Upstream of everything it is necessary to define a meaning of “end of the war”, that is
1) a “real peace”
2) which is guaranteed by an element external to Russia and Ukraine
The preconditions for achieving achieve a solid and lasting peace
In other words, it is necessary, more generally, to define a peace agreement that will allow for a stable period of peace both for Ukraine and for the rest of the world.
The fundamental aspect of the agreement: it is not a question of recovering the situation before the war (a situation which was in itself wrong, since it was destined to bring about a conflict between Russia and the West anyway). But it is a question of defining a better situation than the one that existed at the beginning of the conflict, which gives more security to Ukraine that it will no longer be attacked (and also to arrive at a legal definition – this time recognized by other Nations – of the situation in the possible “autonomous regions”).
That is, it is necessary that:
● Russia is no longer in a position to blackmail the West (and therefore to threaten Ukraine).
● Ukraine (probably), to be able to arrive at a real solution, will have to make concessions which, however, do not harm the nation as regards its sovereignty, economy and security of the ethnic Ukrainian population.
The key points on which to focus in order to achieve real peace
The key points are specifically:
■ for UKRAINE
U.1 ● RECOVERY OF A STATUS QUO ANTE
In order to be able to define a real peace it is necessary that there is
the possibility for Ukraine
(the country attacked without a legal reason)
the pre-conflict territorial situation
(this is not a final goal, but a fundamental starting point to arrive at defining a solution).
That is: Ukraine must
recover the territories it had before the invasion,
Once this condition has been created, it will be possible to discuss at the diplomatic level the question that was at stake before the war: the belonging of the territories of Crimea and Dombass).
It is possible that Ukraine should grant the possibility to these disputed regions to become autonomous in some way with respect to the Ukrainian state (there are more models applicable to this case)
But this time this must happen through legal solutions (probably referendums) approved by other nations (currently no nation has recognized their alleged “independence”)
U.2 ● POSSIBILITY OF EFFECTIVE RECOVERY OF NORMAL LIVING CONDITIONS
Ukraine must be able to restore its economic and social life prior to the conflict, with a correct system of
Reparations, reconstruction and resumption of a normal life:
To achieve this it is necessary to resort to a different method from the one that has been used up to now in the “reconstructions” of countries damaged by war.
The difference lies substantially in the fact that in this case it is avoided to create “dependencies” for the damaged country by the countries that intervene in its aid (these are political-economic dependencies that can transform Ukraine into a Puppest-State of some other nation, altering the global balance again).
That is, Ukraine must be able to “rebuild” by itself what was destroyed (albeit with a reconstruction subsidized by the West – an operation obviously financed largely by the defeated country, Russia (this is also possible intervening on payments for oil and gas supplies imported from Russia).
The key to everything is (as has always been the case after a war!)
to succeed in obliging Russia
to compensate for the damage caused by this war
(for Ukraine and other Western countries).
U.3 ● SECURITY OF STABILITY (DURATION) OF THE PEACE SITUATION
Ukraine must have a guarantee that what has happened will never happen again.
– a critical aspect is to identify guarantors who can effectively provide effective guarantees of stability of the agreed peace. [see next point]
– as mentioned, in order to have a stable peace Putin must lose all forms of power in Russia: this result can be obtained indirectly, by putting pressure on the Oligarchs, the Military Apparatus and the Population with sanctions and condemnations by the International Courts of Justice. [see next point]
■ for the WEST
W.1 ● TO END THE WAR SO THAT IT IS CLEAR THAT RUSSIA IS DEFEATED
To have a defeat of Russia and achieve a real Peace that allows Ukraine to resume its normal life, it is necessary to continue to support Ukraine on the military level so that it can counterattack Russia by hitting strategic targets even behind the enemy lines (which could not be done effectively in the first two months of the war).
Obviously, this must be done without direct help from other nations.
W.2 ● DEFINITELY NEUTRALIZE PUTIN’S THREAT OF WANTING TO DOMINATE EUROPE
It is necessary to arrive at a condition that allows to put an end to the development of Putin’s plans for the West on the political and economic level, for Putin to lose any position of power in Russia see GCW text “With Putin in power, nothing positive can be done (the Putin’s fall)”>
The conditions for achieving this are, in addition to the defeat Russia on the ground in Ukraine, to continue to oppose Russia on the economic-legal level:
● with sanctions (real sanctions, and not as was done in the early stages of the war).
● with convictions by international Courts: those responsible for crimes against humanity (Putin and accomplices such as oligarchs, soldiers, officials) must be summoned to court (requesting extradition, as was done with Pinochet). It is necessary to create efficient commissions of inquiry supported by the international community.
If the current international courts cannot be used, new methods of international jurisprudence can be defined.
● by getting rid of the dependence on Russian gas and oil, so as not to allow Russia to assume again the position of power that allowed it to attack Ukraine undisturbed (see point W.4)
W.3 ● REDEFINE THE MODALITIES OF INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS
(NATO, UN, EU did not work).
