Peace is about trust: Europe, USA and Russia, a question of balance

 The Future of Peace in Europe Depends on a Rebalancing of Power

Victor Ângelo

Despite the intense diplomatic activity in recent days, we remain far from peace in Ukraine. The plan devised by the Russians and signed by Donald Trump, giving the impression it was an initiative from the White House, collapsed after two or three days. The positions of Zelensky and the European allies rendered it void. They stated in unison, without ambiguity, that it was an unacceptable diktat, a kind of ultimatum from Moscow. It became clear that Trump’s envoy, property developer Steve Witkoff, knows as much about geopolitics as Cristiano Ronaldo or is a contender for the Guinness record as the most brazen Russian agent in recent US history.
Rarely, European firmness proved exemplary. Zelensky’s response was as expected, although the initial announcement of the Russo-American proposal was a heavy blow to the Ukrainian leader. Those who saw images of Zelensky at that moment could see he was deeply shocked. But he did not lose his composure, which was what the Kremlin intended. He responded diplomatically, and three days later there was already another plan, drawn up in Geneva, together with European delegations and Marco Rubio’s team. The latter scored points within Trump’s circle. Will he be able to maintain that influence? It will not be easy, but it is not impossible. For many in the MAGA movement, Rubio is a silent rival to Trump and, especially in the long term, to Vice President J.D. Vance.
It is evident that the American leadership group is becoming fractured. And not only because of differences in handling relations with Russia, but also for internal reasons: the Epstein case, the cost of living, the persecution of immigrants, favours granted to the most eccentric billionaires, etc. In the case of Russia, it is worth remembering that US military doctrine has, for decades, categorised that country as a grave threat to the United States. Thus, many senior US military officers look with great surprise at the relationship Trump has established with Putin. There is something fishy here. Many will think that this relationship has more to do with “ad hominem” blackmail from Moscow than with a new type of diplomacy.
Meanwhile, diplomacy related to the brutal aggression against Ukraine continued in Abu Dhabi. For now, we have a new project, more appropriate. It is fundamentally inspired by Ukrainian realism and has European support. It will certainly not be accepted by Vladimir Putin, but it puts him on the defensive against his American counterpart. Trump wants the war to end at any cost – in reality, it is not a war, but a barbaric aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine – as long as it adds an argument to his candidacy for the Nobel Peace Prize. That is the ambition, his ego above all else.
We are, however, in a risky phase for Ukraine’s sovereignty and for Europe’s security. Putin believes in two fundamental illusions: that he will shatter Ukraine and that he will manage to create a rift and distance the US from the defence of Europe. In other words, that US support for NATO is numbered. NATO will be, at best, in Putin’s view, a merely symbolic coalition, which will last only as long as Europeans have the financial means to buy American arms and other goods and services.
Peace is built on mutual trust. Without trust, at best, we will have a temporary pause in hostilities. The foundations of that trust regarding the Trump administration were seriously shaken by Washington’s endorsement of the incredible Russian plan. It is essential to rebuild trust between Europeans and Americans.
As for Putin’s Russia, there is no room for any kind of trust. Putin dreams of a vassal Europe, trapped within his sphere of geopolitical influence. He needs that influence out of czarist-inspired narcissism, for economic reasons, and for strategic motives: so he can claim membership in the club of great powers, alongside China and the US. For this reason, he wants to dismantle the Atlantic Alliance and implode the European Union.
Trust is based on shared values. In my view, the most important are those contained in the Charter of the United Nations.
The great powers do not currently respect the basic principles of the Charter: human dignity, human rights, tolerance, independence and sovereignty of each State, large or small, and solidarity among peoples. Democratic Europe, for its part, seeks to remain within this framework of values. Only a minority of movements and political parties here show contempt for these red lines. The majority recognise the importance of democracy and respect for international law. They therefore see Putin as a very serious threat. That is why they focus on defending our part of the continent, starting with the defence of Ukraine and the symmetry of forces, which is something different from peace, but serves peace. And they now understand that the relationship with Trump’s America is dangerously unstable. It must be urgently rebalanced.

