A proposal for a Consolidated Peace Framework for Ukraine

This is a formal policy document draft to establish a structured, enforceable roadmap for ending hostilities, restoring stability, and ensuring long-term peace between Ukraine and the Russian Federation. It should be refined through bilateral and group consultations, and then proposed by the UN Secretary-General. 

---

Executive Summary

This framework outlines a phased approach to achieving peace in Ukraine, balancing sovereignty, security, humanitarian needs, and international engagement and oversight. It is designed to be incremental, verifiable, and supported by global stakeholders, preferably under a UN Security Council Resolution.

---

I. Guiding Principles

• Respect for Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity: Ukraine’s internationally recognised borders remain the ultimate objective.
• Non-Recognition of Annexation: No territorial changes will be legitimised through force.
• Humanitarian Priority: Immediate protection of civilians and infrastructure.
• Incremental Implementation: Each phase contingent on verified compliance.
• International Oversight: Neutral bodies ensure transparency and enforcement.

---

II. Framework Structure

Phase 1: Immediate Ceasefire and Stabilisation

• Mutual cessation of hostilities within 24 hours of signing.
• Freeze current lines of contact as a temporary measure.
• Deploy UN/OSCE monitoring teams with satellite and drone verification.

Phase 2: Security Guarantees

• Binding security assurances for Ukraine from guarantor states (G7 + EU+ G20).
• Establish demilitarised buffer zones along the contact line.
• Russia withdraws heavy weapons from frontline areas.

Phase 3: Governance and Political Dialogue

• No formal recognition of annexation; status of occupied territories deferred.
• Create a Transitional Governance Council for disputed regions with Ukrainian representation and neutral observers.
• Guarantee cultural and linguistic rights under Ukrainian law.

Phase 4: Humanitarian Measures

• Immediate return of deported Ukrainian children and release of POWs.
• Safe corridors for civilian evacuation and aid delivery.
• Joint task force to secure nuclear facilities and critical infrastructure in close liaison with IAEA.

Phase 5: Economic Reconstruction and Sanctions Roadmap

• Establish Ukraine Reconstruction Fund financed by frozen Russian assets and international donors.
• Implement phased sanctions relief for Russia, conditional on compliance.
• Prioritise investment in housing, energy, and transport networks.

Phase 6: International Oversight

• Form a Peace Implementation Council, if possible under the supervision of the UN Security Council, and chaired by a neutral international figure.
• Consider UN peacekeeping mission from neutral countries.
• Compliance reviews every 90 days.

Phase 7: Long-Term Political Commitments

• Continue Ukraine’s EU accession process without obstruction.
• NATO membership excluded during transitional period; Ukraine retains defensive military rights.
• Sign a non-aggression pact backed by international guarantees.

---

III. Enforcement and Accountability

• Violations trigger automatic suspension of sanctions relief and reconstruction funding.
• War crimes accountability mechanisms integrated into later phases.
• Dispute resolution through the International Court of Justice or agreed arbitration panels.

---

IV. Timeline

• Phase 1: Within 24 hours of agreement.
• Phase 2–4: Within 3–6 months.
• Phase 5–7: Progressive implementation over 2–5 years.

---

V. Stakeholder Roles

• Ukraine & Russia: Primary parties to the agreement.
• Guarantor States: Provide security assurances and financial support. Composition to be agreed by Ukraine and Russia.
• International Organisations (UN, OSCE, EU): Oversight, monitoring, and peacekeeping. Also institution-building. 
• Civil Society & NGOs: Humanitarian aid and reconstruction support.

---

Diplomacy and manifestations of force

A diplomacy with strength

Victor Angelo

 

When the United Nations was created in 1945, its founders had in mind the establishment of a supranational organization capable of resolving future conflicts in a peaceful manner, in particular those that might occur between the great powers. We were at the end of the Second World War, which had brought incredible levels of suffering and destruction. The main concern was to avoid new military confrontations. So, they established a structure that gave the primacy to diplomatic negotiations and that should prevent situations like the one that now exists around Ukraine from sliding into a new war. More than seven decades later, the founding fathers, if they were still among us, would be deeply shocked to see that the UN is completely marginalised here in this part of Europe in the crisis between Russia and the West. As it is in other geographies, where the superpowers intervene directly in the struggle for what they consider to be their vital interests.

