The War in Ukraine: Its Impact on the World Economic and Energy Sectors

Updated version

The War in Ukraine: Its Impact on the World Economic and Energy Sector

Corresponding Author: ?Jorge Morales Pedraza

Author e-mail address: [email protected] or [email protected]

Author affiliation: Senior Consultant and founder of Morales Project Consulting. Senior Independent Researcher on International Affairs.

Abstract: Many people believe that the origin of the current war between Russia and Ukraine, called by the Russian government a “Special military operation,” began on November 24, 2013. On that day, the then-president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, suspended the signing of an association agreement with the European Union (E.U.) scheduled for November 29, 2013. The announcement of suspending the E.U. Association Agreement signature catalyzes the population’s discontent, promoted and supported openly by the E.U. and the United States (U.S.). The protests culminated in a coup d’état against President Yanukovych and the rise to power of a group of politicians who were supporters of Ukraine's entry as a full member of the E.U. and NATO, a position that Russia strongly rejected because this action would affect its own security.

This paper has been prepared with the result of an investigation of Ukraine’s war, its origin, consequences, participants, and impact on multiple sectors of the world economy, especially the energy sector. Based on the outcome of this research, a group of proposals has been identified associated with a ceasefire arrangement and a diplomatic negotiation to end the Ukraine war.

Keywords: Ukraine war; Russian special military operation; Russian invasion; energy sector, fossil fuels; renewable energy; electricity generation; green economy; peace proposals;

?Introduction

???? This article has been prepared with the result of an investigation of Ukraine’s war, its origins, consequences, participants, and impact on multiple sectors of the world economy, especially the energy sector. Based on the outcome of this research, the article stresses the importance of opening a negotiation process that could end the confrontation between the U.S., the E.U., NATO, Ukraine, and other Western countries against Russia and identifies some realistic issues to be discussed between the parties during the negotiation process to search for a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine war.

Research Methodology and Findings

????? A review of the published literature on the Ukraine war was conducted to prepare this article. This review aims to provide the reader with the most relevant updated data and information and a deep impartial analysis of the Ukraine war situation and its impact on the world economy, particularly in the energy sector, and the importance of opening a negotiation process to stop all military actions in order to discuss a lasting peace and security agreement to officially end the Ukrainian war, taking into consideration the legitime security concerns of Russia, Ukraine, the E.U., NATO, and the U.S.

???? The methodology used to prepare the manuscript is the so-called "Historical-Logical Method," which allows the Author to describe the facts through their logical development, in this case, the evolution of the Russian Special military operation, its causes, and impact on multiple sectors of the world economy, especially the energy sector, and the importance of opening a negotiation process to stop all military actions in order to discuss a lasting peace and security agreement to officially end the Ukrainian war.

Historical Background

???? Many people believe that the roots of the current war between Russia and Ukraine (see Fig. 1), called by the Russian government a “Special military operation,” and by Ukraine and others a “Russian invasion or aggression,” must be found not on February 24, 2022, when the special military operation began, but on November 24, 2013. On that day, the then-president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, suspended the signing of an association agreement with the European Union (E.U.) scheduled for November 29, 2013. The suspension of the signature of the E.U. Association Agreement was due to strong pressure from Russia, which offered him significant economic compensation, including a gas price reduction, if the mentioned agreement was not signed. The announcement of the suspension of the E.U. Association Agreement signature catalyzes the population’s discontent, promoted and supported openly by the E.U. and the United States (U.S.), as shown in Oliver Stone’s video entitled “Ukraine on Fire,” especially in the country’s west, where Kyiv is located and where most Ukrainian living there are pro-western, and on other articles published by the Western media on the same issue.

Source: hispanopress.blogspot.com

Fig. 1: Map of Ukraine

???? On November 21, 2013, a series of pro-European demonstrations were carried out in Kyiv to support the signature of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the E.U. (Al Jazeera, 2013). On November 24, 2013, tens of thousands of Ukrainians demonstrated against the government in Kyiv’s Independence Square (Maidan Square) for its decision not to sign the mentioned agreement. After several weeks of protests and riots (see Fig. 2), on the night of February 19 and 20, 2014, President Yanukovych and the main opposition leaders, Vitali Klichkó, Arseni Yatseniuk, and Oleh Tyagnibok, agreed to a truce and the dismantling of the barricades previously placed in the capital square as a measure to contain the police forces.

???? On February 21, 2014, after the so-called “Black Thursday” (February 20, 2014), in which more than 60 protesters died, an agreement was reached between the Ukrainian government and the opposition leaders to advance the elections, constitute a transitional government, the return to Ukraine’s Constitution of 2004, and curb violence (El Pais, 2014). Despite the agreement reached between the Ukrainian government and the opposition leaders, demonstrations against the government continued. The video prepared by Oliver Stone mentioned before shows the direct involvement in the revolt the Maidan Square of Victoria Nuland, Assistant of the U.S. Secretary of State, Senator McCain of the U.S. Congress, and the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, in addition to several ONG that provide financial resources to the opposition groups.

Source: Euromaidan. (2022, November 9). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromaidan

Fig. 2: Euromaidan protest in Kyiv, February 18, 2014

???? In the early hours of February 21-22, 2014, President Yanukovych left the capital without informing the parliament what he would do and disappeared in an unknown direction. What President Yanukovych did was to fly to Moscow in what was later deemed an opposition coup d’état. On the morning of February 22, 2014, Verkhovna Rada (the Ukrainian parliament) removed him from office for “abandonment of his constitutional functions” and took control of the country by voting and by a constitutional majority to return to the 2004 Constitution, agreed the day before between the government and opposition leaders. After the return to the parliamentary political system, Oleksandr Turchinov assumed the presidency of the parliament. The next day, Turchinov was appointed acting prime minister to carry out the coordination of government tasks. On February 28, 2014, Yanukovych reappeared in Rostov-on-Don (Russia), denouncing an alleged “coup d'état” against his government (El Pais, 2014).