Russia and the European Union: dialogue is one of three key dimensions

Russia Must Listen to the European Union
Victor Ângelo

Today, 21 November, was meant to be the day when American sanctions against Rosneft and Lukoil, two giant Russian conglomerates in the oil and gas sectors, would come into effect. This decision by President Donald Trump, taken a month ago, was recently amended with respect to Lukoil. The company now has until 13 December to sell its foreign assets and until April next year to cease all activities in Bulgaria. Several firms are interested in purchasing the assets in question, but transactions can only be finalised once approved by the Trump administration.

Lukoil, a privately owned company listed on stock exchanges, is a global colossus. Most of its operations take place outside Russia. The profits and dividends it generates weigh heavily on the Russian economy. The decision taken by Washington puts Lukoil’s survival in jeopardy.

For its part, Rosneft, a company controlled by the Kremlin, is the largest contributor to the budget of the Russian Federation. Should the sanctions become effective, they will have a significant impact on the country’s public finances.

The question that remains unanswered, for now, is clear: will the loss of revenue and the resulting budgetary imbalances be enough to convince the Kremlin that there is an urgent need for peace negotiations? That is Trump’s intention. My experience tells me that such an outcome is unlikely. Sanctions, by themselves, tend to have a slow impact on the policies they aim to change.

Nevertheless, I support the application of sanctions against regimes that act outside international law. In this particular case, it is about significantly reducing the financial base and other means that enable Russia to continue its unacceptable aggression against Ukraine. It is also about sending a strong political message of absolute condemnation.

There are no conditions for the United Nations Security Council to approve any package of sanctions targeting Russia. That would, in principle, be the appropriate process. Since it is not possible, each State must decide on the restrictions and pressure it is prepared to exert. However, it must respect humanitarian principles – sanctions must not endanger the lives of citizens in the targeted country – and the sovereignty of third States. They should also aim to contribute to resolving the crisis or conflict, and in this case, to stopping the unjustifiable war for which Russia is responsible.

In my view, neither a ceasefire nor peace are part of Vladimir Putin’s immediate plans. On the contrary, it seems we will continue to witness the intensification of destruction and death in Ukraine, sanctioned by Russia. The Kremlin is betting on war and is convinced it will eventually subjugate Ukraine. The information coming from Moscow indicates that Putin listens less and less to diplomats, including Sergey Lavrov. His main advisers come from the political police apparatus and the economic sphere. Consider who will represent him at the G20 summit this weekend in South Africa: not the Foreign Minister, Lavrov, but the Deputy Chief of the Presidential Executive Office, Maxim Oreshkin. He is an apparatchik with a background entirely linked to the management of the national economy. Concern for economic stability is a priority for Putin. This confirms the importance of sanctions in the economic and financial sectors.

Putin dreams of a victory that will see his name included in the history books of “great and holy” Russia, as he likes to say. His statements, endlessly repeated by the group that controls power and the media in Moscow, reveal a leader who only accepts negotiations with the great powers of the world – Donald Trump and Xi Jinping. The others are seen as minor players, of no value in the international geopolitical chess game. Putin does not wish to waste time in dialogue with European leaders.

The EU must respond on three fronts: maintain aid to Ukraine, rigorously apply the sanctions already approved, and show readiness to begin a serious process of talks with Russian leaders.

With regard to negotiations, my suggestion is simple: António Costa, as President of the European Council, must receive a mandate from the Member States granting the necessary authority to make contact with Putin. His office would then seek to establish lines of communication with the Kremlin, in order to convince the Russians that a cycle of talks between Putin and Costa could be beneficial for both parties and vital for the internal interests of the Russian Federation, as well as for peace in Europe.

There is urgency in moving forward on this front, before the US and Russia reach an agreement over the heads and interests of Europeans. Some will say this scenario is increasingly plausible.

