Draft settlement treaty

This is a follow up article to the article I wrote on 19th of February 2022, 5 days before the launch of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine. It was called 'Mutually Assured Destruction - the Prelude to Mutually Assured Security'. At the time, I didn't think Russia would move into the Donesk. I wrote:

"The current lead that Russia has in missile and defensive systems might persuade the US to agree to verifiable arms control, but this is the work of years. In the meantime, the West provokes Russia relentlessly, across all dimensions of life. This is dangerous. It is time for nations to comply with their obligations under the UN Charter. A mechanism must be found accelerate a move to universal security and the peace dividend it brings. And Russia has done this, in a stunning and unexpected move, a move missed by the entire media."

I was referring to an article I published on the same day 'Blindsided by Peace?' The "stunning and unexpected move" was the December 2021 presentation to the US and to NATO of new draft Security Treaties. One was written for NATO as an organization, and the other for the United States. I note "The provisions are short and the language uncompromising. They secure Russia's security while at the same time securing European security."

Well, the USA didn't sign, and neither did NATO. I now suspect the Russians had intelligence that an assault against the breakaway republics and on into Russia's Crimea was planned, and was maybe only months from being launched. I now suspect the Americans knew that Russia suspected something was in the offing, even if the exact date wasn't known. As the Russian President Vladimir Putin commented in 2015 "Over 50 years ago the streets of Leningrad taught me a rule of thumb - if a fight is inevitable - you have to hit first".

"Embassy employees are being evacuated and Anglo-Saxons are urged to leave Ukraine as soon as possible. Some food for thought: what if the Anglo-Saxons are preparing something of their own and this is why they are evacuating their staff? We see their actions." Sergey Lavrov 10 February 2022 No matter how many more months the conflict in Ukraine goes on, Russia has 'won'. Or rather, nearly achieved it's initial objectives of helping the Lughansk and Donesk Republics to push out the Ukrainian armed forces - many of the units there were manned with white supremacist nationalists, espousing Nazi ideas. To the extent these extremists are captured, killed or pushed out, then de-nazification - another Russian objective - is achieved, at least in the new Republics.

The tipping point is near. The West (who are the armers and instigators of the conflict) will have to tell the Ukrainian government to come to terms. A signed peace treaty will be required. It is now a matter of historic record that the signature of Western politicians on agreements is worthless, and the more so the signature of Ukrainian politicians. So will Russia ignore the Ukrainian capitulation and their plea for a peace treaty? After all, it could grind on and capture as much Ukrainian territory as it wanted, as long as it was willing to pay for it in 'blood and treasure' - as the saying goes.

I don't know what Russia will do. I do know what Russia wants for itself, and for others, because it has publicly stated it. I do know it wants normal relations with Ukraine, because it has said so. And the Russians almost never lie. "Even some seemingly respectable media outlets write about an “operation” that we are supposedly preparing with the aim of seizing Kiev and other Ukrainian cities or that some “coup” is being prepared with a view to putting a puppet regime in power in the Ukrainian capital." Sergey Lavrov 10 February 2022 We can guess an operation was being planned 2 weeks before the launch. But not to 'seize' Kiev. Not to 'seize' (note that word) 'other Ukrainian cities. Not to place a puppet regime in power.

We are left with the stated aim - liberation of the 2 Republics. Kiev won't be taken. Lviv won't be taken. What of other Ukrainian cities?

Question: [...] Does Russia intend to demand that Kiev additionally recognise independence of the Kherson Region and part of the Zaporozhye Region currently controlled by the Russian forces, or their accession to Russia? Sergey Lavrov: This question will be answered by the people living in the liberated territories. They are saying that they want to choose their future on their own. We fully respect this position. Sergey Lavrov 6 June 2022

Time and again the Russian government has stated that the future of other areas will be decided by the people who live there themselves. Therefore, there will be a referendum. How will it be worded? We will have to wait to see. How long before conditions to hold it are suitable?

This quote from the book 'Rob Roy' by Sir Walter Scott. It embodies the reality that outstanding leaders are almost instinctively recognised by all who exercise power, whether they admit it or not.