???? On the eve of the Euromaidan riot, the Ukrainian population was virtually divided: 38% of Ukrainians supported a partnership with Russia, while 37.8% preferred one with the E.U. (Bonet, 2013). At the same time, 41% of Ukrainians considered that the priority for Ukraine should be to become an E.U. member, while 33% favored a customs union with Russia. The greatest support for integration with the E.U. was found in western Ukraine (81%) and Kyiv (about 75%); support was reduced to 56% in central Ukraine, 30% in the South and the Crimean Peninsula, and 18% in the East (Research & Branding Group, 2013).

???? On May 25, 2014, one of the richest men in the country, Petro Poroshenko, declared victory in the presidential elections in Ukraine and accused pro-Russian separatists of preventing people from voting in the East of the country. On June 27, 2014, President Poroshenko signed the Association Agreement with the E.U. and warned Russia that Ukraine would not waver in its determination to become an E.U. and also a NATO member (Thompson, 2015). In addition, the Ukraine government began to approve several laws and regulations with a discriminatory character that directly affected the pro-Russian separatists and other minorities living in the country. The pro-Russian separatists of the Donbas region (see Fig. 3) rejected the new Ukrainian government elected and the laws and regulations adopted and began a struggle, first defending its right to be transformed into an autonomous region within Ukraine's sovereignty and later to become an independent popular republic within Russia. All elements to start a civil war between the Ukrainian government and armed forces supported by the U.S., the E.U., and NATO on one side, and the pro-Russia militia separatists of the Donbas, a territory with an important Russian-speaking population supported by Russia on the other, were already present in 2014. Undoubtedly, the beginning of a civil war in 2014 increased the possibility of a direct war between Russia and Ukraine, a conflict that began on February 24, 2022, with the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Source: Wikipedia Minsk Agreements

Fig. 3: The Donbas region

The Minsk Agreements

???? In May 2014, pro-Russian separatist groups in the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces proclaimed themselves “People’s Republics” and demanded the independence of Ukraine and integration into the Russian Federation, a request that the Russian government rejected at that time. The Ukrainian government, determined to militarily defeat the pro-Russian separatist militia of both republics, began a civil war that lasted eight years without achieving its objectives of regaining control of the Donbas region.

???? Two attempts were made to stop the internal conflict between Ukraine's armed forces and the pro-Russian separatist militia, the first in 2014 and the second in 2015. Two agreements called “Minsk Agreements ?(I and II)” were signed, one in 2014 and the second in 2015, in order to stop the civil war in the Donbas region between the recently elected Ukrainian government and armed forces, supported by the U.S., the E.U., and NATO members and other Western countries on one side, and pro-Russian separatist militia of the Donbas region, supported by Russia government and armed forces on the other. The abovementioned agreements were adopted to stop the fight (Rahman, 2022), but both failed to achieve this objective.

???? The first Minsk Agreement, also known as the Minsk Protocol or Minks I Agreement, was signed on September 5, 2014, by Russia, Ukraine, and the so-called “People’s Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk” representatives under the auspices of the Organization for? Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The Minsk I Agreement did not achieve the goal of stopping the civil war and was repeatedly violated by the Ukrainian government, according to the Russian government.

???? To overcome the situation created by the failure of the Minsk I Agreement, between February 11 and 12, 2015, the Minsk II Agreement was negotiated between the countries involved in the Minsk I Agreement and with the additional participation of France and Germany (see Fig. 4). A new immediate and complete ceasefire was approved, as well as the decision to open a dialogue between the Ukrainian government and the pro-Russian separatists in order to find a political solution to their differences. The heads of state of Russia, Ukraine, France, and Germany held the Paris Summit on October 2, 2015, to agree on withdrawing heavy weapons from both sides. Despite the signature of the Minsk II Agreement by the Ukrainian government and the pro-Russian separatists, ceasefire violations of this agreement persisted.

Source: Wikipedia Minsk Agreements

Fig. 4: Leaders of Belarus, Russia, Germany, France, and Ukraine in a summit in Minsk, Belarus, for the signature of the Minsk II Agreement

???? On October 19, 2016, a meeting in Berlin of the Normandy Quartet —composed of France, Germany, Russia, Ukraine, and the ?OSCE, was organized by Germany to stop the fighting and resolve the Donbas conflict politically. The meeting ended without progress. Why? Former German Chancellor A. Markel, in an interview with Spiegel at the end of 2021, stated that the real objective of signing the Minsk I and II Agreements by France, Germany, and Ukraine was not to stop the war but to gain time to allow the Ukrainian army to be better prepared to fight and defeat the pro-Russian separatist groups in the Donbas civil war, and thus retake control of the entire region (Schwarz, 2022).

???? On December 10, 2019, President Putin and the new Ukrainian President, Volodymir Zelenski, agreed in Paris to resume the peace process in the Donbas region. On December 29, 2019, Kyiv and pro-Russian separatist representatives exchanged 200 prisoners of war.

????? It is important to note that after signing the Minsk II Agreement, ultra-nationalist protests broke out in Ukraine, opposing the implementation of the abovementioned agreement. The protesters accused President “Zelensky of capitulation to Russian pressure and threatened to force him to resign” (Rahman, 2022). The fear of losing popular and U.S. support, as well as being removed from power, made President Zelensky “adopt tougher rhetoric toward Russia, blaming it for the problems in the Donbas region instead of addressing the real issue” (Rahman, 2022).

