Written by Vivek GROVER
Part I
27/03/2024
What the Warring Parties Say
Türkiye has recently offered to host a Russia-Ukraine summit, which will be the first time the two parties meet since negotiations were broken down in late March, 2022. Since that time, a number of peace proposals have been drawn up, with many countries offering their views on how the conflict should be settled. In this context, let us analyze what initiatives are on the table and can be used as drafts for a future settlement. In this article we will analyze Russia and Ukraine’s stances.
Russia’s security guarantees: the wake of the Special Military Operation
A good place to start would be to see what Russia wanted to achieve before it started its special military operation in Ukraine. In December 2021, the Russian Foreign Ministry passed over the document concerning security guarantees to assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian affairs Karen Donfried.
The principle of indivisible and equal security was the main point of it. Russia invited the United States not to carry out activities that affect the security of each other, including using the territory of other states for the purpose of preparing or carrying out an armed attack against either party. The document also read that the United States should not create any military bases on the territory of former members of the USSR, i.e. Ukraine, the Baltic states, and Georgia, as well as to abandon the idea of expanding NATO eastward, which would mean reversing the decisions of the 2008 NATO Bucharest summit, where Ukraine and Georgia were invited to join the Alliance.
Among other things, Russia proposed to mutually renounce the deployment of armed forces and weapons in areas where such deployment would be perceived by the other side as a threat to its national security. Moreover, it invited the United States to reject the deployment of medium- and short-range ground-based missiles as well as nuclear weapons outside national territory. Russia also said that the Russia-NATO Council should resume its active functioning in order to enhance cooperation between the two sides.
The United States rejected the document in its entirety and notified Russia that they did not intend to engage in the negotiation process on security guarantees. This, along with the United States’ determination to enhance military cooperation with Ukraine and Ukraine’s unwillingness to implement the Minsk Accords, is what led to the beginning of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine.
Ukraine’s 10-point peace plan: Ukrainian ultimatum to Russia
After a few rounds of talks in Türkiye, which have been described in detail in our previous articles, Ukraine outright banned any negotiations with Russia and President Zelensky presented his own 10-point “peace formula”. This can hardly be described as a peace plan, as it resembles more an ultimatum to Russia.
According to this plan, Russia should cease all hostilities and withdraw all of its troops immediately. This would mean that Russia would have to give up all of the territories of the Donbas, which it captured in 2022, and Crimea, which has been practically part of Russia ever since 2014. The “formula” reads that restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity should also be followed by the establishment of a special tribunal to prosecute “Russian war crimes”. Ultimately, Ukraine insisted on building a new security infrastructure in the Euro-Atlantic space, which would include security guarantees for Ukraine. This would practically mean Ukraine’s accession to NATO.
It is no wonder that Russia has firmly rejected any kind of negotiations based on this “peace formula”. Russian Foreign Minister called it “an ultimatum”, “a product of Zelensky’s sick imagination”, and “a road to nowhere”. Despite Zelensky’s formula having some provisions aimed at solving the current food and energy crises, the main idea is ultimately to make Russia go back to its 1991 borders and allow Ukraine to become an anti-Russian NATO stronghold along its borders. Russia will not give up any of the territories that it has already gained and will continue pressuring Ukraine into accepting the status of a neutral state.
The West and Ukraine have used a range of instruments trying to rally support for the peace plan. Four rounds of talks were held in Denmark, Saudi Arabia, Malta, and Switzerland in order to make countries of the Global South more familiar with and more supportive of Ukraine’s “formula”. A number of key actors from the Global South took part in some of these talks, including members of the BRICS, such as China, Brazil, India, South Africa, and Saudi Arabia. However, the results of these talks seem to be rather limited, as Zelensky’s peace plan managed to garner support exclusively from countries of the Western world.
to be continued
Source: https://orientalreview.su/2024/03/27/so-many-ukraine-peace-initiatives-yet-so-little-progress-i/
Part II
29/03/2024
What the World Majority Says
In light of Türkiye’s offer to host a Russia-Ukraine summit we decided to compare and contrast the various peace initiatives that are already on the table. In the previous article we examined the warring parties’ stances. In this one we will focus on the proposals made by the Global South.
