Peace Plan

I take pleasure in announcing the publication earlier today in The National Interest, Washington, D.C. of a Peace Plan prepared jointly with my friend Nicolai Petro, Professor of Political Science at the University of Rhode Island.


Not surprising, but disappointing nonetheless: I have received some poisonous comments on the PeacePlan following my posting of the National Interest link.  It just goes to prove that too many readers of non-mainstream analysis are not looking for new insights, just looking for pro-Russian, anti-Western soulmates and penpals.

When you seek Veritas, be prepared to wear a barrel and carry a candle.

22 thoughts on “Peace Plan

  1. Interesting proposal. Awesome work. It might even work if America were agreement capable. Yet even she is not, still proposals like help to build a saner world.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Russia won’t give up Crimea.

    There already was a referendum there.

    Russia is winning and has no motive to stop, because I think the Russians are really sick of Nazis. Aren’t you?

    UKraine is being slaughtered upon American behest. The West ain’t agreement capable . There won’t be a negotiated settlement that allows continuation of Nazies’ control of UKraine, Sirs.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. I agree – The West is not agreement capable. Minsk just proved that.
      And this is part of a deliberate US plan. Probably Biden’s from 10 years ago.

      In 2015 the US had effective control of a huge US friendly state on the Russian border. It could have kept it that way with just a moderate effort to push it to at least token gestures linked to Minsk (instead of changing the constitution to block Minsk) and some tut tutting about the nazis.
      Very clearly destroying all Ukraine has been a deliberate policy by US. So we know US wants no deal. And we know that even a President with 75% vote on a mandate of talking to Russia has no real support in Kiev to get that done.
      Until the day that Ukrainians can vote for someone who will dare to day that shelling civilians in Donbas is actually shooting Ukraine in the foot, there is not much hope of Ukraine forming a government Russia can negotiate with.

      Any solution requires a Kiev government that respects Russia (though fear or friendship). I don’t really see how such a Ukraine can form as an independent country rather than (as Putin says) as a colony.
      Best chances are actually as a Russian controlled state, with perhaps Polish/EU controlled Western areals.

      As for referendums – most working age people (especially males with families) have left Ukraine over the past 8 years. The only ones likely to return to NovoRussia or Kherson are the ones that are substantially pro-Russian already (recall pro-Russian parties had a majority in Ukraine last time they were allowed to stand).
      I can’t imagine any referendum would not support a merger into RF.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Unfortunately for the authors of this article, Russia, (and the sane world aka as the Global South) cannot trust anything that the west says. A defensive rebuilding of the Ukrainian military will turn out to be a stealth NATO rearming to an offensive military. Any referendum in NovoRussia to be held under international supervision (what international group will be considered impartial?) will be unacceptable to Russia, as this will mean their recognition of Donetsk and Lugansk republics is null and void.

    The only real solution will be whatever Russia wants.

    It is time the West understands that there is a new global order, and they must get used to losing on the diplomatic, economic and conventional military fronts.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Here is my Peace Proposal: Russia, China, India, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, declare a New United Nations who’s first act will be to permenently abolish the current United Nations. They will then proceed about the business of building a new world order with the New United Nations. Perhaps some – shall we say temporarily “radical” members – of this New United Nations will propose declaring America NATO and Europe “terrorist states” but I would recommend tabling such proposals for later consideration.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Good ideas and they might have prevailed during the Belarus negotiations but I suspect it is too late now. And as raviven says the USA and by association, Nato are недоговороспособный which is a bit of a stumbling block. But with suitable sponsors and guarantees it could have worked.

    @ Grasshopper Kaplan
    You have to read that sentence two or three times but Russia keeps the Crimea.


  6. “Another likely objection will no doubt be that Russian officials cannot ever be trusted to keep their word.”

    Well, this is a bit disingenuous, don’t you think?

    What about not ever trusting France and Germany, let alone Ukraine as the cosigners of Minsk II to keep their word, or the US as a signer of UNSC Res 2202, giving Minsk II its imprimatur?

    Wasn’t that after all, what gnawed at Russia for so many years that it finally felt compelled to speak up in such a harsh tone?


  7. The proposed “Peace Plan” focusses exclusively on Russia and Ukraine and does not attempt to address wider issues, without which no Peace Plan is possible.

    In December 2021, Russia approached the West (the USA and NATO countries) collectively and separately, expressing its concerns and asking for a comprehensive agreement on COLLECTIVE SECURITY. The West rejected this approach, somewhat derisively.