The focus on diplomacy, regarding Ukraine and the broader issue of European security, is now taking place in other forums - in the EU, in NATO, in the OSCE in Vienna. And, above all, in bilateral discussions between the Americans and the Russians, leaving the Europeans in a secondary position, even though they are the ones who will have to pay the most important part of the bill, the cost of the decisions that will be taken. The extent of the bill remains to be defined, in economic, financial, or even military terms.

So, it is not only the UN that is left out, but also the Europeans themselves, however much they deny it. It is enough to see that there is no enthusiasm in the Kremlin to discuss a new defence architecture in Europe with the German, French or other leaders. Whether one wants to see it or not, the truth is that the Russians only believe in possible understandings with the Americans. As far as the EU is concerned, Russia is only interested in the most technologically and economically advanced member states, one by one, and only for business reasons. Only on Wednesday, Putin held a videoconference with the heads of the major Italian multinationals (Enel, UniCredit Bank, and the Generali insurance company, among others), while at the same time ignoring the proposals for détente sent to him by Macron and reinforcing the presence of his armed forces in Belarus, a stone's throw from Kiev.

It has once again become clear that we are still part of an international framework in which armed force, or at least those who have it, make the law. This has a very negative impact on the political role of the UN. It also represents a fundamental challenge for the EU, which does not have the military and foreign policy capabilities that would be required to assert its strategic views and interests. The current crisis must be turned into an opportunity to strengthen those capabilities. It is necessary to reduce Europe's double dependence - military and political - on the US just as it is essential to reduce the energy dependence of certain EU member states on Russia.

Returning to diplomacy, I recall that Louis XIV had the Latin locution "ultima ratio regum" engraved on his cannons, to remind us that heavy weaponry was "the ultimate argument of kings". In other words, for diplomacy to be effective when peace is desired, warlike preparation cannot be neglected. However, today's wars are no longer waged using only cannons: economic and financial measures, political restrictions, cybernetics, information and counterinformation are now also part of the arsenal. This is what is known as an integrated response to external aggression.  Such a response is particularly necessary when on the other side we have an autocratic regime, led by an individual who presents himself as the ultra-nationalist protector of his people and national culture, who calls opponents traitors and who does not hesitate to use armed violence, internally and externally, to achieve his personal power objectives.

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper. Edition dated 28 January 2022)

 

 

Our Putin policy

Russia in fat letters

Victor Angelo

 

This week, Vladimir Putin and Russia made headlines again. One of the reasons was the message of congratulations that Putin sent to Joe Biden. The Russian leader turned out to be one of the last heads of state to congratulate the winner of the US elections. The pretext for the delay was to wait for the results of the Electoral College. This formalism, which was impeccable from a legal point of view, but undiplomatic and inconsequential in terms of future relations, barely conceals Putin's preference for Donald Trump. In Moscow's view, Trump's incompetent, incoherent and divisive policy was the one that most weakened the international position of the USA and best served the Russian geopolitical renaissance. Not to mention, of course, the deference that the American always showed for the Kremlin's strong man. 

Putin's message speaks of cooperation and puts his country on a par with the USA, in the very exclusive league of the great states "especially responsible for global security and stability". Putin, always attentive, takes this opportunity to reaffirm his country's indispensable role on the world stage.

In the meantime, other headlines have emerged about Russia. Since March she has been accused of infiltrating the computer systems of several major American targets. The list of federal institutions and private companies violated, as well as the level of refinement used, show the gigantic scale of the operation, which can only have been carried out by the highly specialised services that make up the official Russian espionage web. It is true that other countries are constantly trying to do the same. But the fact is that the Russians have succeeded and for a long time. This can only mean that the leadership invests exceptionally in cyber-espionage. It will never be known exactly what information has been extracted. The hope remains that the volume of data will be of such magnitude that it will eventually overwhelm the analysts. In these matters, it is one thing to obtain information, but another to have the capacity to carry out its analysis, in order to transform it into knowledge and courses of action, and this in good time, which becomes short as soon as the infiltration is discovered.

