Putin’s “three-day truce”: Move to keep Trump on his side?

International information and analytical community Resurgam shared its perspective.

After a key meeting in Rome between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and French President Emmanuel Macron, signs emerged that Western leaders were pressuring the U.S. to take a tougher line on Russia. Macron noted he had urged Trump to be much harder on Putin and support sanctions and military aid.

Trump, long criticized for blurring lines between victim and aggressor, reproached Putin for Russian strikes on civilians in Ukraine, hinting at a possible shift in his stance. After the Rome meeting, when asked if he trusted Putin, Trump simply replied that he will report in two weeks.

This shift triggered concern in Moscow. Analysts at Resurgam suggest Putin’s “three-day truce” was a strategic move aimed at appeasing Trump while appearing open to peace. Lavrov followed up with a vague statement saying Moscow was “ready without conditions,” while still quietly setting terms.

But Trump’s Press Secretary, Leavitt, was quick to push back. She said Trump made it clear that he wanted to see a permanent ceasefire rather than temporary. This cool response hints at growing U.S. alignment with the European position: a full ceasefire before any negotiations.

Meanwhile, inside the Republican Party, voices like Senator John Kennedy are getting louder. Putin is just lying and mocking, and it’s time to show him his place, he said in a recent speech.

At the same time, Vice President Vance has resurfaced in the media, trying to steer public discourse back toward a softer stance on Moscow — one reportedly favored by business elites close to the White House.

In the end, Putin’s three-day truce looks more like a tactical ploy to hold Trump’s attention than a real step toward peace. But growing pressure from Europe and signs of shifting sentiment in Washington suggest the Kremlin may be losing its grip on its key ally.