On March 18, Russian President Vladimir Putin held a telephone conversation with President of the United States Donald Trump, confirming his fundamental commitment to finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Putin expressed willingness to thoroughly work out possible solutions in cooperation with the American partners, aimed at reaching a settlement that would be comprehensive, reliable, and lasting, and, naturally, take into account the essential need to eliminate the root causes of the crisis, as well as Russia’s legitimate security interests.
Concerning US President’s proposal to declare a 30-day ceasefire, the Russian side outlined a number of significant points regarding ensuring effective control over a possible ceasefire along the entire frontline, as well as the need to stop the forced mobilisation in Ukraine and rearming the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Putin, however, insisted on a number of strict conditions, and making progress towards its resolution through political and diplomatic means. During the conversation, Donald Trump put forward a proposal for the parties to mutually refrain from strikes on energy infrastructure for 30 days. Vladimir Putin responded favourably to the proposal and immediately gave the relevant order to the Russian troops.
Both leaders expressed mutual interest in normalising the bilateral ties in light of the special responsibility for ensuring global security and stability borne by both Russia and the United States. Within that context, Russia and the United States would establish cooperation, aimed at fostering potential ties of mutual interest in economy and energy.
South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa, with multitude of conflicts at home, is also gearing to host peace talks with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in May. Full of assertive optimism and energy, Ramaphosa envisioned to engage in a new diplomatic negotiations after previous unsuccessful stark attempts in 2023, which Russian official argued the ten-point steps were not formulated on paper, and worse could not be implemented. Ramaphosa headed, at that time, an African Peace Initiative group to Kyiv, Ukraine and St. Petersburg, Russia.
Under the an approval by the State Duma and Federation Council, and under assigned presidential decree, Moscow’s full-scale ‘special military operation’ began in late February 2022. Over the past few years, BRICS (Brazil, India, China and South Africa) have said BRICS would continue to pursue “a lasting peace to end the Ukrainian crisis.” BRICS members have been active with talks and negotiations, but without any practical results, and without any visible signs for establishing relative peace and/or anytime soon would be realized.
Several reports have indicated that Russia utterly rejected a European-led ceasefire deal that would have ended the war in Ukraine. Even as staunch advocate of multipolar world, BRICS suggested peace-plan proposals were also trashed, particularly those from China, India and South Africa. After ascending to political power, President Donald Trump strategically moving to deliver peace in Ukraine, simultaneously eyeing corporate deals to exploit natural resources, while Elon Musk (DOGE) pushing for extending government business to the region, Russia’s backyard.
South Africa has taken over the G20 presidency, outlined diverse measures to overcome global economic instability, address deepening poverty, pursue economic development and growth, and lowering developing countries’ debts, narrow the gap between developing countries and the advanced world. Besides these however, South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa, within the context of the power of G20 agenda, plans a comprehensive ‘peace trip’ to Russia and Ukraine in May. Despite that fact that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Kremlin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov mocked South Africa’s ten-point proposal in mid-June 2023, Ramaphosa has still expressed optimism about upcoming peace talks with Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy, purposely aimed at ending the escalating crisis in this former Soviet republic of Ukraine.
For instance, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said after the three-hour meeting that the Africa’s peace plan consisted of ten (10) elements, but “was not formulated on paper.” Lavrov added that the African delegation had not brought for the Russian leader any message from Zelenskyy. Lavrov was not alone, but was joined by Dmitry Peskov. “The peace initiative proposed by African countries is very difficult to implement, difficult to compare positions,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.
On 17th June 2023, President of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa; the then Chairperson of the African Union and Comoros president, Ghazali Othman; then President of Senegal, Macky Sall; President of Zambia, Hakainde Hichilema and Prime Minister of Egypt, Mostafa Madbouly arrived in St. Petersburg to discuss the African peace initiative. In addition, the delegation included representatives of Uganda and Congo.
The key aim of the African peace mission primarily was to propose “confidence-building measures” in order to facilitate peace between the two countries. It was to seek a peaceful settlement of the conflict which began 24th February 2022.
Ramaphosa made the proposal hoping to convince Russia and Ukraine to opt for dialogue, find a solution to the conflict. “We would like to propose that this war must be settled through negotiations and through diplomatic means. The war cannot go on forever. All wars have to be settled and come to an end at some stage. And we are here to communicate this very clear message because the war is having a negative impact on the African continent, and indeed on many other countries around the world,” emphasized Ramaphosa, and further underlined that Russia has primarily violated Ukraine’s territorial integrity and its political sovereignty which it attained in 1991 after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
In that mid-June, talking to leaders of seven African countries in St. Petersburg, Putin interrupted the presentations to explain the concept and the reasons behind the special military action in Ukraine. Putin explained that Russia initially would not “occupy” the territory of Ukraine. On the other side, Russia wanted simply to protect its Russian-language speaking population in Eastern Ukraine. But in the end, Russia has taken “full control” over the southern region as well as the Eastern Donbas region off Ukraine.