To complete the bunch, it was simultaneously noticed that the Russians had also pirated the European Medicines Agency. And CNN published a detailed report of the persecution and poisoning of the opposition figure, Alexei Navalny, by Putin's agents. Then came the news about doping and the ban on participation in the next Olympic Games. A series of negative headlines about a regime that loves to sell its image as respectable.  

Amid all this, Europeans extended sanctions against Russia until July 2021. These measures, which come from 2014 and relate to Russian armed intrusions into Ukraine and the occupation of the Crimea, have a narrow scope. They do not include, for example, the suspension of the construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, which will link Russia and Germany across the Baltic. Another title of the week was to announce that work on the installation of the pipeline had resumed and had even entered the final phase.

The reality is that EU leaders do not have a clear political vision of what the relationship with Russia should be like. There has been much debate on the issue, including the design of scenarios, but no agreement. The trend seems to me, as we look at the decade ahead, a mixture of deadlock, hesitation, opportunism, mistrust, and detachment. A policy of uncertainties, with Putin setting the pace.

The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), now with Helga Schmid at the helm, should seek to be the bridge for dialogue between us and Moscow. But not only that. The EU's external agenda needs to define a strategic line on Russia, including proposals for joint action, first in areas of least controversy and serving to build understanding and trust. The same should happen at the military level, both in the EU and NATO. Russia is our massive neighbour. Threatening, certainly, with autocratic leadership, but geographically, culturally, and economically close. A policy of locked doors has no way out.

 

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published today in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper)

 

 

Europe meets on Belarus

The leaders of the European Union met today to discuss the situation in Belarus. They agreed that the presidential elections of 9 August were not credible and therefore the results announced by the country’s electoral authorities cannot be accepted. That is a good statement. But it is not enough. The leaders should have called for new elections to be held as soon as possible. They put a lot of emphasis on dialogue between the dictator and the opposition. That dialogue should be about the electoral process to be followed when organising new elections.

The leaders have also expressed support to the possible role the OSCE (Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe) could play in Belarus. I found it a bit strange as we all know that this Vienna-based entity is in a crisis mode. All its key leadership positions are filled by officers-in-charge. They have no political clout to facilitate any dialogue in Belarus.

In the end, the most important thing the EU can do is to send a clear message to Alexander Lukashenko that his legitimacy is not recognised and personal responsibility for human rights violations will not be forgotten. Dictators love strong messages. Brussels must realise it.

Greater risk of confrontation

The seizure by Belgium and France of Russian assets, following a court order of yesterday, is a new dangerous step towards conflict escalation.

I am not saying, let me be clear, that those countries should not implement the court order, which is by the way a response to the illegal confiscation of Youkos´s corporate assets by the Moscow authorities a decade ago. What I am witnessing, with great concern, is an acceleration of the tension between Russia and the West. And experience shows that a greater level of confrontation can lead to a mishap or a miscalculation and become an open clash.

That would be a disaster. But as things keep going these days, one cannot ignore the risks. 

Ukraine: the diplomatic front should be supported

The joint diplomatic initiative taken by François Hollande and Angela Merkel, who decided to fly to Kiev today and then to Moscow, should be supported. It is true that it gives us a measure of the seriousness of the current situation in Eastern Ukraine. But it is the best response to a fast deteriorating conflict. It also comes at a time when Vladimir Putin seems to be ready to talk. The sides might be far apart, no doubt. But negotiations never take place when things are going well. They happen when the costs of further fighting become too high. And also when the possibility of an uncontrolled escalation is around the corner. We have both at present. Therefore, let´s give diplomacy a chance. And the first step has to be an agreement on a ceasefire. Both sides should accept the status quo and freeze the war. Then, negotiations could start and take the time they might require to achieve a durable settlement.

Let´s hope. Let´s also be clear that the continuation of the existing offensive cannot be accepted and must stop. 

