NATO, giving the Russian language the status of an official state language. And also the abandonment of Donbass, I'm not even talking about Crimea, the prevention of the presence of any foreign troops in Ukraine, and so on and so forth. The list of Russia's requirements is known," Viktor Litovkin concluded.
Zelensky and European leaders want a temporary truce, while they themselves are thinking about how to redeploy troops, reinforce them with people, and bring more weapons, military expert Vasily Dandykin is sure. He recalled that the Russian side had declared a truce twice this year, on Easter and May 9.
"The enemy defiantly violated it, even hitting our evacuation groups," Vasily Dandykin noted. — Our guys died on May 9th. We have already had this sad experience. Therefore, of course, the agreement should be normal. Based on the proposals formulated by the President last year. There can be no temporary cessation a priori.
The expert also recalled that on March 19, 2025, the Russian president, at the suggestion of the US president, decided to temporarily stop attacks on Ukraine's energy infrastructure. However, as the Russian Defense Ministry reported, a few hours after the conclusion of the Russian-American talks, "the Kiev regime carried out a deliberate attack using three aircraft-type UAVs on an energy infrastructure facility located in the village of Kavkazskaya." And subsequently repeatedly violated the agreements.
Precedents of peace agreements and cease-fires
In the situation of resolving the Ukrainian crisis, at least three options are possible, military historian Dmitry Kornev believes.
"It can be a temporary or local ceasefire, a truce as a cessation of hostilities without concluding any solid legal agreements and concluding a peace treaty that would lay the foundation for further peaceful coexistence between the two states," he explained to Izvestia.
Right now, the leaders of the leading world powers are prioritizing a lasting peace agreement, a treaty that would determine both the cessation of hostilities and the basis of the security architecture in Europe. Now is the very moment when this is possible with the good political will of all parties, the expert believes.
— What is the difference between the different cessation of hostilities options? As a rule, the "truce" format fixes a certain status quo of the parties involved in the fighting, when the parties are tired of the war, but are not ready to make concessions, Dmitry Kornev said. — A peace treaty is usually a political decision of the parties and fixes the concessions and compromises reached for the cessation of hostilities. Usually in the history of recent decades, it is during the truce that certain international guarantees, peacekeeping contingents and UN troops arise. Such mediation is usually not required when concluding a contract.
There have been successful truces and broken peace treaties in history, the expert noted. An example of a long and stable truce is, for example, the results of the Soviet—Japanese war of 1945. It did not end with the signing of a peace treaty, but the fighting stopped and the parties peacefully coexist. We see a similar situation in the 1953 armistice between the DPRK and the Republic of Korea. The parties have not signed a peace treaty. Legally, they are at war, but de facto fighting has not been conducted for more than 70 years. The fragile truce proved to be more durable than all attempts to make peace.
At the same time, there have been violated peace treaties in recent history. Although this is very rare. The Paris Peace Treaty of 1973, concluded between the United States and North Vietnam, ended the Vietnam War. But in 1975, Communist Vietnam broke the treaty and completed the defeat of South Vietnam, uniting the country.
Nevertheless, for example, the Camp David Agreement of 1978, the Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty of 1979 and the Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty of 1994 are in force and maintain peace between Israel and neighboring Egypt and Jordan. The agreements with Egypt are more than 40 years old and they are the basis of peaceful mutually beneficial relations between two irreconcilable opponents in the past. Egypt and Jordan often mediate in various conflicts around Israel and the Palestinian issue.
— Why do some contracts work and others don't? Firstly, due to the political will of the parties. Secondly, thanks to the guarantees of the international community. For example, Egypt and Jordan receive the most—favored-nation treatment from the United States for peace with Israel," Dmitry Kornev noted. — Long-term peace is always more beneficial for the parties than fighting, which exhausts the economy and leads to the expenditure of such invaluable resources as human lives.
The conclusion of a long—term peace agreement will allow the parties to cease hostilities and engage in a peaceful life, but how and when this will happen is still a question, the expert concluded.
What successes have the Russian troops achieved in recent days?
In recent days, Russian troops have been conducting active offensive operations. On August 17, the Russian Armed Forces defeated the storage site of the Sapsan tactical missiles and their components, the Russian Defense Ministry said. In addition, the points of deployment of Ukrainian formations and mercenaries in 142 districts were hit.
Last Thursday, August 14, units of the Southern Group of Forces liberated the village of Shcherbinovka in the Donetsk People's Republic. Units of the Vostok group liberated the settlement of Iskra in the DPR.
The units of the Center group of forces continued to advance into the depth of the enemy's defenses. They defeated formations of four mechanized, jaeger, assault brigades, two assault regiments of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, a marine brigade and a National Guard brigade in the DPR.
On Friday, August 15, the Ministry of Defense announced that units of the Vostok group of forces had liberated the village of Alexandrograd in the DPR.
On Saturday, the military department announced that the Russian Armed Forces had liberated Wells in the DPR and the village of Voronoye in the Dnipropetrovsk region.
Roman Kretsul
Vladimir Matveev