???? The failure of the Minsk I and II Agreements and the tougher rhetoric of the new Ukrainian government, the U.S., the E.U., and NATO, among other Western countries against Russia, closed all possibilities to find a diplomatic solution to end the Donbas civil war and created the conditions to solve the Donbas conflict politically, according to Russia political and military interest and the wishes of the majority of the Donbas population[1], reflected in the results of the referendums held in the Donbas region before the start of Russia’s special military operation on February 24, 2022.

NATO Expansion Towards East????

An important element to take into account when analyzing the reasons that pushed Russia to invade Ukraine is the expansion of NATO toward the East. The process of NATO's extension to the East can be divided into two periods. The first period covers from 1952 until the disintegration of the USSR in 1991 and is characterized by the fact that none of the countries that joined the organization had borders with the USSR. The second period covers from 1991 to the present day and is characterized by incorporating certain countries that bordered Russia for the first time in the organization's history, considered by Russia a real threat to its security. According to Jeffrey Sachs's interview about NATO's arrogance toward Russia, the superpower war in Ukraine, and China's rise, the main objective of NATO expansion towards the East was to surround Russia in the Black Sea with NATO members following a detailed plan prepared by Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Crater National Security Adviser, and published in 1977 in the Foreign Affairs journal.

NATO Expansion Before the Fall of the USSR

???? After the end of the Second World War, the world was divided into three blocks. One block was under U.S. control, another was under USSR control, and the third was established on September 1, 1955, called the “Non-Aligned Movement” with many countries outside the previous two blocks. Europe was divided into two parts, separated by an imaginary border Winston Churchill called the “Iron Curtain.”

???? Each of the three blocks, particularly those under the U.S. and the USSR control, began a political, ideological, economic, and military confrontation period to impede the expansion of the other block to new countries and regions, particularly Latin America, Asia, and Africa. This period was called the “Cold War.” To impede the expansion of the USSR block in Europe, on April 4, 1949, and in the context of the Cold War, the U.S. sat down with its allies, giving birth to a military organization called the “North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)” (see Fig. 6). NATO founding member countries were Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

????? A few years later, to neutralize NATO activities related to the containment of the expansion of the USSR in Europe and other regions of the world, the USSR and other socialist countries, with the same objectives that NATO, created a military organization called the “Warsaw Pact” on May 14, 1955. The original signatories to the Warsaw Pact were the Soviet Union, Albania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, and the German Democratic Republic.

?

Source: Sarkarilist/nato-members-list/

Fig. 6: NATO Members Map

???? The first NATO expansion was implemented in 1952 to incorporate Greece and Türkiye, reinforcing the southern flank of the Alliance. In 1955, after years of deliberations, the Federal Republic of Germany became the 15th NATO member. It was not an easy accession because most Germans living in the Federal Republic of Germany were against any form of the country's rearmament. Spain was the last country to join NATO in 1982 before the USSR’s collapse.

???? As can be seen, in 1995, none of the NATO members had borders with Russia. For this reason, at that time,? NATO did not represent a direct threat to the USSR's security. However, the situation began to change after the collapse of the USSR in 1991.

The Expansion of NATO After the Fall of the USSR

???? But if NATO was created to stop the USSR expansion and this country does not exist anymore, why is NATO still alive? NATO is, in reality, an extension of the U.S. armed forces created in 1949 to involve European countries to help this country prevent Soviet expansion in Europe while the U.S. stops the USSR expansion in other regions of the world.

????? For many analysts, military experts, and politicians, NATO expansion policy to the borders of Russia is the root of the current war in Ukraine. Why? The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 ended the Cold War period. The U.S. took advantage of the end of the Cold War to change NATO's expansion policy, now trying to convert the former members of the Warsaw Pact and other states that made up the socialist camp in Europe into members of the organization. The new NATO expansion policy toward the East ignored the original agreement made by the U.S. and other Western countries with the USSR in 1989 not to expand the organization to the East. After the collapse of the USSR in the 1990s, the U.S. administration of George H.W. Bush repeatedly assured the new Russian government that the U.S. would not seek to extend NATO to Eastern Europe, Central Asia, or the Caucasus. If the U.S. maintains its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, former President Bush stressed that not one inch of NATO's current military jurisdiction would extend in an easterly direction.

???? George Kennan, the original architect of U.S. foreign policy during the Cold War, said that expanding NATO toward the East would be the most fateful mistake of U.S. policy in the entire post-Cold War era. However, in a clear violation of the assurance given to Russia by the U.S. on the NATO expansion to the East and the recommendations submitted by a group of U.S. diplomats and politicians to the U.S. government on the same issue, 14 countries have become NATO members, most from Eastern Europe, in the last 22 years, some of them with borders with Russia for the first time since 1949 creating a new security situation to this country. The 1995 NATO Enlargement Study recommended inviting the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland to start talks at the 1997 Madrid Summit about a possible NATO membership of these three countries. Two years later, they became the first former Warsaw Pact members to join NATO, bringing the organization closer to the borders of Russia.

???? After the weak Russian response to this first NATO move to the East, the organization made another move and created the Membership Action Plan (MAP) in 1999. MAP's objective is to select which new countries could become members of the organization in the future and to advise and help them meet NATO’s requirements. According to the NATO treaty, participating in the MAP does not bind the Alliance to accept them as new members because this decision must be adopted unanimously by all NATO members.

???? In 2003, seven other countries in the former Soviet orbit, some of them with borders with Russia for the first time, staged the largest enlargement in NATO history. These countries are Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—the last three countries with borders with Russia. In 2009, Albania and Croatia also joined as NATO members. The last two countries to join NATO were Montenegro in 2017 and North Macedonia in 2020. Bosnia and Herzegovina have participated in MAP activities since 2010, but after two decades, the country is still waiting for the invitation to become a NATO member.

