So you want to talk about peace in Ukraine. Here’s a quick primer regarding the issues at play if you want your ideas to be taken seriously.
First, full disclosure, I have been clear about my position on peace. I think it is unlikely in the near future. I write so here and explain why: Calls for peace in Ukraine a year after Russia’s full scale invasion are unrealistic.
Any discussion of peace needs to consider that it will be, in some way, in the control of the governments of Ukraine and Russia. The West has made it their position that Ukraine will decide its terms. Russia has made clear it is an unreliable partner. Both have maintained maximalist terms.
But let’s say that changes somehow – then what? First, any discussion of territory has to realize Russian occupation has been harsh and brutal. This recent AP report has more (explaining things we’ve known about since Feb 2022): AP News on treatment of Ukrainians under Russian occupation
If Russia maintains control of Ukrainian territory, Ukrainians will continue to targeted and subjected to this horrible treatment. Russian occupation = Ukrainian oppression and further violence and death. This is why liberation, after defense, has been the key aim for Ukraine.
Some plans focus on a ceasefire. Except we know Russia likes to use ceasefires to reload and prepare for renewed violence. This is what happened with Minsk. If you call for a ceasefire, explain how we can trust Russia. Many experts, and Ukrainians, don’t for good reason.
Some focus on agreements to keep Ukraine out of NATO or the EU. Given recent announcements by NATO, NATO membership is not likely until after the war ends (and even then, I don’t think it’s going to happen. Same for EU.). That aside, if your plan sees Ukraine accepting neutrality, how is the plan better than it was before when de facto that neutrality existed (Ukraine was not part of NATO/EU; Sweden and Finland joined NATO with some minor tantrums from Russian officials)? Oh but security guarantees. Well, any NATO member likely isn’t an option, as Russia won’t agree. China’s peace plan was rejected out of hand by Russia and China may not want to put itself in that position. The positions of Lula, for example, make BRICs unlikely to be accepted by Ukraine.
Finally, people offering peace plans focusing on ceasefires, territory swaps, etc, often don’t realize that’s a recipe for future war. What does LASTING PEACE look like? For Ukrainians, it focuses on liberation, justice for Russian atrocities, and reparations. For Russia, lasting peace is the carve up of Ukraine, and its firm placement under its control. This is a war about Russian imperialism. Their destruction of Ukraine is plain to see. How is this squared away to bring lasting peace?
I get wanting the war to end. Ukrainians would love the war to end. They understand the stakes more than any. But many Ukrainians understand what Russia is doing to their nation and their people. Hence liberation and defense as key aims.
And no serious person is suggesting diplomacy should just be thrown out. It has led to the grain deal, to prisoner swaps and other minor agreements that show some hope. The issue is that in big picture things (fate of Ukraine), diplomacy stops quickly. And incremental diplomacy can be important, but there is a difference between keeping options open and expecting magically things will work out. Magically that a ceasefire will work. Magically, that Russia will stop.
Many of these recent peace plans I’ve seen floating around from certain candidates really focus on ending the war right now, and often, ending the world’s focus on it. They claim to care about people, but as I suggest above, that’s not what they’re actually worried about. It’s frankly so they can sleep better at night and go back to ignoring Ukraine as the world did in 2014 or because they struggle with the ramifications of their ideological outlook. Some fear the war expanding or fear nuclear weapons being used (And I find these concerns understandable!). But Russia can’t face the world (and clearly didn’t think the world would get involved, hence its need to fearmonger). Still, this has remained a war largely localized to Ukraine.
My point – Diplomacy is hard. Peace is hard. And yes, at some point, Ukrainian and Russian leaders may be in a position to negotiate. And hard decisions may need to be made. That does not appear to be at this point. And an imposed peace on Ukraine solves little. So if you’re going to offer a peace plan, and you want it to be taken seriously, consider the above. And realize it’s very complicated. But also realize, what you don’t consider about the reality on the ground speaks volumes.
To be blunt, many peace plans ignore what Russian forces are doing in Ukraine to Ukrainians. And that immediately suggests their peace plan ignores the realities of this war and is based on naivety, ignorance, or worse.
Oleksa Drachewych 