    The USA, over recent decades, has formally stated its foreign policy: all round supremacy, (Cf Wolfovitz Doctrine, PNAC, and subsequent defence modications). It has acted out this policy.

    What about nuclear weapons? What about American bases ringing Russia and China? What about biolabs?

    Russia seeks security in a multi-polar world. The West does not share this view: it wants unilateral security and total dominance. One could ask about the future of NATO: will it continue expanding? Will it continue its aggressive posturing, notwithstanding its alleged ‘defensive’ nature?

    It is good that people put their minds to PEACE, and the conditions necessary, but it needs to be all-embracing rather than local and temporary. This is NOT intended as a poisonous comment, but rather to expand the issues that need to be resolved if we are to achieve a more-lasting peace and lower the risk of a nuclear Armageddon.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thank you for your non-toxic critique. One step at a time. The immediate threat of escalation to the point of nuclear war, by intention or miscalculation, has to be neutralized. The war has to stop. The sanctions have to be lifted. Only after this is done can the other issues begin to be addressed.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. If NATO had any interest in stopping the war, would it not be up to them to stop the deliveries of more weaponry first, signalling to Russia that it was willing to negotiate?

        By further dumping, often useless material, into Ukraine, which is more often than not used NOT to defend the Ukranian positions, but is used to attack and destroy civilian property and civic infrastructure, a war crime not worth mentioning by the western media prostitutes,

        NATO clearly tells the RF it is as of now not willing to entertain the idea of a negotiated settlement, but in the opposite, supporting a losing proposition, is willing to inflict as much damage to Russian military as possible by sacrificing as many Ukrainians as NATO seems necessary to achieve that goal.

        Zelensky has no say in this matter, he is just the marionette stringed along.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Is the “war’ the problem or the result? “War is a mere continuation of policy by other means.” But in this case, it’s not war but a “special military operation.” Many seem to think the problem is the US unbending attempts at world domination and forced subservience of all nations. It seems the only solution to that is regime change of the US government or her total military disarmament. And let’s remember that Russia obtained proof Ukraine and the West had intended to attack Donbass only weeks after Russia pre-empted them by attacking first.

        IMO, until we reach a point at which America does a 180 on policy or is regime changed or militarily disarmed, the Russian Special Military Operation is a good thing. It is a good thing that should not be stopped but encouraged and supported until is is successful, because had this war not happened, it is possible even greater upheaval, misery, suffering would have happened sometime in the future if for example America was allowed to continue towards it’s goal of turning the Russian Federation into a Syria like dismemberment situation of mass upheaval, dismemberment, bombing, tens of millions fleeing their homes and lands pouring into the West.

        There is a blog many here probably watch that has a “clown show” section. This refers to the obvious total unseriousness of our Western leaders who are so inept they can’t even find The Black Sea on a map or know it is not The Baltic Sea or even know were Ukraine is and are so grossly uninformed yet they lecture Russia to not invade her own territory because they apparently can’t even find Russia on a map, unserious because they openly enact policy that inflicts great harm on their own people but they couldn’t care less because it benefits their powerful donors (ex: embargo of Russian energy greatly enriches Western Big Oil, etc). Another ex: Kiev cutting off water to her own people in Kherson thus wiping out agriculture, to spite Crimea. Think about what this says of our Western leadership: They think only of serving their donor’s goals to the point of actively inflicting great harm on their own people. Hence they are unserious about actually governing, or of helping those they are supposed to represent, of doing their actual job in any way.

        Hence “Clown Show.”

        Add to that, please note America is even now trying to replicate in Taiwan-China what it did in Ukraine-Russia. That doesn’t support the idea that America can be reasoned with in any way or is yet capable of learning from her mistakes or even cares to.

        Russia is giving America a bloody nose, probably because at the moment this is the only way America is capable of listening and understanding things. The only thing America can understand is her defeat, of the limits of her own power. Let’s hope this is sufficient to get her to realize her unipolar 15 minutes of fame is over and she has to start acting accordingly, as an equal not a superior. 

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I always look forward to your articles and am disappointed that there are not more of them. I find your articles well written, well reasoned, and entertaining. But I am confused by the postscript to this article.

        Could you please specify which comments are toxic? Furthermore, I would like to know how a comment is classified as toxic.