China’s Peace Proposals On Rocks
A 12-point peace proposal Beijing offered on the Russia-Ukraine’s one-year anniversary did little to change anything, Moreso Russia often referred to China as trusted and reliable partner in BRICS+. For the discussions here, it is necessary to consider carefully here, in the context the China’s Global Security Initiative (GSI) that could play important role in resolving he Russia-Ukraine crisis and many others around the world. In the first place, China prominently places “cooperation” as the key component in its foreign policy, as oppose to Russia that is confrontational and yet talk about multipolar – in fact ‘multipolar’ in its basic sense means inclusive and integrated approach to global developments including conflict resolutions.
According to the concept, the Global Security Initiative aims at eliminating the root causes of international conflicts, improve global security governance, encourage joint international efforts to bring more stability and certainty to a volatile and changing era, and promote durable peace and development in the world.
The concept is guided by six commitments or pillars, which are
(i) pursuing common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security;
(ii) respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries;
(iii) adhering to the purposes and principles of the UN Charter;
(iv) taking the legitimate security concerns of all countries seriously;
(v) peacefully resolving differences and disputes between countries through dialogue and consultation; and
(vi) maintaining security in both traditional and non-traditional domains.
Gleaning from these core principles, it’s safe to say that the GSI could and probably would become a catalyst for the world to chart a new path to building sustainable peace, stability and development. The Global Security Initiative (GSI) was first proposed by Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference on April 21, 2022.
Trump-Putin’s Peace Formula
President Donald Trump has been making conscious steps toward resolving the Russia-Ukraine crisis. United States set the ball rolling, highlighting the essence for leveraging both to comprehensive economic opportunities in Russia and Ukraine. It sets eyes on exploring natural resources (i.e. signing an agreement on minerals) with Washington, while at the same time negotiating for U.S. corporate business return to Russian market. Russia has show reciprocity, within the context of its frequently parroted policy of ’emerging multipolar world order’ and guaranteed the stage for constructive engagement with the US president. As expected, for the love of American dream, Kremlin readily appointed new ambassador to the United States and also would despatch diplomatic staff to New York and Washington.
Bilateral relations worsened after Kremlin despatched troops under ‘special military operation’ in former Soviet republic of Ukraine in February 2022. Ukraine attained its political freedom after the collapse of the power Soviet Union. At the present time, Russia and United States are presumably looking to reset their bilateral relations, and in particular, the latest developments undoubtedly portray this fact, which is increasingly becoming a geopolitical reality. Concretely, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov together with the MFA Spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce agreed, in official statements, to continue working towards restoring communication between the United States and Russia.
Despite some elements of discontent and disagreements, Putin’s emphasis on ‘long-term peace’ rather than a ‘temporary ceasefire’ explicit implies insistence on a permanent settlement. Putin mentioned multiple times, and most importantly, the necessity to address the ‘root-causes’ of the crisis, and among them, straightforward underlined NATO and its allies not to endorse Ukraine’s membership. In addition, NATO must as far as possible keep off Russia’s territorial backyard.
With obstacles still persistent in getting the ‘peace-process’ implemented in Ukraine, Donald Trump’s and Vladimir Putin’s specially-focused discussion on March 18th, has certain credible conditions that could affect a full-fledged ceasefire. Trump’s primary position has been, through the 30-day temporary pause in fighting as a confidence-building measure for both sides to hammer out a longer-term peace plan, and to ensure Ukraine’s political sovereignty and territorial integrity, within the legal framework of the UN Security Council.
In pursuit of its goals, Kremlin explicitly demanded that Ukraine renounce joining NATO, sharply cut its army, and protect Russian language and culture to keep the country in Moscow’s orbit. Putin has repeatedly emphasized the need to “remove the root causes of the crisis” — a reference to the Kremlin’s demand to roll back a NATO military buildup near Russian borders that it describes as a major threat to its security. Putin made these in his speech before both State Duma and the Federation Council at the time of launching the full-scale ‘special military operation’ on Feb. 24, 2022.