Minsk´s impasse

The new round of talks in Minsk – just one short day around the table – ended without any type of progress. It´s no surprise. The situation on the ground in Ukraine is deteriorating fast. The rebels and their backers are on the offensive and fully convinced they have the initiative. They can afford to say no to the Minsk pretence.

OSCE and my friend Heidi Tagliavini, the peace facilitator, have shown a lot of patience. I admire them. They should continue their efforts. Even if they are just useful to let everyone see that the rebellion is not in a mood to talk about peace. The rebels know they can count on the support of their powerful godfather. 

Mariupol should not fall into rebel hands

The strategists behind the rebellion in Ukraine know that the EU States are now pretty busy with very demanding issues – internal security, Quantitative Easing and the possible consequences of the elections in Greece. Therefore, they considered this was a good time to reinforce the rebels and go for an offensive beyond the territories already held by the insurgency.

That´s what is taking place today. There is a dramatic increase on the rebel activity. And we have all the indications that show the combatants have been strengthened by their supporters and are now ready for additional gains.

The attack against the port city of Mariupol is the latest development in this strategy. If the city falls into rebel hands that will be a major blow for the Kiev authorities. In view of this, the allies of Ukraine have to go the extra mile to help the government to retain control of Mariupol. They have also to be very clear at the OSCE. The organisation has several teams on the ground, including in Mariupol. They should be in a position to say, in very clear terms, who is the aggressor. And they have to be brave and say it without any further delay.

Unfortunately, OSCE has shown to live in an impasse. And they will keep showing it, demonstrating their irrelevance. 

Cooperation in Europe is the only way to do business

The last thing Europe needs is war. That´s the message we have to send around. But we should also send an additional message: European countries should respect international law and the existing treaties. There is no way we can accept any exception to that. Those leaders who think they can ignore internationally accepted norms and agreements that have been signed by the European nations, including their own countries, are on the wrong side of history. They should be clearly told that. And if they persist, then there are sanctions of all types and sizes that can be applied. But always with the invitation for them to change course and accept that the only acceptable approach to relations among our States is the one based on full respect for the sovereignty and the domestic affairs of each country. The political and economic instruments are quite powerful in international relations. They should however be complemented by a build-up of national security and a strong public information campaign. 

The environment in Eastern Europe is not good

President Vladimir Putin keeps playing tough ball on Ukraine. And he is also raising the stakes in his response to the Western sanctions. Both decisions are serious challenges to peace in Europe.

It would be a mistake to take peace in our continent for granted.

But even if this only part of a gambling approach to international relations, we should not forget that the decisions that are now being implemented carry important economic costs. And we should also keep in mind that when the political leaders are ready to sacrifice the economy that means a lot. One should then redouble the security precautions. Better be alert and prepared. 

EU and Russia: sanctions and cooperation, the two sides of the coin

I have just finished my opinion piece of this week for Visão, a well-read general news magazine that is published every Thursday in Lisbon. This time the theme had to be about the relations between the EU and Russia, in the aftermath of the shooting down of the Malaysia Airlines plane.

My points are that we have to combine much tougher and better targetted economic sanctions against key Russian enterprises, including Rosneft, making sure they cannot access the European financial markets, with a continuous invitation for political dialogue between Europe and Russia. In the end, both blocs need each other. Russia, sooner or later, will require EU capital, technology and markets to develop its Far East. And Europe has a lot to gain by participating in the economic development of its big neighbour.

However the long term view cannot ignore the realities of today. And the key message here is that Russia has to fully implement the Helsinki Act of 1975 about peace and cooperation in Europe and non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. 

Ukraine´s window of opportunity is now

I sense there is a little but encouraging window of opportunity to find a solution to the crisis in Ukraine. Tomorrow´s meetings in Vienna, where President Putin has arrived today, could offer a chance for a peace road map. I think that the Swiss have been particularly active in trying to bring Putin and the other parties together, including the new Head of State of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko. The Swiss Confederation President, Didier Burkhalter, has also travelled to Vienna this morning. His discussions with the Russian leader tomorrow are something that should be carefully watched. 

