After three days of talks in Saudi Arabia, it finally made progress.
Two separate texts outline the agreement between the United States and Russia, as well as the United States and Ukraine.
There are some differences, but many are the same. All parties agreed to “ensure safe navigation, eliminate the use of force, and prevent the use of commercial vessels in the Black Sea for military purposes”.
They also agreed to “develop implementation measures…an agreement to prohibit strikes on energy facilities in Russia and Ukraine”.
President Zelensky regrets that there is no explicit ban on attacks on civilian infrastructure, but it sounds satisfying.
He told reporters that Ukraine will immediately implement a ceasefire in the Black Sea and energy.
He also nodded to the U.S. agenda, saying he “will continue to work on the exchange of prisoners of war, the release of civilian detainees and the return of Ukrainian children who have been forcibly transferred.”
But then it was the third document issued by the Kremlin, which chaoticized the waters.
It imposes conditions that did not appear in the initial agreement between the United States and Russia.
It said that the Black Sea ceasefire will only take effect when sanctions are imposed on Russian banks, insurance companies, companies, ports and ships, which will allow it to export more agriculture and fertilizers.
In other words, they see the deal as not only a revival of the ancient Black Sea Grain Initiative they exited in 2023, but also a chance to lift large amounts of economic sanctions.
However, it may take some time to do so, delaying any maritime ceasefire.
We may not be entirely in order to make all the changes required by Russia.
For example, any return to the SWIFT financial messaging system will require EU approval.
President Zelensky said the agreement is a step in the right direction [Reuters]
The Kremlin also said the 30-day pause in the energy strike will begin on March 18 and could be suspended if one party violates the deal.
In other words, what has been agreed is a weak step towards a reduction in the fight in Ukraine, but success cannot be guaranteed in an atmosphere of mutual distrust.
Even if today’s agreement is to survive, it still has a long way to go from the nationwide ceasefire that the United States initially wanted.
It is usually said that a ceasefire is a process, not an event. This is as always true for this Agreement.
What matters is not to announce any ceasefire, but how to implement it. In other words, the evidence for pudding will be in the diet.
Can both parties make the deal work and live up to it? Because in the answers to these questions, we will learn a lot about what both sides really want.
Do they want the ceasefire to turn into long-term peace? Or are they just trying to trade while putting their strengths on the battlefield?
