Outline for Ukraine Peace Deal Floated in European Press
April 9—Sources report that there is real content to a proposed peace deal to end the war in Ukraine making its rounds in NATO circles, as reported in the European press. But these same sources say the press has spun it slightly wrong.
First publicly floated in the April 5 Italian paper La Repubblica, in an article titled “Kiev in NATO After the Surrender: The Scenario Europe Fears if Trump Wins the Elections,” and also reported by other European media, there is a “possibility surfacing in all informal discussions” in NATO circles about a change of strategy to end the war in Ukraine. The deal would involve Ukraine giving up territories controlled by Russia in exchange for security guarantees, and Russia would accept Ukraine immediately joining NATO. However, 2024 is still seen as another year on the battlefield, and the said agreement would not occur before 2025, the reports say.
The reason for the delay, according to the Italian daily, is that it must wait for a victory by Donald Trump, now feared by many in Europe as a likely possibility, in the U.S. Presidential elections in November. Trump has repeatedly said that he could end the war in the Ukraine in a single day, were he in the Oval Office, and an exchange of territory for NATO membership is seen as a quick way to accomplish this.
Unstated in this scenario is that Trump has also said that not only does he oppose putting Ukraine in NATO, he wants to reconsider the U.S. relationship to NATO. He has recently proclaimed that he sees no reason put the U.S. at risk by providing Europe with an American nuclear umbrella, should the Europeans, including the France of President Emmanuel Macron, engage in a useless and unnecessary confrontation with Russian President Vladimir Putin, that NATO and Europe, under those circumstances, should be prepared to defend themselves by themselves.
Such statements by Trump have garnered extreme criticism from the Atlanticist Establishment, but as the former President knows, his views on this reflect the opinion of the majority of Americans outside the military-industrial complex. Sources report that the latter has placed the former and would-be next President in their crosshairs, as well as have their puppets in the current Nazi government of Ukraine, who might deny him access to a second term in the White House. “In many ways,” said an intelligence source who says Trump is aware of these risks, “for these people, Trump is a greater threat than Putin.”
As for the proposed deal, sources who are not spinning silly scenarios, say that elements of it are very much on the table right now, in back-channel discussions between the Ukrainian and Russian military—without the approval of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. A growing section of the Ukrainian military leadership realizes that the war is lost and its continuation only means greater slaughter for its soldiers, whose losses are now estimated to be far north of 500,000.
On the other hand, Zelenskyy, who has recently fired army leaders who refuse to back his prolonging the war, cannot let the war end quickly or he will face new elections; the President has ruled out holding a presidential election scheduled before May (when his term expires) because, he said, it cannot be conducted under martial law, which he has imposed for the duration of the conflict. He plans to stay in power as long as it takes to secure an elusive victory.
As reported in La Repubblica, the proposed deal would involve handing over all currently Russian-run territories—i.e., Crimea and the Donbass republics, Zaporozhye and Kherson—permanently to Russia. The remaining part of Ukraine, its borders secured by the agreement, would be incorporated into NATO. The final step would then be to fortify and arm this new Eastern border of NATO.
However, Russia would never accept either NATO membership for the Ukraine or its further arming as part of NATO. Instead, sources with some knowledge of the discussions, say the deal under consideration would acknowledge the territories controlled by Russia and incorporated into Russia to be part of Russia. In exchange, both NATO and the United States, specifically, along with Russia, would guarantee the sovereignty and borders of a neutral Ukraine, which would be allowed to maintain its own defensive armed forces.
Under such an agreement, Russia would withdraw all it forces from the Ukraine and would participate in an international reconstruction effort, along with the NATO member countries, the Saudis, and other Arab nations and the BRICS alliance, of which Russia is a part. The program for reconstruction would be administered by the United Nations. Under such an agreement, were the Ukraine attacked by Russia, this would evoke an Article 5 (of the North Atlantic Charter) full NATO response.
The sources report that the Russians are looking favorably on such an outline, as do “some” people in the Biden White House. It is thought that the Ukraine’s insane and bellicose backers in the U.S. Congress look on such a plan as a “sell out,” although these same people have failed now for more than six months to push through a new funding and military equipment package for the Ukraine.