???? After the large NATO expansion briefly explained above, the threat of a possible military confrontation between NATO and Russia increased significantly, particularly after the Ukraine war. The decision of the Sweden and Finland governments to request NATO membership due to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, particularly in the case of Finland, which is now a full NATO member, will increase the tension between the organization and Russia even further, considering the large border between Finland and Russia (1,340 km) and the distance between the Finland border and San Petersburg, the second largest Russian city. As foreseen, the political, military, and economic tension between Finland and Russia has increased considerably, and the Finland government has closed all border routes between these two countries due they call an unusual increased flow of illegal migrants coming from Russia.

???? Finally, it is important to note the following: In line with NATO's decision to move to the East following the U.S. desire, at the 2008 NATO summit, several of its members applauded the interest of Ukraine and Georgia in becoming members of the Alliance. However, despite these two countries' interest in becoming NATO members, no concrete accession plan was adopted because some NATO members, particularly France and Germany, feared a strong Russian reaction to a new expansionist move by the Alliance near its borders, based on the continued warning statement of the Russian government to the Alliance not to continue its expansion policy to the East. NATO ignored the Russian warning, which resulted in two wars, one in 2008 in Georgia and the second in 2022 in Ukraine.

The War Between Russia and Ukraine????

???? After the failure of the Minsk I and II Agreements, a civil war broke out between the pro-Russian separatists of the Donbas region and the Ukrainian central government and armed forces, which lasted eight years. All attempts to end this war failed and convinced the Russian authorities that the civil war that had already claimed the lives of more than 14,000 people would not end at a negotiation table during the coming years. For this reason, the Russian government decided to protect the Russian minority in Donbas by using openly its own military forces.

???? From January to April 2021, Russia began moving troops to its borders with Ukraine and the Crimean Peninsula, annexed by Russia in 2014[2], in response to the failure to implement the Minks I and II Agreements, the continuation of the civil war in the Donbas region, and the clear intention of the Ukrainian government to become a NATO member, ignoring several warning given by the Russian government not to insist in this sensitive issue.

???? On December 3, 2021, the U.S. believed that Russia was preparing to invade Ukraine, and the invasion would occur "in early 2022," according to The Washington Post. The U.S. declared that Russia was deploying near the Ukrainian border up to 175,000 soldiers to carry out its plan to invade Ukraine. On December 16, 2021, the E.U. threatened Russia with drastic sanctions if it invaded Ukraine. On January 11, 2022, the U.S. and Russian representatives met in Geneva, Switzerland. The meeting ended without agreement on any issues discussed, particularly a possible invasion of Ukraine by Russian troops. Another meeting was held the following day between NATO and Russian representatives with the same results. After these two meetings, the Russian government started military maneuvers in southern Russia, the Caucasus, and the Crimean Peninsula. Other military maneuvers were scheduled to be carried out in Belarus near the border with Ukraine.

???? Ignoring all previous Russian warnings, the Ukrainian government reiterated its decision to become a NATO member and to solve the civil war in the Donbas region using military forces. After this declaration, the Russian government immediately declared that it would not tolerate it and reinforced the deployment of Russian troops on the border with Ukraine, Belarus, and the Black Sea. After the last warning, ignored by the Ukrainian government, the U.S., the E.U., and NATO members, Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022 (see Fig. 7).

Source: Global-strategy.org

Fig. 7: Russia's invasion of Ukraine

The Impact of the Sanctions Adopted Against Russia on the World Economy

???? Without a doubt, Ukraine’s war is an extremely dangerous military conflict because four nuclear-weapon states are involved actively in this war, including the two countries with the biggest nuclear-weapon arsenals in the world, Russia, with 5,977 nuclear warheads, and the U.S., with 5,428 nuclear warheads. If the Ukraine war is prolonged, then several experts and politicians expect that the impact on the world economy will be extremely negative. This negative impact will affect not only the Russian economy but the economies of the same countries that promote the application of sanctions against Russia, among many others that do not have any relationship with this war.

????? As a result of the Ukrainian war, many countries suffer from an extremely high level of inflation not seen since the end of the Cold War. It is foreseen that the high level of inflation registered during the last months will continue to affect the U.S., the E.U., Russia, and many other countries all over the world. In 2022, the inflation rate in the U.S. reached 7%, its highest level since 1982, but lower than the one reported in September 2022 (between 8% and 10%). In the case of the E.U., the inflation rate in November 2022 was 11.1%, the highest inflation rate in years. Fortunately, in April 2023, the inflation rate decreased to 7%.

???? Is the war in Ukraine the only one responsible for the current world economic crisis? The answer is no, but it is an important factor. According to Trujillo (2022), the world has been experiencing a considerable increase in energy and other basic product prices and a shortage of supply since the second tranche of 2021, well before the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. Why? This situation is the result of the implementation of the U.S. foreign policy, supported by the E.U. and NATO members and other U.S. allies, consistently applying economic and political sanctions against any country that does not support the U.S. foreign policy. Some of the governments under U.S. and E.U. sanctions are Russia, China, Iran, and Venezuela, all main oil and gas producers and exporters, provoking an increase in oil and gas prices. But the U.S. and the E.U. sanctions against the countries mentioned above are not affecting only the oil and gas supplies but are provoking an increase in other basic product prices in several countries, including those that adopted these sanctions.

???? Are the sanctions against Russia working? Many politicians and analysts have said no they are not working as expected. But what is worse, they are also affecting the economy of the promoters of these sanctions and the economies of many others that have nothing to do with this war even more than the Russian economy. According to Russian government sources, Russia's income from the sale of gas and oil increased by 28% in 2022, equivalent to 2.5 trillion rubles (US$36,998 million), despite Western measures to reduce dependence on Russian hydrocarbons and to set a cap on Russian crude oil price. However, this cap was even ignored by the U.S. government, allowing US companies to buy oil at a higher price. Regardless of the actions and the sanctions adopted against Russia, oil production last year amounted to 535 million tons, or 2% higher than the level reported in 2021. Russian Vice President Alexander Novak said oil exports also grew by 7%. Against all odds, the Russian economy contracted only 2.5% instead of the 20% as expected and, in 2023, increased by around 3%.