Such leaders command true respect (not the respect that comes from fear) because they have earned respect. Not by dramatic actions, but by effecting popular outcomes, by being consistent over time, by being honest, calm, by not turning away and blaming others when things unexpectedly go badly, by being patient and far sighted. Such a rare person knows the all the dimensions of power - diplomatic, military, informational, economic.

Russia, just like any other country, is concerned with one thing - the comfort and happiness of its people.

"Our greatest concern and the main task is to increase people’s incomes. This is our priority, our number one task, and we are not going to resolve it by simple linear methods. To do this, we must ensure the growth of the economy and a change of its infrastructure. This is a long-term goal.

It is based on qualitative economic growth that we intend to resolve major social tasks - including an increase in the incomes of the Russian people and the demographic problem, which is our second most important task.

It implies a package of social issues: healthcare, education and support for families with children.

To resolve all these tasks, we have mapped out certain national development goals...Therefore, we should resolve the two main problems ‒ improve demography and increase people’s incomes, raise their quality of life on this serious economic foundation I have just mentioned. This is what we are going to do in the near future" Vladimir Putin 14 October 2021

Russia signed into law a document outlining national goals and strategic objectives on 7th May 2018. They covered 12 areas, and in many cases, listed very specific key indicators of success which had to be met by 2024. The areas covered will be familiar to you, because most countries have similar desires for their people : deal with the flow-on effects of the demographic mismatch of an aging population and low birth rate improved and affordable healthcare a more highly educated population better housing and urban environment protection of the natural environment and clamp down on pollution safe and high-quality motorways improve labour productivity and employment support support research in order to compete in modern economies support the digital economy support and preserve Russia's culture support for small and medium-sized businesses and individual entrepreneurs encourage international cooperation and increase exports All this is expensive, both in money and effort. A huge amount of money has been sunk into it. If you were the Russian government, would you risk destruction of all your hard won progress?

How could Russian development be destroyed, anyway? There are 4 obvious possibilities: nuclear missile strike conventional war biological war economic war

We can dismiss nuclear strikes - even by the Americans. The Russian and American Presidents have signed a declaration that a nuclear war cannot be won, and must not be fought. Both are bound by chains of terror. I have fully covered this matter in my article 'The Time Has Come'. Russia's nuclear strike policy was very clearly explained by the Russian President in 2018, and is appended to my article. Nothing more need be said.

"The end, ways, and means, they lack that, to be able to go back to the pre-2014.

The second point that I would make is, you know, as you look at the DIME—diplomatic, informational, military, and economic—we’re woefully lacking on the diplomatic piece of this. If you notice, there’s no diplomacy going on at all to trying to get to some type of negotiations. And I don’t think that we can lead that, given where Putin thinks about us.

But if you sit back and think about those that could possibly be a part of this negotiation team, you know, you have the—two of them are in—that I’m going to list are in NATO. One is President Orbán out of Hungary. Perhaps he can help out in the negotiation effort. The other one is President Erdoğan of Turkey. Longtime friends of President Putin, although some view that relationship as transactional. I don’t know. Let’s put it to the test and see." Stephen Twitty, former Deputy Commander of the United States European Command (2018–2020), May 31 2022

Russia was always going to win the NATO proxy war. Why? because Russia has advanced standoff missiles, superior electronic suppression, superior air defense, superior aircraft, superior training in urban warfare (in Syria) - the list goes on. If NATO didn't know that, then they are professionally incompetent.

Russia does full spectrum conflict resolution (except it doesn't do much propaganda work). It know power comes from diplomacy backstopped by military competence (in all its many dimensions), and from a robust and self-reliant domestic economy. Its military responses are very carefully calibrated, constantly re-assessed and adjusted. Russia will not win 'at any cost'. It will create a military-economic-human nexus where the opposing party cannot but come to terms.

Biological warfare we can dismiss. When a new instance of a pathogen arises it's genome will be pulled apart and examined, the consensus origin found, it's genetic differences examined for structure and placement on and between chromosomes or RNA, and conclusions drawn. An attack on Russia with biological weapons will draw an immediate nuclear or hypersonic kinetic-energy response.

Economic warfare will eventually fail. It will cause quite a bit of pain for a year or two, but it has no chance of suceeding. What's more, it damages those who made the attack. I have covered this in detail in 'The West's Apartheid International Trading System'.