        If you have a blog, please do not expect everybody to agree with everything you say all the time. There will be disagreements, even very strong disagreements at times. As long as the responders give some reasoning for their views, it should not be taken to mean the comment is toxic. My earlier comment was very strongly worded, I believe. But I still respect you and your views, and will continue to look forward to your wonderful articles.


  8. As most of the comments above generally agree, this proposal is ‘too little, too late’. It is probable that the Ukranian armed forces will collapse completely within the next four to six weeks. If true, Russia would be foolish to stop now, and internally such a move would be very unpopular, given the sacrifices of men and material which have already been made. The proposal also does not provide for a serious Russian goal – complete de-nazification of Ukraine. This is very important, to leave this unattained implies that the whole scenario would be repeated in the future.

    The article also assumes that Russian actions are aimed purely at Ukraine – however, there is a school of thought which posits that the action is also aimed at the discrediting of NATO and possibly, more broadly, the whole western Neo-liberal capitalist system. If this is so then it further decreases the chances of Russian agreement.

    Further, it can be argued that the US is currently benefitting from a) the potential increase of arms sales to European states, and b) the closing down of EU trade with China and thus increased EU dependence on US energy and other goods – so will the US back this plan?


  9. i get where you’re coming from but, as others have said, it’s a day late and a ruble short.

    ukraine in its current form is a failed state that will be picked apart by its neighbors and the usual IMF “disaster capitalism” vultures. those in the east who aren’t neo-pagan “nazis” will soon come to appreciate russia if they don’t already. there is zero reason for them to stay on a sinking ship….much less one that has tried to genocide many of them. even if they’re under sanctions it’s better than IMF/EU servitude and “lend lease”.

    russia has shown it can exist in a mostly non-western “vacuum” as can its neighbor china (to a lesser degree but it still holds better cards than the west). the US is becoming a failed state with segments ranging from provincial yuppie enclaves to opioid bantustans. it balkanized itself better than it ever could russia.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It seems you are correct about southern Ukraine Oblasts prefering Russian governance over Ukraine: “The military summary channel mentioned something interesting yesterday. He said the residents of Mykolaiv are receiving very meager rations of bread and they have to use coupons to receive the bread. He said it is a very small ration.

      He said there is a great deal of communication between Mykolaiv and Kherson and the residents of Mykolaiv see that the residents of Kherson are doing much better under Russian governance. Pensions are being paid, people are working and eating normal. Services are working. There is fuel.

      He believes there is a gread deal of support for Russia in Mykolaiv and that the Russians may be now beginning to move in that direction. Phase two?

      With the Ukraininas conscripting women between the ages of 18 and 60 I think that a great deal of anger would begin to become obvious in the poulation centers of the Ukraine.”

      Liked by 1 person

  10. “Poland and Ukraine will not be, as well as Europe”: the president of the State Duma Vyacheslav Volodin warned of a nuclear conflict in the words of the former minister of Poland, now a member of the European Parliament, Radoslaw Sikorsky, that the L ‘West has the right to transfer nuclear weapons to Ukraine. Since, according to the former minister, Russia has violated the Budapest Memorandum.

    “With such MEPs, Europeans will have much more serious problems than those they have already faced today (refugees, record inflation, energy crisis). Sikorsky does not think about the future of either Ukraine or Poland. If his proposals are implemented, these countries will disappear, as will Europe, “Volodin wrote.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. It has struck me that the most passionate supporters of Russian speakers right to self determination belong to the older generations. I am very much pro-Russian in my sentiments, and i too am of that older generation ( i am a 62 YO Australian of Russian descent, my mother was a post WWII refugee from Kharkov. But i cant fail to see th
    At the large majority of people who attend pro russian events that i can see in online media are older.
    I hoped that in the diplomacy failed of January/feb 2022, ukraine and NATO would announce that accession to NATO would not be considered for another 25 years, by which time the decision might be decided by a more clear headed public opinion less swayed by the conflict of the last decade.
    You proposal is a framework to allow time to heal, and a sensible document recognising the aspirations of all, putting the people themselves at the centre


  12. It’s a great proposal. Most heartening is that it was published in The National Interest. I had thought that it was impossible to write anything sane about Russia today.


  13. I enjoy reading everything you write, thank you for taking the time to publish your thoughts and exxperiences. As for your peace plan proposal – if only the people with the power to make the decisions would study and adapt it!

    My only change would be to allow other oblasts of Ukraine to also choose to join ‘Novorussia’, not just the ones currently partially occupied. Leaving the final decision until a generation has passed makes a lot of sense.


Comments are closed.