How Ukraine Lost Four Regions
On 23rd-27th September 2022, the republics of Donetsk and Lugansk (DPR and LPR) as well as the Kherson region and the liberated territories of the Zaporozhye Region, held referendum to join Russia. In all of these regions, the overwhelming majority of voters favoured becoming part of the Russian Federation. These regions have been a thorny question these past several years, and with the accusation against Kiev for committing the highest level of human rights including intimidation, discrimination and maltreatment of Russian-speaking population in the Eastern Ukraine.
“In accordance with the generally recognized principles and norms of international law, recognizing and confirming the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples enshrined in the United Nations Charter, and taking into consideration the will expressed by the people of the Kherson region at the referendum held on September 27, I hereby order that the state sovereignty and independence of the Kherson region be recognized,” the president’s decree on recognition of the Kherson region said, and made available on its the official Kremlin’s website.
United Nations’ Reactions to Annexation
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres pointed out that the UN position on the referendum as unequivocal and slammed, in unreserved terms, the accession unto the Russian Federation. Secretary General Antonio Guterres said: “Any decision to proceed with the annexation of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions of Ukraine would have no legal value and deserves to be condemned.”
“The UN Charter is clear,” Guterres stressed, “Any annexation of a State’s territory by another State resulting from the threat or use of force is a violation of the Principles of the UN Charter and international law. The United Nations General Assembly is equally clear.”
He further stressed that “Russian Federation, as one of the five permanent members of the Security Council, shares a particular responsibility to respect the Charter. It cannot be reconciled with the international legal framework. It stands against everything the international community is meant to stand for. It flouts the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations. It is a dangerous escalation. It has no place in the modern world. It must not be accepted.”
Guterres pointed out that the UN position on the referendum is unequivocal. “We are fully committed to the sovereignty, unity, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine, within its internationally recognized borders, in accordance with the relevant UN resolution. I want to underscore that the so-called referenda in the occupied regions were conducted during active armed conflict, in areas under Russian occupation, and outside Ukraine’s legal and constitutional framework. They cannot be called a genuine expression of the popular will.”
“Any decision by Russia to go forward will further jeopardize the prospects for peace. It will prolong the dramatic impacts on the global economy, especially developing countries and hinder our ability to deliver life-saving aid across Ukraine and beyond. It is high time to step back from the brink. Now more than ever, we must work together to end this devastating and senseless war and uphold the UN Charter and international law,” Guterres concluded.
Forward March With Russia’s Security Challenges
In his sparkling speech in the Kremlin, Putin said Moscow would protect the newly incorporated regions by “all available means” and vehemently insisted that the question of handing them back would never be discussed and renegotiated. He clearly portrayed the special military operation and the snapshot referendum as part of efforts to reclaim Russia’s great power status and, on the other hand, to counter global Western domination. “History has called us to a battlefield to fight for our people, for the grand historic Russia, for future generations,” he said.
With Ukraine vowing to take back all occupied territory and Russia pledging to defend its gains, threatening nuclear-weapon use and mobilizing an additional 300,000 troops despite protests, the two nations are on an increasingly escalatory collision course.
Over these years Putin, concerned about security risks and lack of security guarantees from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) observing its promise of not expanding further eastward, embarked on “special military operation” ultimately aims at “demilitarization and denazification” of the former Soviet republic of Ukraine on February 24 after both Federation Council and the State Duma (legislative chambers) approved and gave the greenlight for this operation.
Undelivered Expectations and Forward-Looking Peace
As a new world is awakening to the worsening situation, global leaders still believe that all countries have to respect and operate within the confines of international law. That all countries must be guided profoundly by the principles of non-interference in internal matters, respect for national sovereignty and territorial integrity. South Africa, China and Brazil, India, China and South Africa (BRICS+) have proposed their “peace formula” of in attempts resolving Russia-Ukraine crisis during the last couple of years. BRICS+ has not been successful, in principle, to secure and sustain global peace as outlined in their final summit declarations.
As frequently resonated ’emerging multipolar world’ – the prefix ‘multi’ and the 3-worded phrase requires majority decision over existing challenges of global peace, development and economic growth. Time is still on the side of key global powers for negotiating a ceasefire, as a primary step towards full-fledged peace between Russia and Ukraine. Could South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa succeed, after Donald Trump who has made an extraordinary return to the White House and opned a new geopolitical chapter in the world? If not South Africa as part of present-day well-praised BRICS+ then we leave the chance for the United States. With admirable determination to secure a sustainable peace through negotiations and unwavering commitment to Russia-Ukraine and second term foreign policy with unique approach to geo-political situation, that would Make America Great Again (MAGA) under the 47th U.S. President Donald John Trump.