Russia doesn't need and doesn't want armed conflict - Russia has always wanted peace

Ukraine will come to terms because it is reaching a tipping point, where the things that anyone cares about are being lost or have become uncertain and insecure. Healthcare, housing, education, a good job, a stable and reasonably comfortable life, certainty, stability, freedom from fear - this is what people must have. At a certain point they demand peace.

Russia will provide peace on reasonable terms. Russia still sees Ukraine as part of the Slavic orbit, a kindred people. There are deep roots between the two countries. It will never set out to humiliate Ukraine, or try to bleed it dry. Russia thinks long term - very long term. But the terms will be set without US or European interference.

Russia will not deal with 'mediators'. "This is the gist of the EU’s mediation. Some process started in the Balkans after Kosovo proclaimed “independence” unilaterally and without any referendum. The UN General Assembly invited the EU to mediate between Pristina and Belgrade and its effort was rather successful: in 2013, the agreement was reached on establishing the Community of Serbian Municipalities of Kosovo. In 2014, when a coup was staged in Ukraine and the “counterterrorism” forces launched an operation against Donbass and Russians in Ukraine, the EU also acted as a mediator. This led to the signing of the Minsk agreements that established certain rules, just as with regard to the Serbian municipalities in Kosovo.

The EU made a solemn promise to support a special status for northern Kosovo and eastern Ukraine. The status did not imply any complicated things: to let people speak their native tongue (Serbians were supposed to be allowed to speak Serbian and Russians in Ukraine to speak Russian), teach children in schools in their native tongue, use it in daily life and have a certain autonomy as regards law-enforcement and economic ties with neighbouring regions (northern Kosovo with Serbia and eastern Ukraine with Russia). Identical agreements were made, which urged respect for national minorities in full conformity with international European conventions on the rights of these groups. The EU announced that it had succeeded in both cases.

But it shamefully failed in both cases and had to admit it later on by saying it could not persuade Kiev to fulfil the Minsk agreements or make Pristina abide by its agreements with Belgrade. There is something in common as regards the EU’s treatment of different areas in our common geopolitical space, its goals, its competence and its ability to make deals...I have repeatedly emphasised the main geopolitical conclusion from this situation: it is now impossible to agree with Europe on anything and be sure that they will deliver on their obligations." Sergey Lavrov 6 June 2022

EU 'mediators' have failed twice now. They are useless, There will be no mediators. Nor will matters be dealt with President to President. They will be dealt with between competent officials, and only when everything is worked out in greatest detail will any agreement be signed by some official. There will probably be a photo opportunity, where whoever is in charge in Ukraine is treated with the usual courtesy by the President of Russia. But that's it.

"Vladimir Putin has commented on the situation that emerged in connection with the arrival of the new weapons. I can only add that the longer-range arms you supply, the farther will we push from our border the line where the neo-Nazis will be able to threaten the Russian Federation...let me reiterate the following. The West has decided to supply weapons that, in all evidence, are capable of reaching not only the border areas of the Russian Federation but also its more remote points. Politicians and legislators in Ukraine itself are laughing at the Americans, who said they believed Vladimir Zelensky’s promise not to shell Russia. ...I will stress once again: the longer-range are the systems supplied to the Kiev regime, the farther will we push the Nazis from the line from which threats emanate for the Russian population of Ukraine and the Russian Federation. " Sergey Lavrov 6 June 2022

What is "the line" Sergey Lavrov refers to? It is the point at which shells and rockets can reach not just Russia, but also "the Russian population of Ukraine". Where, then is the 'Russian population' of Ukraine located? According to wikipedia, quoting a 2004 study, the percent of Russian language speakers by region (oblast) is:

This data is out of date, and populations will have shifted a great deal in the last 18 years. Many Ukrainians in the east have fled to Russia. Many families are made up of both Ukrainian speaking and Russian speaking people. And language spoken is not the sole determinant of how people identify themselves. Some Ukrainians may want to 'vote Russia', so to speak, for economic advantage. Some 'Russians' may identify with Ukraine for many reasons, from family ties, business, to ideological views.

This means Russia can play the great 'definition game'. Russia can use any criterion that suits it's political objectives to decide for the population just where 'Russian Ukraine' ends and "Ukrainian Ukraine' begins.