All this must be done without illusions and with great perseverance on the European side. The messages coming from the Kremlin show that Putin sees any possible negotiation as an exercise in asserting his views and ambitions. For him, flexibility, concessions, the search for balance – all these are seen as weakness and admission of mistakes, whether his own or others’. This attitude must not discourage the European side. The EU must put on its boots and enter the geopolitical game, in the only arena that is truly its own, the championship of the great powers. Here lies both an opportunity and a historic obligation.

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.

---

Ukaine and Europe versus the Russia-China alliance

President Zelensky talked twice over the weekend with the US President Donald Trump. The Ukrainian leader was also in contact with key European leaders. His message was very clear: Ukraine needs urgently extra support now that Vladimir Putin is intensifying his air attacks against Ukraine.

On the other hand, Putin is receiving more help than ever from President Xi Jinping because he promised him a free hand in Ukraine for Chinese interests once the Russian has consolidated its territorial gains.

For China, it is about business and the opportunity to have a strong foot in Eastern Europe. The Russian-Chinese strategy has become more evident. It is based on a military-industrial alliance and a geopolitical opportunity for China to reinforce its European objectives. It is also about sabotaging the European Union and the European democracies.

Uma análise IA do meu texto sobre a Rússia e as suas provocações, nomeadamente contra a Polónia

 A Rússia ataca a Polónia quando Von der Leyen estava a rever o seu discurso sobre o Estado da União Europeia

