Ukraine's peace agreement should be judged by its consequences, not its text

These points can seriously be perceived exclusively as diplomatic courtesies before Trump, on whom it depends what weapons Ukraine will receive with European money. Therefore, the effectiveness of this document is measured not by what is written there, but by what results Ukraine will obtain as a consequence of Trump's current efforts. It is important that weapons continue to flow to Ukraine, and if/when these efforts are disrupted, it was not Ukraine's "fault."

Although the reaction to the published "20 points" is a good illustration that any final document of this stage of the Russian-Ukrainian war (of course, if it is signed at all) will not please anyone. It's just that today the geopolitical circumstances are such that a complete and total capitulation of Russia, unfortunately, will not happen. And therefore the final document will contain things that will seem absolutely unjust to us. But world history is rarely just. At least not immediately. And the Russian-Ukrainian war is precisely that case.

On the other hand, these same geopolitical circumstances will force the West not to leave Ukraine alone with Russia. 

"Ukraine's defeat will directly contradict the interests of the total majority of NATO countries, and therefore the final document (again, if it is signed at all) will contain sufficient mechanisms to preserve a sovereign Ukrainian state. And again – we are not talking about justice here, but about the national interests of Western countries."

A ceasefire at some stage is indeed possible. Primarily because Russia, despite its bravado propaganda, may also need a pause. Especially if economic and military strikes on the Russian gas station continue.

I will venture to assume that a window of opportunity for realistic agreements may appear somewhere at the end of January — when Russia's deadline to respond to Trump's initiatives will have de facto expired, and when the results of Russian attempts to destroy Ukrainian energy infrastructure become obvious.

But even if peace documents are signed, the most important thing will not be their text, but what happens during the ceasefire. If Ukraine and Europe use this hypothetical pause as intended and during the temporary peace large-scale investments in military production are launched, defensive structures are built near the front line, a new architecture of common European security is designed, then there is a chance that the pause in the war will be prolonged for a long time.

In the history of world politics, there is not a single peace agreement that has been guaranteed to be observed to the end. If it were otherwise, there would have been no wars in the world for a long time. But despite all the agreements in the world, military conflicts are becoming more numerous. However, the value of any peace agreement can be assessed – but not by the fact of "eternal peace," which will never exist, but by how successfully these agreements provided an opportunity to prepare for a future war and thereby deter the aggressor. This is exactly how the "20 points" currently being discussed in Ukraine should be evaluated.

The value of international agreements is measured not by their text, but by their consequences.

Source

About the author. Serhii Taran, political scientist.

The editorial office does not always share the opinions expressed by blog authors.