Proposal to End the Russia-Ukraine War

[Bamspeedy]

Territory:
Russia must return any territorial gains in Ukraine made during the current conflict / special military action
Ukraine must return any territorial gains in Russia (if any) made during the current conflict / special military action

So Russia is giving up all the land it captured (Ukraine captured some of it back at various times, but did not capture any land that was Russian before the conflict, so Ukraine has nothing to give up in this section).

NATO may not entertain the possibility of Ukraine becoming a member of NATO for {Time Period 1}
The European Union may not entertain the possibility of Ukraine becoming a member of the European Union for {Time Period 1}

Can they 'join' any kind of union with Russia?

Espionage:
NATO countries may not operate espionage operations within Ukraine for {Time Period 1}
Known US Surveillance Capitalist companies, including Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Cloudflare, may not operate any offices and may not control any infrastructure in Ukraine for {Time Period 1}. Any existing offices must be closed and any existing infrastructure must be divested
NATO countries and entities with significant operations in NATO countries may not set up any new schools in Ukraine for {Time Period 1}

Optional bargaining point: NATO countries and entities with significant operations in NATO countries may not operate any media operations within Ukraine for {Time Period 1}
Optional bargaining point: NATO countries may not operate any embassies in Ukraine and must close any existing embassies in Ukraine for {Time Period 1}

And what about Russian 'espionage operations'? First thing Russians did when capturing Mariupol was set up radio towers to broadcast their propaganda.

Military:
Russia may not declare war on Ukraine and may not perform any military operations against Ukraine for {Time Period 1}
Ukraine may not declare war on Russia and may not perform any military operations against Russia for {Time Period 1}
NATO countries, entities with significant operations in NATO countries, countries which are allies of NATO countries, and entities with significant operations in countries which are allies of NATO countries may not supply military armaments, military components, military personnel, or military services to Ukraine for {Time Period 1}

Can Russia be re-supplied with military armaments during this time?

 

[Cutlass]

Counter proposal:

* Russia withdraws to the post-Soviet breakup borders.
* Any residents of Ukraine that consider themselves Russian, and not Ukrainian, be relocated to Russia.
* Ukrainians kidnapped into Russia repatriated.
* Russia admits sole responsibility for the conflict.
* Putin turned over to the Hague for war crime trial.
* The net worth of all Russian Oligarchs liquidated to pay reparations to Ukraine.
* Russia surrenders all of its nuclear weapons to NATO.


Seems fair and balanced.

 

[amadeus]

The U.S. has to close its embassy?

 

[amadeus]

The proposal is ludicrous because all of the concrete obligations are on Ukraine and the West, and in exchange we are given an empty promise by the Putin government not to directly invade again.

If I was Russian I would accept this immediately because it basically grants MFN status to Russia in the world’s largest economies and allows virtually unlimited interference and subversion of its neighbors.

 

[r16]

stuff to be imposed . Not agreed upon . And once again , Moscow is not begging here .

 

[Cutlass]

stuff to be imposed . Not agreed upon . And once again , Moscow is not begging here .

Let's make them beg.

 

[Cutlass]

you will make Russians beg on your own .

please do not come a week later , or a month or a year and say Kharkov has not yet fallen . Russians reportedly telling everyone on the web that this not a big arrow one .

Turkey was doing really well selling Ukraine drones. Don't you want more Turkish drones showing their superiority over Russian crap?

 

[Crezth]

if a person was to join CFC tomorrow and randomly check threads and chance upon this one and get to feel stuff , it would be quite a help to understand things if he/she knew one of the "sides" try to hide that it was known that the Summer Offensive of 2023 was done on a limited front , easy to identify , easy to cover with firepower , easy to defend under the pressure of Western enablers so that nothing untoward would have happened . The said side talks about the agency of a nation that fights , will do everything to hide that the nation in question was denied a victory , is supplied within strict limits , even when the aggressor as defined by a majority on the global scene gets stronger . Yes , conditions for a ceasefire ? Before one of the warring nations runs out the best of its people so that when the Western corporations come , nobody will be able to question the bill presented . Unacceptable ? Then the other nation will impose a situation that no Western corporation will be able to do business in the country that's fought upon . Including the Western areas which Polands rejects claims that it covets . This be the crucible the Western Power is broken , didn't start it , know very well that the China issue is a lie . Those who can act ... Act while you can .

Gonna be honest, it is your posts that are 90% of what I bother coming to this forum to read.

The proposal is ludicrous because all of the concrete obligations are on Ukraine and the West, and in exchange we are given an empty promise by the Putin government not to directly invade again.

Yeah, that's what you get when you win. Personally, it's why I like pulling off a conquest in Civ. You can do anything you want to the loser, ya know?

 

[amadeus]

Yeah, that's what you get when you win.

I read this proposal as giving Russia more than if Ukraine capitulates.

 

[Crezth]

I read this proposal as giving Russia more than if Ukraine capitulates.

Well the proposal is meant to actually solve the issue in the big picture, but Ukraine capitulating only takes Ukraine out of the image. It doesn't really do anything about the CIA, for example. So yeah, this is a pretty generous proposal that will never be offered because the party responsible for deciding if Ukraine should keep fighting is prepared to fight to the last Ukrainian - if they can keep costs low enough, that is.
Moderator Action: Edited to keep it on topic. Birdjaguar

 

[red_elk]

The proposal is ludicrous because all of the concrete obligations are on Ukraine and the West, and in exchange we are given an empty promise by the Putin government not to directly invade again.