China’s 12-point plan: for all the good, and against all the bad
On February 24th, 2023, China became the first country to release its own 12-point peace plan, which was written in the traditional style of Chinese diplomacy. There was much debate surrounding China’s view on the situation at the time. No one could deny the fact that China leaned more pro-Russian, but the country seemed hesitant to present its own detailed view of the conflict in Ukraine. Experts, politicians and scholars alike looked forward to the release of this document, but it ultimately proved anti-climactic.
The Chinese peace initiative turned out to be a largely symbolic document with generic statements on adherence to international law, agreeing on a lasting ceasefire and ensuring the stability of production and supply chains. Formally, this document cannot even be considered a peace plan, as it does not describe specific mechanisms that would help achieve peace. Neither does it address the key issues of Ukraine’s neutrality or the status of the Donbas and other Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine.
Many commentators indicate that the publication of the “peace plan” coincided with American intelligence reports on discussions about possible deliveries of Chinese weapons to Russia. This leads to thoughts that the provisions of this “plan” were meant to underline China’s determination to uphold the principles of international law, which both the West and Russia say they adhere to. This way, China aimed at keeping close relations with both sides, without damaging its reputation on the international arena.
Brazil’s “peace club”: a G20 for security issues
More substantive proposals came later, as Brazil President Lula da Silva said a group of neutral nations must come together to help broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. “When the economic crisis struck us in 2008, we quickly created a G20 in a desperate attempt to save the global economy. Now it is important to create another G20 to end the war and establish peace,” said the Brazilian President.
Brazil did not publish any official document regarding peace in Ukraine, but Lula has stated three main points. Firstly, the international “club” of neutral states must be established that which will encourage both sides to pursue peace. Secondly, Ukraine should give up its territorial claims and cede Crimea to Russia officially. Thirdly, the West should stop supplying arms to Ukraine, as this only contributed to the escalation of the conflict.
Unsurprisingly, these initiatives have been met with anger in Ukraine and the West, as they believe Lula is hiding pro-Russian rhetoric behind the curtain of “respecting international law”. Still, Brazil seems to have forgotten its self-proclaimed role as the mediator in the conflict, as it has failed to follow up on these initiatives with any real diplomatic activity.
Africa’s 10-point peace plan: from those directly affected by the crises
In June 2023, a group of African representatives paid visits to both Kyiv and Moscow and presented their own 10-point peace plan, which is largely influenced by the Chinese initiative. No details or clarifications are presented on how peace should be achieved, rather a set of good wishes regarding peace and security.
For Africa, the various crises caused by the conflict are the main pints of concern, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said that the conflict in Ukraine directly affects the lives of the African peoples, especially when it comes to food security, as prices for fertilizers, grain and fuel have skyrocketed ever since the beginning of the hostilities.
Indonesia’s plan: demilitarized zone and UN peacekeepers
June 2023 also saw Indonesia present its Ukraine peace plan. This one is, perhaps, the most realistic and detailed yet. At the Shangri-La dialogue summit, Indonesia’s Defence minister called for the cessation of all hostilities and the creation of a demilitarized zone by withdrawing all troops by 15 kilometres from each parties’ current position. Additionally, he called for the deployment of a UN peacekeeping force to guarantee peace. According to this plan, the UN would also host a referendum in order to “ascertain objectively the wishes of the majority of the inhabitants of the various disputed areas”.
Despite this plan being one of the most objective ones yet, Ukraine reacted furiously, saying that “there are no disputed territories between Ukraine and the Russian Federation to hold referendums there”. This is quite natural, as Ukrainian authorities understand that Russian-speaking people will inevitably vote to remain part of Russia in case of any referendum. Still, the modalities of such a procedure are unclear, which is why it is rather unlikely that this initiative will gain any ground.
Conclusion
All in all, all of the aforementioned peace initiatives have the same problem: they do not go into detail. Both Russia and Western states refer to the fundamental principles and norms of international law, which is why peace initiatives written in general phrases do not advance the peace process at all.
Still, there is much to gain from these “plans”. The modalities of peace will have to be discussed using an international platform similar to the one proposed by Brazil. The basic principles should be taken from the Chinese and African initiatives. Some parts of the detailed elaboration could be used from the Indonesian plan. In any case, the final word will be with the parties to the conflict and it will be they who will have to make concessions to achieve peace. But it seems that as of now, neither Russia nor the West are ready for this.
to be continued
Source: https://orientalreview.su/2024/03/29/so-many-ukraine-peace-initiatives-yet-so-little-progress-ii/
Emma Olive 
You must be logged in to post a comment.