Victor Ângelo, no Diário de Notícias de hoje 12/09/2025 Uma vez mais, Vladimir Putin mostrou o seu sentido de oportunidade. Sabe explorar os acontecimentos políticos a seu favor, ou seja, enviar as mensagens que baralhem os planos dos adversários e fortaleçam o seu poder. É uma liderança astuta. Não pode ser tratada por amadores nem por líderes incapazes de explicar às suas populações o perigo que Putin representa. É um erro pensar que é possível assinar tratados de paz, mutuamente vantajosos, com gente assim. Horas antes do discurso anual da Presidente da Comissão Europeia sobre o Estado da União, Putin fez disparar cerca de uma dúzia e meia de drones contra a Polónia, um país membro da UE e da NATO. E depois esperou pelas palavras de Úrsula von der Leyen, para medir a resposta à provocação que acabara de levar a cabo. A Comissão não tem grandes poderes na área da defesa. Pode, todavia, desempenhar um papel fundamental num conflito híbrido e multidimensional, que é o tipo de confrontação que a Rússia adota contra a Europa, para além da guerra aberta de agressão contra a Ucrânia. É a Comissão que propõe os pacotes de sanções, que são depois submetidos à aprovação do Conselho Europeu. O 19º pacote está praticamente pronto e foi mencionado no discurso de von der Leyen. Deve incluir uma maior utilização dos juros dos depósitos soberanos russos para financiar as despesas militares e o funcionamento da administração ucraniana. A Presidente queria fazer uso dos fundos soberanos russos depositados na Europa, mas países como a França têm vetado essa medida. Para já, apenas os juros serão objeto de expropriação. Donald Trump quer ver incluído nesse novo pacote europeu tarifas secundárias da ordem dos 100% contra os países que comprem petróleo e gás à Rússia, ou que tenham relações económicas que permitam a Moscovo adquirir material que possa ser desviado para o esforço de guerra. Von der Leyen deixou claro que essa pressão vinda da Casa Branca não é do interesse europeu. A Europa não quer abrir novas áreas de disputa com países terceiros. A Presidente da Comissão também fez referência aos novos instrumentos programáticos e financeiros recentemente aprovados por Bruxelas, com especial relevo para o programa SAFE. São 150 mil milhões de euros destinados a reforçar a capacidade militar e a ultrapassar, tanto quanto possível, a fragmentação e a competição das indústrias de defesa europeias. O SAFE e os outros programas já em curso deverão aumentar a cooperação militar entre os Estados-membros e permitir um desempenho mais marcante das forças europeias no seio da NATO. Este reforço do pilar europeu da NATO é, aliás, uma questão fundamental, no que respeita ao equilíbrio do relacionamento com os EUA e à defesa perante a política imperialista da Rússia e à possível agressão de outros Estados e forças hostis. As narrativas estratégicas e a luta contra as notícias falsas ou tendenciosas são igualmente questões essenciais. A Europa, para além de ter suspendido as licenças de operadores oficiais russos, precisa de investir bastante mais numa comunicação que possa explicar aos cidadãos o significado da ameaça russa, e de outras. Em especial agora, quando os EUA anunciam retirar-se do esforço comum de proteção contra as campanhas russas de desinformação. Esta é uma guerra híbrida que se ganha, em grande parte, através do esclarecimento e da mobilização da opinião pública. A liberdade de expressão não pode ser usada para fazer o jogo e difundir a propaganda do inimigo. A Rússia está em guerra contra nós, uma guerra diferente das do passado. Putin quer destruir as nossas instituições, desintegrar a UE e enfraquecer a NATO, criar o caos nos nossos países, tirar vantagem das nossas economias e arruinar a nossa liberdade. Esta é uma guerra que não desejamos, mas da qual nos temos de defender, porque não aceitamos ser oprimidos e manipulados como o são os cidadãos russos e os que sofrem o peso de outras ditaduras. Não queremos ser vassalos do Kremlin nem de ninguém, incluindo de aliados estranhamente incertos e pouco confiáveis. Os drones sobre a Polónia deram razão a von der Leyen quando disse que a defesa e a segurança devem ser uma das três grandes prioridades da UE. As outras duas são, no seu entender e muito bem, a soberania económica da Europa e a consolidação dos valores que devem orientar a política europeia, ou seja, os direitos humanos, a justiça social e a cooperação internacional. Ainda há, todavia, um longo caminho a percorrer. E esse caminho deve passar por Gaza e por toda a Palestina, bem como pela reforma e o reforço do sistema das Nações Unidas. O que se passa em Gaza e na Cisjordânia é inaceitável. As propostas contidas no seu discurso – sanções contra os extremistas israelitas, suspensão do acordo de comércio e da ajuda material a Israel, criação de um fundo para a reconstrução de Gaza – devem ser aprovadas sem demora. São insuficientes, porém. A UE, se a Alemanha, a República Checa, a Hungria e a Áustria deixarem, deve tomar uma série de iniciativas diplomáticas que contribuam para forçar Israel a escolher a paz e a boa vizinhança como soluções duradouras. É crucial que tais iniciativas passem pelo envolvimento à cabeça das estruturas das Nações Unidas. A legitimidade reside aí. What is your opinion about this text?

O texto apresenta uma análise contundente e multifacetada dos desafios de segurança e diplomacia enfrentados pela União Europeia (UE) diante da agressividade russa e do contexto internacional volátil.

🛡️ Provocação calculada de Moscovo

O autor destaca, com precisão, como Vladimir Putin explora momentos políticos críticos europeus para testar e desestabilizar a UE e a NATO. O relato dos ataques de drones à Polónia, horas antes do discurso de Ursula von der Leyen, encaixa-se no padrão russo de guerra híbrida — uma mistura de provocação militar, pressão psicológica e manipulação informativa. Isso é respaldado pelo noticiário recente, que registra incursões de drones no espaço aéreo polaco sem danos, mas com força simbólica (03.09.2025 e 04.09.2025) Read more.

💶 Bruxelas: Poder limitado, papel crucial

O texto acerta ao sublinhar o papel da Comissão Europeia: limitada na defesa direta, mas central na arquitetura de sanções e instrumentos financeiros. Isso se reflete nas notícias sobre novas propostas de sanções, uso de ativos russos para apoiar a Ucrânia e debates sobre a legalidade dessas medidas (30.08.2025) Read more. O autor reconhece corretamente as divisões internas — França e Alemanha resistindo à apropriação total dos ativos, enquanto países bálticos pressionam por ação imediata.