Ruse at play in Eastern Ukraine

We are again reminded that deception is a critical tool of war and conflict. You have to let your enemy believe he understands your intentions and plans. Then, you do something else.

That´s so much what is happening in Eastern Ukraine these days. 

Odessa and OSCE

Odessa in Southern Ukraine is a very symbolic city. It means a lot for many people in that part of the world. It has a very rich history as well.

Today´s events, which led to many deaths of civilians on the pro-Russian side, could therefore be a turning point in the national crisis Ukraine is engulfed. They could give way to a serious escalation of the confrontations.

They are certainly an important development. But they cannot justify any armed intervention from outside the country. They call though for a deeper political involvement of OSCE.

The way forward is not very easy. It goes however through the deployment of a much larger contingent of OSCE observers and a renewed political initiative in Vienna where OSCE headquarters are based.

The UN Security Council cannot be of help. OSCE can. But it needs to be much bolder and much more assertive in terms of the European public opinion. 

The Ukrainian Geneva deal must move on

The Geneva agreement on the de-escalation of the crisis in Ukraine has been declared “moribund” too quickly. It is a bit like a deal that is signed but no one really wants to implement. Consequently, as soon as each side leaves the conference room it starts saying the deal is not working.

That´s not acceptable. In situations like the one in Ukraine, the implementation of conflict mitigation measures is a complex task. But it needs to be tried. And the first responsibility for its implementation belongs to those who signed it.

One should not be ingenuous. Beyond the agreement there are other moves taking place and they do not necessarily reflect what has been declared by the parties. That´s why the role of independent observers is crucial. In this case, it is essential to fully deploy the OSCE observers without any further delay. This is the most immediate response to the current situation.

After that, it is critical to trace the affiliations of the armed men. Many of them, in the Eastern part of the country, seem to be too well coordinated and too professional to be considered just self-defence forces, or civilians in arms. There is more to that. It has to be cleared soonest as well. 

Eastern Ukraine

The de-escalation in Eastern Ukraine is very urgent. And it should start by looking at the most recent events with a clear sense of proportions. The occupations of public buildings in a few Eastern cities are the work of very small groups of individuals. They might get a lot of media attention and create serious concerns in many chancelleries, but the truth is that there is no massive support, at least up to now, for that kind of actions. For the time being this is a law and order issue and not a popular sea change. It should be dealt with by the Kiev authorities with measured force. That´s the call one has to make at this time of greater risks. 

Baltic bridges

The Baltic States are all members of NATO. That´s a big difference when their situation is compared with Ukraine´s. But there is more. They are part of the EU, including of the Schengen space, and two of them have the Euro as their currency. These are major reasons for their citizens of Russian ancestry and ethnicity to consider that they have a lot to gain if the current status quo of the Baltic countries is maintained. They would certainly feel less free and less able to move around if they were to become part of Russia.

But the Baltic leaders also have a major role to play. They should recognise the rights of the minority populations that live in their countries, including the official recognition of Russian as one of the national languages.

I have said several times to my Baltic friends that they have a lot to gain by being neighbours of Russia and part of the EU. They can be the bridge that everyone would like to see strengthened.

This is therefore no time for inappropriate rhetoric. 

Calm down on Ukraine, please!

The rhetoric on Ukraine remains too passionate. It is time to de-escalate the war of words as well. At the end of the day, the EU and Russia should unite to save the country from violent conflict. They should also co-sponsor a joint economic recovery programme that would bring the Ukrainian economy back to its feet. That should be the aim of the diplomatic initiatives in the next few days. 

Russia and NATO

Russia is still obsessed with NATO. The Russian leaders cannot understand that today´s NATO is very different from the Cold War organisation. In result, they still believe that NATO is a race against Russian interests. That´s the way they look at events in Ukraine, for instance. They see the West´s hand everywhere and always against Moscow´s strategic security interests.

From our side, we have the responsibility to help the Russians to overcome such a vision of today’s world. The dialogue and the partnership with Russia needs to be re-thought very carefully and with great attention to the concerns that feed the other side´s fears.