27 APRIL 2024
Die Welt, a German media outlet, has stated that a peace agreement could have been signed a few weeks after the start of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The conditions for ending the war then were spelled out in a 17-page draft agreement that the parties agreed on on 15 April 2022. Russia demanded neutrality from Ukraine, and a limit on the number of troops, weapons, equipment and aircraft. The then-occupied territories were to remain with Russia.
Source: Die Welt with reference to the document at their disposal
Details: Only a few points remained unagreed upon, and they were supposed to be discussed personally by Russian leader Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at a summit, but this never happened.
Die Welt noted that immediately after the start of the full-scale war, the Russian and Ukrainian sides began negotiations to end combat actions. Moscow tried to force Kyiv to surrender at the negotiating table.
In this treaty, Ukraine pledged to maintain “permanent neutrality”. By doing so, Kyiv renounced any membership in military alliances. Thus, the country’s accession to NATO would have been ruled out.
Ukraine agreed to never “receive, produce or acquire” nuclear weapons, to not allow foreign weapons and troops into the country, and to not grant access to its military infrastructure, including airfields and seaports, to any other country.
In addition, Kyiv had to refrain from conducting military exercises with foreign participation and from participating in any military conflicts. According to Article 3 of the document, nothing explicitly prevented Kyiv from becoming a member of the EU.
In response, Russia promised not to attack Ukraine again. To give Kyiv this assurance, Moscow agreed that the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, which are the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China and Russia itself, could provide Ukraine with comprehensive security guarantees. In Article 5 of the draft treaty, Kyiv and Moscow agreed on a mechanism reminiscent of NATO’s assistance provisions.
In the event of an “armed attack on Ukraine”, the guarantor countries would be obliged to provide Kyiv with support in its right to self-defence, enshrined in the UN Charter, within a maximum of three days. This assistance could be provided through “joint action” of all or some of the guarantors’ powers. The treaty had to be ratified by each signatory state in accordance with international law.
Thus, the two sides developed a mechanism that differs significantly from the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. At that time, Russia had already assured Ukraine of its territorial integrity. Western states promised Kyiv support in case of an attack but did not guarantee it.
However, the security guarantees being considered in the spring of 2022 would have required the approval of the United States, China, the United Kingdom and France in a second phase. Russia also wanted to include Belarus, and Kyiv wanted to include Türkiye. However, the first goal of the negotiators was to create unity between Kyiv and Moscow so that the text could be used as a basis for multilateral negotiations.
Crimea and the port of Sevastopol were to be excluded from security guarantees. By doing so, Kyiv was practically handing over control of the peninsula to Russia.
It is not clear from the document which part of Ukraine’s east was to be excluded from the guarantor states’ promise. The relevant areas were marked in red. In the Istanbul communiqué, Kyiv supposedly agreed to exclude parts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts that Russia had already occupied before the full-scale war. The Russian delegation, on the other hand, insisted that the borders be determined personally by Putin and Zelenskyy and marked on a map. The Ukrainian delegation rejected this option.
Russia demanded that in the event of an attack, all guarantor states would have to give consent to activate the assistance mechanism. This would have given Moscow a veto to override the defence mechanism. In addition, Moscow rejected Ukraine’s demand that the guarantor states could establish a no-fly zone over Ukraine in the event of an attack.
During the talks, Russia signalled its readiness to withdraw from Ukraine, but not from Crimea and the part of Donbas that was to be excluded from security guarantees. Putin and Zelenskyy were to discuss the details of the withdrawal directly. This was confirmed to Die Welt by two members of the Ukrainian negotiation delegation independently of each other.
The issue of the size of the Ukrainian army in the future also remained unresolved. Kyiv partially responded to Russia’s demands for demilitarisation. Moscow demanded that the Ukrainian army be reduced to 85,000 soldiers, and currently, there are about a million servicemen. Ukraine proposed the number of 250,000 soldiers.
Opinions also differed on the number of military equipment. Russia demanded that the number of tanks be reduced to 342, while Kyiv wanted to keep it at 800. Ukraine wanted to reduce the number of armoured vehicles to 2,400, while Russia demanded that only 1,029 be left.
There was also a big difference in the numbers of artillery pieces. Moscow planned to allow Ukraine to keep 519, while Kyiv wanted 1,900. Kyiv wanted to retain 600 multiple-launch rocket systems with a range of up to 280 kilometres, while Russia wanted 96 pieces with a maximum range of 40 kilometres. Russia wanted to reduce the number of mortars to 147 and anti-tank missiles to 333, while Kyiv insisted that the number be reduced to 1,080 and 2,000 respectively.
In addition, Russia demanded the destruction of Ukrainian aircraft. Moscow demanded that 102 fighters and 35 helicopters be left, while Kyiv insisted on 160 jets and 144 helicopters. According to Russian ideas, there should be two warships, while according to Ukrainian ideas, there should be eight of them.
Die Welt stressed that the draft treaty shows how close Ukraine and Russia were to a possible peace deal in April 2022. But after the promising summit in Istanbul, Moscow put forward the following demands, which Kyiv did not agree to.
Thus, Russia demanded that Ukraine make Russian the second state language, lift mutual sanctions and stop lawsuits in international courts. Kyiv also had to ban “fascism, Nazism and aggressive nationalism” in Ukraine.
As Welt learned from several diplomats involved in the negotiations, there was great interest in the agreement in the spring of 2022. After the failure of its offensive on Kyiv, Russia withdrew from Ukraine’s north and announced that it wanted to focus on gaining territory in the east.
Die Welt quoted an unnamed member of the Ukrainian delegation as saying: “It was the best deal we could have had.” Die Welt believes that even after more than two years of the full-scale war, the deal still looks favourable in retrospect.