???? US Col (ret.) and Senator for Virginia Richard Black, in a conference at the Schiller Institute on the Ukraine war, said the following:

·???????? The rubble is now stronger than before and also stronger than many other foreign currencies. “The ruble today is at a seven-year high during the time since the invasion. The ruble has become the world’s strongest single currency in terms of its appreciation against other currencies. Instead of being turned to dust, it has become much stronger than any other currency”;

·???????? Russia’s oil and gas export income is higher than before the beginning of the Ukraine war, increasing its monetary reserves significantly despite the frozen Russian reserves in Western banks. As far as the sanctions were concerned, the Russian trade balance is now triple what it was before the war. This is because they have found alternative oil and gas production markets. Russia is selling oil and gas to China. They are selling oil to India. They are selling to Japan. They are even selling to Turkey, which is one of the NATO countries! They are selling oil and gas all around the world. They are selling all of their commodities. On the contrary, the E.U. is paying higher prices for its oil and LNG imports from the U.S. and other countries and in much lower quantities;

·???????? The inflation rate in Russia reached 15% but began to decrease. In the U.S. and the E.U. inflation rate reached around 10.9% in September 2022, 11,1% in November 2022, and 7% by the end of 2022;

·???????? Instead of isolating Russia from the global market, its trading income is now US$1,000 million per day with a commercial surplus of US$250,000 million, double the commercial surplus it registered the year before the Ukraine war. Russia is strengthening commercial ties with China, India, South Africa, Iran, Brazil, and Saudi Arabia, among others, and is selling its oil and gas to several of them at a favorable price below the market price;

·???????? Despite the negative impact of the sanctions adopted by the U.S., the E.U., and other US allies, Russia has no shortage of food, fertilizers, energy, or heating.

???? President Putin has responded to the sanctions imposed on his country, cutting or limiting the export of gas and oil to a select group of E.U. countries, such as Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Bulgaria, among others. The Russian government also imposes the ruble to pay for all oil and gas supplies, which some E.U. countries oppose. Due to the high dependence of some E.U. countries on Russian oil and gas supply, such as Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic, the E.U. has been forced to accept the continuing oil and gas supply from Russia to a restricted number of E.U. countries during a limited number of years.

???? Due to the E.U. and U.S. sanctions against Russia, one of the most important players in the world energy market, the entire energy supply chain has been affected. Energy bills for electricity and gas consumption in several E.U. countries have been doubled or more, seriously affecting the domestic economy of hundreds of thousands of families and the activities of many small and medium companies, including high-energy consumption facilities, who see how their energy bills have reached a level they cannot pay or that the increase in the cost of their products making them no competitive in the open market. The same has happened in the U.S., where gasoline and diesel prices have increased to their highest level in the last decades. Fortunately, due to the measures adopted by the U.S. government and the U.S. Federal Reserve, the energy bill and gasoline, diesel, and gas prices have been reduced to an acceptable level.

???? ?Is the U.S. headed for a recession? Opinion is divided on that question, with many economists warning of a recession and Wall Street bulls saying those fears are overblown” (Siegel et al., 2022). On the other hand, the Eurozone is headed for a recession due to a deepening cost of living crisis and a gloomy outlook that is keeping consumers wary of spending. Germany, the main Eurozone economy, is, in 2023, technically in recession.

???? Contrary to what was expected, Russia increased its oil and gas supply to other Asian countries. This trade movement allowed Russia to overcome the sanctions adopted by the U.S., the E.U., and other Western countries and to increase Russia’s financial reserves faster than before the sanctions were adopted. On the contrary, the E.U. receives less oil and gas than before and at a higher price. For this reason, the E.U. has been forced to adopt measures to reduce its oil and gas consumption. These measures have created a complex situation in several E.U. countries, such as Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands, where the production of the high-energy consumption industries has been limited or closed to avoid paying high-energy bills. These high-energy bills make their products not competitive in the open market. At the same time, energy-intensive industries are studying the halting of activities in Germany and other E.U. countries due to the high energy bills and their relocation to the U.S. or other countries where energy is cheaper and their products can be competitive in the open market.

???? ?The U.S. government, where the energy price is much lower than in Europe, has approved a regulation that favors the production of many products in the U.S. This situation has sounded the alarm in the E.U. because some big European companies are considering moving their production to the U.S. to reduce costs and benefit from the existence of that regulation. This situation could decapitalize the industry sector in the E.U. during the coming years.

???? The high energy price is responsible for the rising production costs worldwide, affecting the competitiveness of the industry and agriculture sectors in many countries, particularly in the E.U. countries. The higher energy prices increased transportation costs significantly. In the E.U., the high inflation rate reported in 2022 is pushing many families to reduce their daily expenses and delaying the payment of their energy bills. In the case of the U.S., inflation reached its highest level in 39 years. Latin America, for its part, one of the regions most affected by the increase in the cost of living, reached an extraordinarily high level of inflation rate between 8% and 10% in 2022 (Hammad, 2022).

???? While the E.U. suffers the economic consequences of stopping purchasing Russia’s energy sources at a good price, the U.S. sees some of its energy exports set records on the other side of the Atlantic. The U.S. is the clear winner of the current energy crisis, becoming the largest exporter of LNG (see Fig. 8) to the E.U. and removing its main competitor from the European energy market.