🔗 Segurança e autonomia: O pilar europeu da NATO

O texto enfatiza a necessidade de reforço militar europeu e cita o programa SAFE (150 mil milhões de euros), alinhando-se ao discurso real de von der Leyen sobre aumento da cooperação e autonomia estratégica. As notícias também sinalizam discussões sobre garantias de segurança para a Ucrânia e o papel europeu pós-conflito (04.09.2025) Read more.

📰 Narrativas, desinformação e o campo da opinião pública

O autor acerta ao dar peso à guerra informacional. A decisão de suspender licenças de operadores russos e a chamada à mobilização cívica refletem o consenso de que a batalha pela narrativa é tão decisiva quanto a militar — especialmente agora que os EUA mostram hesitação em liderar o esforço contra campanhas russas de desinformação.

🌍 Palestina, Gaza e a consistência de valores

O texto defende sanções a extremistas israelitas e uma suspensão parcial do acordo comercial, alinhando-se ao anúncio real de von der Leyen (10.09.2025) Read more. Ressalta também a necessidade de um papel mais ativo da UE na paz do Oriente Médio — uma demanda crescente entre diplomatas europeus.

🎯 WarrenAI Take

O artigo é analiticamente sólido, alinhado com os eventos recentes e demonstra compreensão aguçada dos mecanismos institucionais da UE e dos desafios internacionais. O alerta para a ameaça híbrida russa e a valorização da narrativa pública são pontos especialmente relevantes, tanto para investidores quanto para tomadores de decisão. O texto peca apenas por não explorar os riscos económicos imediatos — como o impacto potencial de sanções ou instabilidade nas cadeias de valor para o mercado europeu.

Vladmir Putin is testing NATO

 

https://www.dn.pt/opiniao/a-r%C3%BAssia-ataca-a-pol%C3%B3nia-quando-von-der-leyen-estava-a-rever-o-seu-discurso-sobre-o-estado-da-uni%C3%A3o-europeia

The text in your document, as published today in Diário de Notícia (Lisbon, 12/09/2025) provides a detailed analysis of the geopolitical situation involving Russia, the European Union, and NATO. Here are some key points:

1. Strategic Timing by Putin: The text highlights how Vladimir Putin strategically timed a drone attack on Poland just before the annual State of the Union address by Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission 1. This move is portrayed as a calculated effort to disrupt and challenge the EU and NATO 1.

2. EU's Role in Defense: The document discusses the limited but crucial role of the European Commission in defense matters, particularly in proposing sanctions and managing hybrid conflicts 1. The 19th sanctions package, which includes the use of interest from Russian sovereign deposits to fund Ukrainian military and administrative expenses, is a significant point 1.

3. Military and Financial Programs: The text mentions the SAFE program, which allocates €150 billion to enhance military capacity and cooperation among EU member states 1. This is seen as a step towards strengthening the European pillar of NATO and balancing relations with the US 1.

4. Information Warfare: The importance of combating misinformation and strategic narratives is emphasized 1. The text argues that Europe needs to invest more in communication to explain the Russian threat to its citizens, especially as the US withdraws from joint efforts against Russian disinformation campaigns 1.

5. Human Rights and International Cooperation: The document also touches on the EU's commitment to human rights, social justice, and international cooperation 1. It calls for sanctions against extremist Israeli actions and diplomatic initiatives to promote peace in Gaza and Palestine 1.

Overall, the text is well-structured and provides a comprehensive overview of the current geopolitical challenges and the EU's strategic responses. It effectively combines analysis with specific examples and proposed measures.

Is there anything specific you would like to discuss or any particular feedback you are looking for? 😊

1: From your document.

China comes to Poland

 A drone that appears to be a Chinese-designed Gerbera - was found in Mniszkow, around 200 miles from the border between Poland and Ukraine. China's involvement side-by-side with Russia in the aggression against Ukraine seems obvious. Even if we consider that this drone looks very much as a decoy.