Quote: “Ukraine has been on the defensive for several months now and has suffered heavy losses. Looking back, we can say that Ukraine was in a stronger negotiating position then than it is now. If the war had ended about two months after it started, it would have saved countless lives.”
More details: At the time, negotiators predicted that Zelenskyy and Putin would sign the document in April 2022.
Die Welt writes that Davyd Arakhamiia, a member of the Ukrainian delegation, suggested in November 2023 why the leaders of the two countries had not met. The then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson arrived in Kyiv on 9 April and said that London would “not sign anything” with Putin and that Ukraine should continue fighting. Later, Johnson rejected ever saying that. However, there are reasons to believe that the proposal to provide security guarantees to Ukraine in agreement with Russia failed at this stage.
Support UP or become our patron!
“Die Welt believes that even after more than two years of the full-scale war, the deal still looks favourable in retrospect.”
Sure, many lives could’ve been saved, but at what price? What price is there for freedom and peace? Reading this peace deal makes me cringe.
It seems that being ignorant of putin and his criminal system is a prerequisite to becoming a German journalist, at least at Die Welt. The fact that putin and his ilk have broken virtually every international law and agreement doesn’t even come into consideration when formulating their opinions at this news outlet. They totally disregard the most important fact of all; mafia land breaking the agreement called the Budapest Memorandum, which had already guaranteed Ukraine’s sovereignty. What worth would another deal have under such a criminal regime?
I wonder, are the journalists at Die Welt on hard drugs, drunk, just plain stupid, or pro-ruskies?
“Ukraine has been on the defensive for several months now and has suffered heavy losses. Looking back, we can say that Ukraine was in a stronger negotiating position then than it is now.”
Die Welt seems to have missed the point about how the cockroaches have suffered lots more loses in meat and equipment than Ukraine. Ukraine also regained lots of territory since the peace negotiations happened in 2022. It even destroyed a third of the mafia Black Sea fleet since then and regained an island despite not having a navy. It’s also in the process of eliminating mafia land’s major source of income, after the sanctions from the combined West utterly failed to do so. And so much more.
Sure, the country could be in better shape, but this is largely thanks to Western inaction, lethargy, cowardice, and stupidity, not because of Ukraine. With new military aid coming back into the country, we should wait and see what will happen next.
In conclusion, the people at Die Welt should refrain from making any comments about topics they don’t know anything about. And, let’s face it, when it comes to military matters, Germany is a loser. It’s a has-been. The days are over in which it was a military powerhouse. Die Welt reflects that very much so.
If true, it’s nothing more than a “surrender to putler” document.
They would get EU membership out of it?
So what? Orbanistan is an EU member and simultaneously a putlerstan satelite; little different from Belarus. That would have been Ukraine’s abysmal fate.
No negotiations with putler; ever. No “land for peace”; ever.
Only the Zel peace plan is acceptable. Nothing else.
“After the failure of its offensive on Kyiv, Russia withdrew from Ukraine’s north and announced that it wanted to focus on gaining territory in the east. ”
That’s one way to describe a shambolic retreat by the orcs. I assume they did the same in Kharkiv Oblast and Kherson too. Ukraine was 100% correct by not signing this one sided surrender document. As sure as eggs is eggs, this would have allowed the orcs to rearm and setup Ukraine for a massive invasion with Ukraine receiving no help from anyone.
You’re right.
“If the war had ended about two months after it started, it would have saved countless lives.”
That statement is rather myopic because it would have enslaved Ukraine for decades and Ukrainians would have reassumed their position like it was during WWII…the head of the Kremlin spear.
Do these people really think that Russia would have withdrawn from Kyiv and Kharkiv oblasts, and gave up the other territories it had infested?
Putler is waiting for the return of Trump.
He expects Trump to offer peace in return for partition.
No Ukrainian leader could accept that, so the war would rage on; perhaps with the U.S. cutting support or dropping out altogether.
Here’s what sensible statesmen would do at this critical stage:
The Democrat and GOP candidates could issue a joint declaration:
“Whichever one of us wins in November, the policy of the US to Ukraine will not change. The US will provide unequivocal support to Ukraine until victory.
Therefore voters should make their decision based on the myriad other issues that we face today, in which there are clear differences of position.”
Statesmen would do that. Unfortunately neither of the candidates are statesmen.
No, they are not statesmen. One belongs in a nursing home, the other in prison.
Wasn’t that debunked last year?
https://www.logicallyfacts.com/en/analysis/ukraine-russia-peace-treaty-2022
What exactly was debunked?
I think this article was published last year, it’s old news, I’m not sure why it was published again.
The Welt piece is dated 26th of April 2024.
What I meant was this info was published in previous articles. Not necessarily by this outlet.
It’s a current opinion piece by the Welt, foccusser.
This is the kind of second-rate garbage journalism that makes people think that a peace with mafia land is possible through negotiations. That’s what I’ve been saying that the press is not doing its job right to educate the people properly. How can they if they themselves are blind, irresponsible morons?
Strange how this peace deal has resurfaced after Ukraine are due to receive massive aid from the US, the UK, F16s and up to a million shells.
Some people in the West don’t want to carry on with the war, it seems. It also seems that their stupidity is beyond comprehension. With mafia land’s past behavior in clear sight, it shouldn’t be so hard to guess that any deal made by the mafiosi is worth as much as dog shit stuck on your shoe.
Guess their bribes are not coming through from Russia now, due to the sanctions on Russian banks.
Yeah, maybe that’s the reason why they are doing this. It wouldn’t be much of a surprise.