???? Being the E.U.’s best friend to the U.S. generates many benefits for this country. Last March, the European Commission reaffirmed its strategic cooperation with the U.S. in energy matters. In the framework of this cooperation, the E.U. has decided to buy not less than 15,000 billion cubic meters of LNG from the U.S. By 2030, the E.U. will buy around 50,000 billion cubic meters, tripling U.S. LNG exports to the E.U. However, it is important to stress that U.S. LNG gas will be purchased at a market price much higher than the gas price purchased from Russia before the Ukraine war. The E.U. has expressed disappointment with the high price it has to pay for the U.S. LNG supply. In addition to acquiring a high amount of LNG from the U.S. to replace part of the gas supplied by Russia, this strategic cooperation involves sharing technologies, working with similar private investors, and incentivizing joint agreements. In an almost antagonistic way to how the E.U. imposes sanctions on Russia, they have also reached agreements with the U.S. (Pérez, 2022).

Source: agritech.cl/barco-transporte-Lng-800x-700-ce/

Fig. 8: LNG ship

???? Despite what has been said above about the E.U.-U.S. energy cooperation, it is not as good as it seems from the outside. Why? Because the U.S. is now exporting different energy sources like never before to the E.U. at a higher price. However, due to the high energy prices in the U.S., some voices like Senator Mitch McConnell warn of the need to reduce LNG export to the E.U. to use part of it to satisfy domestic energy demand and to decrease prices. For this reason, Senator McConnell has requested that energy production be one of the priorities of the Biden administration for 2023 and 2024.

???? In order to reduce the price of gasoline and diesel in the country, the U.S. government decided to take 180 million barrels of oil from its strategic oil reserves (one million barrels per day for six months). This decision also has an economic background since the U.S. would sell its strategic oil reserves at a high price on the world market. But, according to the President of the U.S. Federal Reserve, this government decision was a mistake because not only has it not lowered the prices of gasoline and diesel as expected, but it has also endangered the level of the country’s strategic oil reserves.

Decoupling Process or Separation

???? Another geopolitical phenomenon that could increase the possibility of a political, economic, and eventual military confrontation between the U.S., NATOA, and the E.U., supported by other U.S. allies on one side and Russia and China, supported by several other countries on the other, is the so-called "decoupling process or separation” between the main military and economic powers. This process began with the trade war between the U.S. and China, promoted by the Trump administration, aimed to reduce U.S. dependence on China to a minimum, followed by the E.U. with the same objectives. Due to new events, particularly the Ukraine war, it is spreading rapidly to Russia with the purpose of isolating the country at all levels. It cannot be excluded that the new trend in world trade could end the globalization process as a whole or at least partially, not only due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic but also due to the confrontation between Russia, the U.S., the E.U. and NATO on Ukraine war, and between the two great powers, China and the U.S. on Taiwan and on who is going to be the hegemonic power during the next decades (Sanhueza, 2022).????

???? According to the E.U., the oil supply from Russia ended by December 31, 2022, except for a limited number of E.U. countries with a very high dependency on the Russian oil and gas supply. According to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy Report 2022, the E.U. imported in 2021 a total of 138.7 million tons of oil from Russia, which represented 52.6% of all oil imports made by the region during that year, followed by oil imports from the U.S. with 51.4 million tons of oil or 19.5% of the total.

????? Concerning natural gas, the report mentioned above indicated that, in 2021, Russia supplied the E.U. with a total of 132.3 billion cubic meters through the gas pipelines connecting Europe with Russia, satisfying 49% of the gas needs that year. In the case of Russian LNG imports by the E.U., the same report showed that the region imported from Russia, in 2021, a total of 17.4 billion cubic meters, representing 16.1% of the total. In 2021, the total gas supply from Russia to the E.U. reached 65.1%. If the war in Ukraine does not stop in the coming months, then a 30% increase in the gas price in the E.U. has been foreseen. An increase in the inflation rate in Russia, the U.S., and the E.U. is also expected.

???? As a result of the sanctions adopted by the U.S. and the E.U. against Russia and fear of a shortage of energy supply from Russia, Germany and Austria, among other European countries, are returning to the use of coal for electricity generation. The alarms are beginning to sound in several E.U. countries about a possible shortage of energy sources, an increase in the inflation rate, and a possible economic recession. Although the situation is more or less under control, there is a fear that the situation could deteriorate even further during 2024, provoking a recession in several E.U. countries[3].

The European Commission Plans to Reduce the Consumption of Oil and Gas

???? The U.S., which promised the supply to the E.U. of a high percentage of the oil and gas cut off from Russia, now has said that it cannot supply what was promised due to insufficient capacity installed. For this reason, some E.U. governments have recommended reducing oil and gas consumption by their industries and citizens as much as possible during the coming months. Germany has increased the energy alarm level, declared gas a “scarce resource,”? reopened some old coal-fired power plants for electricity generation, and closed the operation of the remaining three nuclear power plants[4].

???? Now, the question to be answered is the following: what will happen next winter and the one after that if the war in Ukraine continues? According to the NATO Secretary-General, the war in Ukraine could last several months or, in the worst scenario, even years, during which the sanctions against Russia are expected to stay in force. To ensure the implementation of these sanctions while reducing their negative impact on the economy of E.U. countries, the European Commission presented its plan to cut off all Russian fossil fuels by 2027 and to accelerate its transition to renewable energy use for electricity generation. Some of the measures to be implemented to accelerate the E.U. transition to the use of renewable energy for electricity generation are, according to La diariamundo (2022), the following:

·???????? The E.U. is recommending that its member states reduce their current level of consumption of energy as much as they can. Changes in the consumption of energy sources behavior could reduce the demand for gas and oil by 5% in the short term. A total of €11,000 million is expected to be saved by implementing by all E.U. members the recommendations prepared by the European Commission;