It is necessary to define new agreements between Nations for cases of this type (a new form of alliance more dynamic than the current ones – today all have failed: – which can be defined in a specific way according to the case).
Today this point is underestimated: for example, the British Prime Minister says that “a tough approach from the UK is necessary and our allies is vital to strengthen Ukraine’s hand in negotiations.” But the problem is that there are currently no solid alliances.
<see GCW text “Towards a new kind of international alliance” in article “Towards new alliances able to maintain a real condition of Peace”>
W.4 ● END OF THE CONDITION OF DEPENDENCE OF STATES ON OTHER STATES
In order for there to be a solid condition of Peace in the future, States must begin to have economic and energy “independence” (Real Sovereignty). And production of essential products such as chips, medicines, otherwise they will continue to be under blackmailed by China, Iran, Arab countries, etc …
But also States must have sufficient low-level armaments which, as we have seen, seem to be decisive in the conflict of a small State with a world “Great Power” (while having “atomic missiles” on its territory does not seem to have a strategic value for the most Nations).
Obviously, every nation must, above all, to achieve real independence, also reduce its need (consumption) of energy.
■ for RUSSIA
The sine qua non condition for establishing real peace is that Russia is placed in a position where it cannot attack other states again. The conditions are therefore:
R.1 ● RUSSIA WITHDRAWS FROM THE TERRITORIES OF UKRAINE
The pre-condition of any peace process with Russia is the restoration of the status quo prior to 2014: then, eventually, new statuses of the territories of Dombass and Crimea are defined, but this time with regular referendums.
R.2 ● RUSSIA PASSES TO A NEW PHASE OF GOVERNMENT IN WHICH PUTIN NO LONGER HAS ANY POWER (In the phase of the war)
It is understood that Putin will never respect any pact, so the precondition for achieving real peace is that Putin is ousted from any position of power.
To achieve this, it is necessary, among other things, to make Russia stop supporting Putin
– continuing to activate sanctions that punish both Politicians, Oligarchs and Military (with condemnations by international Courts), and the People (with a notable lowering of the quality of life).
– developing counter-information (via satellite or internet) that makes the Russian people understand what Putin’s responsibilities are with respect to their current problems
<see GCW article “The measures that we can (and must) take“>
R.3 ● post-war – attribution of blame and compensation
As it was with all wars,
1) Russia, the aggressor country, must be condemned for war crimes; and must compensate Ukraine (and the countries that supported it during the war).
(Russia can easily pay – in installments – through oil and gas supplies).
2) Russia must be subjected to a “controlled regime” as it was for Germany after WW II.
Some criticalities of the peace agreement
To arrive at a solution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict that achieves the points mentioned above, among other things it is necessary to consider that:
► Putin is no longer credible as an interlocutor and therefore any agreement cannot be entered into with Russia in the current political order.
That is, if Russia wants to dialogue with the world, it must have passed the Putin era. To achieve this, it is necessary to continue to press Russia so that the people in power and the population understand the damage that Putin is doing to them. <see “the unsustainability of the war for Putin”>.
► guarantor of the treaty. There can be no peace treaty without a real guarantee
Probably the most critical point of the situation is that of identifying a guarantor.
This guarantor, of course, must be able – if a threat to the treaty emerges – to intervene effectively: it must therefore be formed by a certain number of nations that are able to implement actions to force the parties to respect the treaty with deterrent actions (embargoes, economic sanctions, etc …), or with the supply of weapons – if not direct military intervention – in case the conflict reopens.
And the guarantor cannot be one of the current international organizations (NATO, UN, EU, etc …) which have shown that they are unable to prevent conflicts like the current one (despite the explicit threat).
That is, it is necessary to create new alliances that are more compatible with the era in which we are living (which are able to identify the new needs for a real global balance).
It should be remembered that, in order to maintain a condition of effective peace, the League of Nations was created specifically at the end of World War I, and the UN at the end of WW II. Today it is necessary to create a new form of alliance where such organizations have failed.
In summary, guarantors are Nations that:
– have an interest in defending the autonomy of Ukraine (its Sovereignty) – that is, nations that can be damaged by a resumption of threats from Russia.
– have the power (military and economic) necessary to guarantee this condition of Ukraine.
► it is necessary to take into account the global situation, in which there are more areas in which other conflicts similar to the Russia-Ukraine one could develop.
In stipulating a peace treaty that puts an end to the current conflict, it is necessary to be sure that this treaty does not end up favoring nations like China and Iran.
► Ukraine must obtain effective independence (sovereignty)
Although in this very critical situation, conceptions must be made in terms of the possibility of making choices such as that of neutrality with respect to NATO,
● Ukraine must be able to decide to make economic agreements with whomever it wants
(It should be avoided that economic aid from other states leads to a condition of dependence on them, which can then lead to international controversies similar to those that damaged Ukraine even before the attack by Russia).
● as regards any autonomous regions: it will probably be necessary to make concessions on Donbass and Crimea (they have never been recognized internationally) and arrive at a truly legal solution (such as a referendum held with international observers): some models of autonomous regions worked very well, like that of Alto Adige in Italy after World War II.