The only concrete obligation here is withdrawal of troops. Anything else are non-enforceable agreements which can and will be violated shortly after they are signed.

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

What peace treaty? The peace treaty will draw a line between NATO and Russian forces. If NATO forces enter Ukraine, then Ukraine will keep those parts. If NATO forces do not, then Russia decides which parts Ukraine can keep. Even if NATO forces enter Ukraine, they will not advance towards established Russian positions.

Ukrainians have agency, but agency, morality, and justice do not stop artillery shells. The expansion of the borders of Russia and its faithful vassals can only be stopped by a comparable force such as NATO or China. The ruling classes of nations near Russia also have agency, and make life and death decisions for their people. Belarus and Armenia chose deferrence, Ukraine chose destruction, Georgia and Kazakhstan are still making up their minds. Please be respectful, especially to Georgians, their nation is in a precarious position.

Moderator Action: Off topic rant removed. Birdjaguar

 

[Birdjaguar]

Moderator Action: Off topic posts removed. Stick with discussing the peace proposal ideas. Thanks.

 

[Gorbles]

Yeah, that's what you get when you win. Personally, it's why I like pulling off a conquest in Civ. You can do anything you want to the loser, ya know?

Except the specific rationale made by the OP (in the second post) was for everybody to win.

 

[Crezth]

Except the specific rationale made by the OP (in the second post) was for everybody to win.

Yeah, well, the story is several degrees of truth-or-we-make-it-truth away from the, you know, truth, if you can make a good enough case for it. In a lot of cases it's did you make off with a good payday or did you win and the big boy has to try to save face.

 

[Verbose]

Fundamentally nothing proposed so far ends the actual conflict. Because there is a difference between what Russia's coercive goals and what Russia's wider ambitions are.

The Russian ideal outcome is not satisfied with anything proposed, and thus the conflict does not end. Because giving Russia what it can coerce, or even more than it can directly coerce, does not end the conflict. Proposals so far conflate these things.

sylvanllewelyn above has it pretty much right that all that is going on is a balancing of coercive power. Ukraine is clearly doing all it can to generate as much domestic coercive power to not fall to Russia it can – which generates a kind of moral argument; if a nation is willing to stand up for itself, it makes itself deserving of aid. (And denying it is doing that and denying Ukranian agency generally is the Russia game, since it is intended to undercut that argument).

The problem for Ukraine's western aiders is that they still lack an actual strategic vision for the conflict, simply reactively aiding Ukraine (and no real plan, and so very little actual timing), and worse they are still trying to somehow limit and restrict its own coercive power, and how much of it Ukraine can actually access. Which, given the dynamics of conflict, is very unclear what that is supposed to do? The coercive power is there, but it won't really be released for use – not even indirectly by Ukraine. And Russia already insists it is fighting NATO anyway, so...

 

[amadeus]

So yeah, this is a pretty generous proposal that will never be offered because the party responsible for deciding if Ukraine should keep fighting is prepared to fight to the last Ukrainian - if they can keep costs low enough, that is.

I have not seen any evidence that Ukraine is not the main political force pushing against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Feb ‘24: Trust in Zelensky: 64-35
Oct ‘23: 60% say fight, 31% negotiate

Those are the most recent figures I could find while on the train here. As far as I know, they are more accurate that any blind speculating—mine or yours.

 

[r16]

they are not the same thing , right ? One burning with 100% understandable combination of indignation , duty to country and society , fear of future and a little hatred but not on the scale Russian propaganda claims . Other that meters support to political , economic and a little bit of strategic advantage . Are you willing to state that the good side would keep fighting if the West was to cut support ? A guerilla war perhaps , like the one in 1950s ?

 

[amadeus]

Are you willing to state that the good side would keep fighting if the West was to cut support ?

Are you willing to state that the good side is being supported because they keep fighting?

Is there a way to measure which one of our statements is true? I guess if we went back to past wars, did the side that was short on materiel immediately lose the will to fight?

——edit to get back on the topic of negotiations——

The hard nut for me to crack is in finding a settlement that does not effectively reward Russia for naked aggression, risking the establishment of a dangerous precedent that would see intensified great power wars in the future.

Were this not a consideration, I would propose the following:

• all contested regions of Ukraine are to have referenda on whether to remain a part of Ukraine, become independent, or join Russia—all residents as of 2010 would be eligible for participation. Observers from countries with free elections would be allowed to observe, no UN knuckleheads.

• all those wishing to leave Ukraine on an individual basis to become Russian citizens are free to surrender their citizenship and move to Russia with their land to be purchased at market price by a combined consortium of Western governments and the Russian government, with the land being turned over to the Ukrainian government for deciding its use.

• support payments are to be made to Ukraine. If the Russian government acts in good faith, the burden of payments would be partially borne by Western governments that sent arms to Ukraine.

• sanctions against Russia are to be gradually scaled down and abolished as it demonstrates good faith in respecting Ukrainian sovereignty.

• for a period of 15 years, Ukraine is to not join any military alliance without the dual consent of Russia and the United States.

—Again, this proposal doesn’t satisfy my own conditions but trying to be as even-handed as possible, returning the region to as much of a status quo ante bellum with changes to restore Ukraine as a country and prevent future conflict.

 

[red_elk]

Are you willing to state that the good side would keep fighting if the West was to cut support ?

Yes, and it would quickly win, most likely.