·???????? The E.U. is proposing to double the current capacity of solar photovoltaic parks and solar panels installed in public and private buildings and houses by 2025 and to reduce administrative obstacles to speed up procedures for implementing projects that promote the use of solar and wind energy for electricity generation;

·???????? The E.U. has decided to impose the installation of solar roofs for public and commercial buildings by 2025 and new residential buildings by 2029. The E.U. governments expect to require €210 billion in extra investments by 2027 and €300 billion by 2030, on top of those already needed to meet the E.U.’s 2030 climate target. The investments include €86,000 million for the development of renewable energies and €27,000 million for hydrogen infrastructure, €29,000 million for electricity networks, and €56,000 million for energy savings and heat pumps (Aljazeera, 2022);

·???????? The E.U. adopted a higher legally binding target for 45% of the E.U.’s energy demand to be satisfied from renewable energy sources by 2030 instead of its previous proposal of 40%;

·???????? The E.U. prevents that some fossil fuel infrastructure investments would require €10 billion for a dozen gas and LNG projects and up to €2 billion for oil, mainly targeting Central and Eastern European countries. These countries are landlocked and thus lack access to non-Russian oil and gas supplies (La diariamundo, 2022).

???? If the war in Ukraine continues over time and the sanctions against Russia stay like they are now, then it is expected not to have a rapid and cheaper replenishment of the E.U. gas and oil reserves during the coming years. If technical problems arise in a gas production platform off the coast of Norway or in the U.S., and if the demand for gas and oil increases in Asia, then the energy situation in Europe in the short and medium term would be very complicated.

???? Finally, it is important to note that the application of sanctions against Russia, the supply of modern weapons to Ukraine by the U.S. and NATO members, and the lack of political will to discuss a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine war, among other elements, are prolonging the war and complicating the search for a diplomatic solution to this war. In addition, the Ukrainian war is seriously affecting world trade in the post-coronavirus pandemic, is putting in danger peace, security, and regional and international stability, particularly trade stability and security of the chain supply, the interruption of energy supply, and increasing hunger and social unrest in several countries.

Importance of Beginning a Negotiation Process for a Ceasefire and the End of the Ukraine War

????? The war in Ukraine has been going on for almost 24 months now, and there are no signs of stopping it through any party's military victory or diplomatic negotiations, at least in the short term. The Ukrainian government insists on a military victory that expels Russian troops from all occupied territories, including Crimea, and the conditions it has put forward to stop the war are unacceptable to Russia. Without a doubt, the prolongation of the war in Ukraine has hardened the demands of the Russian and Ukrainian governments to stop the war. Currently, the positions presented by both parties to achieve the end of the war are, in several cases, very far apart, and for this reason, it is not possible to use them as they are as a starting point for the negotiation and adoption of a ceasefire agreement, much less to reach a definitive agreement to end this war. Reaching a consensus on these issues will be a complex task.

Some of the Issues to be Discussed in the Negotiation Process

??? The fighting situation on the ground right now does not favor Ukraine since the offensive launched to expel Russian troops from the occupied territories has failed only managed to recover after months of the offensive, less than 1% of that territory, and was extremely important, the Ukrainian government has already committed the Ukrainian strategic reserves units prepared and armed by the U.S. and NATO to reach the objectives set up by the Ukrainian summer offensive and, for this reason, has no additional fresh units trained and equipped to continue with the offensive. At the same time, Russia is launching a military counteroffensive at several points in the front line, pushing Ukrainian troops to retreat in some of these points.

???? Under these circumstances, what should be done to stop the fighting? There are two realistic possibilities. One is to prolong the war without any assurance that the Ukrainian armed forces will expel Russian troops from the occupied territories. The second is to search for a diplomatic solution to the war as soon as possible and before any new Russian offensive campaign that could end up occupying more territories in the summer of 2024.

????? Without a doubt, the prolongation of the war in Ukraine and the outcome of the Ukrainian offensive launched in the summer of 2023 has hardened the position of the Russian government and reduced its interest in negotiating a Ceasefire Arrangement. Currently, the conditions presented by the Ukrainian government to achieve the end of the war have been rejected by the Russian government, and for this reason, it is not possible to use them as they are as a starting point for discussing an agenda for the negotiation and adoption of a Ceasefire Arrangement, much less to reach a definitive agreement to end this war.

???? Why the international community should push the Ukrainian and Russian governments to search for a diplomatic solution to the war in Ukraine? The war in Ukraine is escalating dangerously with an increased combat intensity on the ground, the supply of additional heavy and costly offensive weapons by the U.S. and NATO countries, including long-range missile and combatant aircraft and its possible use for attacking Russian territory, including Moscow, as has happened before but with very little impact on the war, an alarming level of destruction of the Ukrainian civil infrastructure, a high number of civilians and military personnel killed and wounded in both sides and a high number of Ukrainian civilians displaced, among others. Besides, the Ukraine war is affecting the economy of many countries worldwide, including those that promoted them and, of course, Russia, the target of the sanctions adopted, but not at the desired level.

???? If the war continues and becomes a war of attrition, as is happening now, then Ukraine has everything to lose. Why? First, the Ukrainian government finds it difficult to recruit, equip, and train new soldiers, forcing the government to reduce to the minimum the recruitment exceptions and accept the voluntary recruitment of women; second, it depends on the supply of weapons and ammunition from the U.S. and NATO, and both sides have already indicated that they have many difficulties in replacing the destroyed military equipment and supplying the ammunition consumed daily by the Ukrainian army; third its economy has not already collapsed due to the injection of around 200,000 million of dollars or more from the U.S. and the E.U. since February 2022, but the level of this aid begins to decline due to an increase in taxpayers' rejection of the war and due to the economic difficulties they are already suffering; fourth the war in the Middle East between Hamas and Israel that is forcing to reallocated the existing resources to support the military activities of Israel in Gaza, in the north of the country around the border with Lebanon, and in the West Bank, among others.