But Russia is very sensitive to the problems of badly defined boundaries. The Russian President has spent endless hours mediating boundary disputes between Armenia and Azerbaijan. When the Soviet Union dissolved itself it didn't fully define some borders. Even today, around 450 kilometres of the 970-kilometre Tajik-Kyrgyz border remain undemarcated, and remain a source of constant disputes.

But the 'military border' simply cannot be finally set until the political border is set. (Albeit when Ukraine comes to terms, a temporary border may have to be set while the political borders are finalised).

Let's consider precedent. Russia used a popular referendum (involving outside monitoring groups) to determine if Crimea was to join Russia or not. Russia was dissatisfied that a referendum was not used (by the EU) in determining whether Kosovo would become an autonomous region or not. But Crimea was strongly pro-Russia, and these other Ukrainian regions are much less easily defined one way or the other.

The choices on a referendum probably have to allow for four states: remain with Ukraine autonomous region of Ukraine independent state merge with Russian federation These options determine the political boundaries. Now we can guess at where the military line will be. Again we can look at precedent. There was a demilitarised zone around Lughansk and Donetsk, monitored by the OSCE. Large caliber artillery had to be pulled back a proscribed distance from the 'line of contact'. (This did not stop the Nazis killing 14,000 people by shelling, mortars and sniping in the breakaway regions over the course of 8 years. That was then. It will be different this time)

Obviously, this will be status quo less Lughansk and Donesk Oblasts. A line will be drawn at a distance from the Lughansk and Donesk Oblast borders that is a little beyond the point of the range of the longest range weapon that Ukraine or the 2 Republics have. A similar maritime line will have to be drawn offshore the Black Sea. To simplify matters, all large weapons, even of shorter range, might be prohibited from the line up to the borders of Russia and the 2 republics. All we need do is look at the text of the Minsk 2 agreement. It is all there. Of course the language will be changed, from 'Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine' to the Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk respectively. The monitoring of military lines will likely be done by Russian and Eurasian Economic Union military or military police. Once the situation has calmed down, normal electronic monitoring methods by the Republics (requiring Russian satellite assistance) should suffice.

Minsk 2 clause 4 is no longer relevant, and the principles of preventing reprisals of Russians in other parts of Ukraine is mentioned in clause 5 ("...a law that forbids persecution and punishment of persons"). This will have to be passed in the Ukrainian Rada before Russian occupation forces leave areas where there is a significant risk of persecution of Russians. Of course, the Europeans, who worked so assiduously to cause this disaster, will be charged through the OSCE with making sure the population remains safe and any criminals are found and punished. And the OSCE will have to implement suppression of Nazi ideology and ensure the freedom of information and expression, protection of minorities and human rights - that is their job.

Clause 8 is no longer relevant; part of clause 9 will be kept to ensure no control is handed back to Ukraine until the constitutional changes to de-nazify (rather than decentralise, as stated in the Minsk 2 Agreement) are passed in the Rada.

Clause 10 is needed to de-militarise Ukraine (expelling all foreign forces), and this too will have to be embedded in the constitution to prevent NATO or any other similar grouping placing itself in the country.

"President Putin has said many times, both in January and early February, that Russia will not tolerate a model of European security that relies on NATO as the dominant force. Especially when it's right on our doorstep.

We've repeatedly said that we want to find an alternative solution - a solution that would reliably address security concerns of Ukraine, the nations of Europe, and, naturally, Russia. And that's the direction we should take.

President Zelensky said that he was interested in security guarantees for Ukraine. I see this as a positive development. Our negotiators are ready to discuss these guarantees..." Sergey Lavrov 2 March 2022

Clauses preventing Ukraine ever developing or hosting nuclear weapons will be required, and also the terms will have to include wording to recognise that nuclear weapons pose an unacceptable existential threat to Russia and the existence of which on Ukrainian territory will result in a military response. This allows Russia to attack Ukraine at any time that they renege on this key part.

"The head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), Sergei Naryshkin, has stated that the SVR had obtained intelligence showing that Ukraine was working on building its own nuclear weapons." - Sputnik News 03 March 2022

But we have to pay attention the 'all inclusive' nature of Sergey Lavrov's statement. The Russian government has previously commented that Ukraine is not really the main problem for Russia. Clearly, Russian and European mutual indivisible security is. And this must include 'detaching' USA, as it has embedded itself into it's European host's tissues very deeply.

Those regions such as Odessa that might vote for autonomy might as well sign up to a Minsk 2 - style agreement. After all, Minsk 2 was hammered out to suit all parties, and hammered out in not dissimilar circumstances. These agreements would likely be agreed by the United Nations. Although this is hardly essential, it allows the West to save face a little. The only change needed may be to embed de-nazification in the Ukrainian constitution.

The model here is the Treaty of Friendship Co-operation and Mutual Assistance. Such treaties were signed between Russia and the two Republics. The mutual assistance provision triggered Russia to come to the Republics aid, push Ukraine from their territories, and end Ukrainian shells and rockets being fired into Lughansk and Donetsk.

I haven't found a copy of the treaty on the web at this time. All we do know is that clause 4 and 5 allow for military assistance to be given to the Republics.

The United States has put trade restrictions on the 2 Republics, and you can be sure that any Ukrainian Oblast that goes down the path to independent state will experience the same blockade. However, it may not be much different to what Odessa, for example, is already experiencing.

Russia, I believe, wants a treaty that finally ends the NATO threat. It wants security in Europe for everyone - but not at any given countries expense.

"The thing is that for twenty years, both you, the British, and the Americans, and all other NATO countries were urged to do what all of you subscribed to in 1999: no country shall strengthen its security at the expense of the security of others. Why can’t you do that? Why is it that the commitments signed by your prime minister, the presidents and prime ministers of all other OSCE countries proved to be lies?...You moved closer to our borders on five occasions (a defensive alliance!). The Warsaw Treaty and the USSR are no more. Who are you defending yourselves against? Five times you decided all on your own where your lines of defence would be. What’s that? This smacks of megalomania." Sergey Lavrov 6 June 2022

Security for all Europe is what the two treaties Russia presented in December 2021 were designed to achieve. I have covered them in my article ' 'Blindsided by Peace?' . If - or rather when - Ukraine joins the European Union, Russia's Europe-relevant treaty (the NATO treaty) would then bind Ukraine. If NATO signs it. It may not.

Europe will eventually sign, there is no other sane choice. But US will never 'allow' it, and therefore NATO will have be dissolved first. Once NATO no longer exists, the way is open for the 2008 Security Treaty to be brought back into the light. "Back in 2008, Russia put forth an initiative to conclude a European Security Treaty under which not a single Euro-Atlantic state or international organisation could strengthen their security at the expense of the security of others. However, our proposal was rejected right off the bat on the pretext that Russia should not be allowed to put limits on NATO activities." President Putin, February 21, 2022 This will take some time. But I doubt Russia or Ukraine can wait that long. A Russia-Ukraine settlement will have to come now. It will have to include relevant parts of Minsk 2, it will have to include the additional elements I have outlined above.

This leaves the issue of rockets. As Ukraine is 'donated' bigger, faster, and more sophisticated rockets (or builds them) the distance from the Russian, Donetsk and Lughansk borders will have to increase. In reality, it is not about distance, it is about time from launch to arrive at the target. Russia needs time to alert the layers of defense. So the faster the rockets go, the further back they must be placed to allow that time. At some point in technical development they will be too fast to be deployed anywhere in Ukraine. And as Russia develops rockets faster than mach 20 (which they already have) their rockets may have to be deployed thousands of kilometers away on the East Coast. This is an absurd situation, and an agreement will have to be reached with Europe on limiting the range of rockets. This will require dialogue and verification.

Well, the West has destroyed all diplomatic relations with Russia. They have dug themselves into an impressively deep hole. Their diplomacy, when it comes to Russia, is simply incompetent, in the literal sense.

As Scott Ritter points out in his new book 'Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika' we have been here before, we have overcome practical difficulties, and we have achieved arms limitations - to everyone's benefit. We know we can do it because it has been done before.

When Trump arbitrarily pulled out of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, it was clear he wanted to cut another 'deal' that dealt with Russia's hypersonics. Biden has walked right to the very edge of the precipice by running with the aggressive NATO plan, organising and inciting the Ukraine conflict, funding and fanning race hatred, continuing the biggest propaganda program in human history, and imposing an economic blockade on Russia of unparalleled malice - designed to cause as much damage to the Russian people as the effects of war.

America has reached the outer limits of it's malignancy. One step further is destruction.

"Let me assure you, dear friends, that we are objectively assessing our potentialities: our intellectual, territorial, economic and military potential. I am referring to our current options, our overall potential. Consolidating this country and looking at what is happening in the world, in other countries I would like to tell those who are still waiting for Russia’s strength to gradually wane, the only thing we are worried about is catching a cold at your funeral." Vladimir Putin 22 October 2020

[Unfortunately lying is not restricted to only this one of our major international enemies. Some cultures and religions think it is only a crime/sin to lie to their own culture or religionists.]

Again, you’re arguing from principle. If only it were true. Non-Western cultures and religions spend most of their time lying to and/or cheating their own. Affinity fraud is the easiest kind of fraud. That’s why so many of these places are such sewers. The only principle in action isn’t the Golden Rule - it’s looking out for #1.

Think about the way the early Muslims killed Muhammad’s blood kin. This disinherited Muhammad’s relatives from the empire he had created, and set up the schism between Sunni and Shia. If there is one principle that stands out - it’s that people will say and do anything to get ahead.

The events of American history, and the last three decades in particular demonstrate American leaders lie without hesitation. Most have rejected religion and have no morality.

1800’s. Many treaties with native Americans were violated and they were almost annihilated when they tried to fight back.

1860’s - we are going to give the freed slaves 40 acres and a mule so they can be self sufficient

1960’s and 1970’s - we will defend South Vietnam from communism. Whatever it takes.

1990’s. - free trade will enhance prosperity. Your manufacturing jobs will be replaced by even better jobs in the new service economy.

2000’s we must invade Iraq to get rid of weapons of mass destruction. We will never leave Afghanistan until we rebuild the country and make it safe from terrorism. To Khadaffi - end you nuclear arms program and we won’t interfere with you

2010’s - Barack Obama - tell Putin I’ll have flexibility once re-elected. A few years later from the Democrat Party and the professional bureaucracy - Trump is colluding with Russia and a stooge of Putin.

2020’s Afghanistan abandoned, Saudi Arabia and Israel snubbed. To the American people —Two week lockdown to flatten the curve. Masks aren’t effective. The vaccine is 95% effective and perfectly safe. Masks are effective and must be worn. We will never mandate anyone take the vaccine. Covid is being spread only by the vaccinated. Only N95 masks work. Beware the next variant. Ivermectin is dangerous horse medicine and won’t work against Covid. There was no cheating in the 2020 election. The greatest threat to our democracy was the Jan. 6 invasion of the Capitol by an unarmed mob of 500 people while 250,000 Americans peacefully protested outside. The greatest threat to our country is white supremacy.

American leaders habitually lie to their own people and the rest of the world. The US government has historically violated treaties repeatedly and invaded other nations at will and without formal declarations of war. Putin may be a lier and a monster, but US leaders also have no moral authority based on their behavior. The moral decay in the United States has reached the point where it is impossible to trust not only politicians, but leadership at any level in almost any institution of our society.

Putin and Ukraine are Europe’s problem, not America’s. If the Europeans won’t use their wealth and manpower to deal with situations in their own backyard, so be it. Our country is financially, morally and spiritually bankrupt. We have to stop being the world’s policeman and devote our energy to the many crises at home.

[Russians have always been duplicitous, but with communism that duplicity found a very happy home; and though “communism” has taken a back seat, its mindset has just made the facile switch to fascism.]

IMHO, fascism and communism are just egalitarian-sounding but closeted forms of monarchy. The “isms” are just frilly accouterments to prettify the reality of despotism. Rome evicted its last titular king in 495 BC. However, Roman consuls kept trying to assume kingly powers, i.e. rule for life and pass the throne to their kin. Julius Caesar finally succeeded. His nephew Octavian reaped the fruits of his efforts after his death.

Vladimir Vladimirovich may be attempting to establish a dynasty that dare not say its name:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10860329/Putin-considering-parachuting-daughter-political-role.html

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.