????? History has shown that all wars end in one way or another at a negotiating table. The war in Ukraine will not be an exception, and the faster this reality is accepted, the better for Ukraine, the most affected country by this war, Russia, the U.S., the E.U., NATO, and many other countries. In this case, no more deaths and injuries will be reported as a consequence of the war; the destruction of civil infrastructure in Ukraine, which is already very high, will be stopped; the suffering of the innocent Ukrainian people will also stop, and the tensions and economic difficulties associated with this war that are affecting many countries that have nothing to do with it will be eliminated.

?????Which could be the most appropriate scenario for searching for a diplomatic solution to the war in Ukraine? First, military operations must be ended by adopting a Ceasefire Arrangement between Ukraine and Russia. Once a ceasefire is agreed upon, the minimum conditions would be created to address the essential elements of a Lasting Peace and Security Agreement.

Issues to be Discussed During the Negotiation Process of a Ceasefire Arrangement

???? Depending on the context, Ceasefire Arrangements may seek, according to the United Nations sources, to address a small number or a wide range of issues, such as:

·???????? The protection of civilians and human rights;

·???????? The status of combatants, their weapons, and their ammunition;

·???????? Interim or transitional security arrangements;

·???????? Interim or transitional governance arrangements;

·???????? Humanitarian coordination and arrangements.

???? In formulating an initial agenda for ceasefire negotiations – with facilitative support from the mediator – parties will try to build consensus around the scope of a possible Ceasefire Arrangement, the issues to be addressed, and the sequence in which they will be negotiated. They should also agree on modalities for negotiating contentious issues and resolving disputes. While an initially agreed agenda for negotiating a Ceasefire Arrangement provides a general direction, the conflict parties may expand it and introduce changes throughout the negotiation process as long as all parties consent.

???? The format and final contents of a Ceasefire Arrangement depend on the outcomes of negotiations on all issues, based on the agenda initially agreed between the parties and possibly adapted during the talks. Without a doubt, a formalized Ceasefire Arrangement that clearly articulates all negotiation outcomes in detail and an agreed sequence helps build trust and encourage compliance. A Ceasefire Arrangement is more likely to be sustainable if it clarifies signatory parties' responsibilities and identifies other parties' tasks associated with, under the control of, or aligned with them.

The following elements can strengthen a Ceasefire Agreement:

·???????? Identification of the signatory conflict parties and their affiliates or associates;

·???????? Clearly stated joint principles, objectives of the ceasefire, and definitions to promote a common understanding of the terms used. Reaching an agreement on a ceasefire's objectives, principles, and definitions can build trust among the parties and provide momentum for negotiating other ceasefire-related issues;

·???????? Clarity on the geography of ceasefire areas, including the type and sources of maps used in all negotiation stages. To be effective, a Ceasefire Arrangement requires clarity and agreement on the geographical areas it applies to. Geospatial information and technology can provide details and context concerning the natural and built-up environments where a conflict has occurred. Maps and imagery (satellite imagery and aerial photographs) can also help increase situational awareness and resolve issues through realistic visualization. Mutual consent is required on the type, scale, and source of maps that may be referenced in the arrangement text and used during implementation. A useful tool for facilitating technical discussions and coordination is a common "planning map," which can be updated based on verified information from the parties;

·???????? Modalities for regulating, controlling, and managing military forces, including the separation, disengagement, and redeployment of combatants, weapons, and ammunition. The regulation, management, and control of combat forces and weapons can involve a range of modalities. While a ceasefire seeks to break contact between military forces to reduce the risk of incidents or further conflict, it does not necessarily require the separation or movement of all military forces. In some cases, the forces may be "frozen in situ" at their last-known or last-held positions; in others, a ceasefire may call for the physical separation of military forces (for example, gradually along the front lines). The parties may use different terms to describe the management of forces, including disengagement, withdrawal, redeployment, demarcation of areas of control or zones, assembly, cantonment, and concentration of military forces. The choice of terms is guided by cultural, regional, and contextual factors; some terms may be culturally or politically sensitive in certain contexts.

Key considerations for mediation with respect to the regulation, control, and management of weapon systems include:

o?? The information required to prepare a framework for weapon and munitions control and means for gathering this information;

o?? The effects of topography or terrain on weapon mobility, ranges, and munitions (regarding use and stability);

o?? The geographical areas covered by weapon control, physical routes available for the redeployment or regrouping of weapons, potential weapon storage locations, and related supervision;

o?? The types and quantities of weapons and ammunition that need to be immobilized, rendered safe, or destroyed on site;

o?? The monitoring systems required for weapon control and the resources needed to establish them;

o?? The scale of planning maps, as well as the methods and styles for marking them up, including agreement on color codes, symbols, and signs;

o?? The potential utility of reciprocity regarding weapon control as a means of balancing demands on the conflict parties;

o?? The technical expertise required to mediate and implement weapon control.

·???????? Monitoring and verification modalities and mechanisms designed to enable effective political oversight and to strengthen compliance and accountability;

·???????? Mechanisms and modalities for dispute resolution and de-escalation, with clear lines of communication and information sharing;

·???????? Interim, transitional, and final security arrangements and their links to other transitional governance mechanisms and bodies.

???? Based on what has been said above, in my opinion, the following are the most important issues to be discussed by Ukrainian and Russian authorities to seek a Ceasefire Arrangement to stop all military actions on the ground, sea, and air:

a)????? The selection of a mediator. Russian and Ukrainian authorities should agree on selecting a mediator and its role during the negotiation of the Ceasefire Arrangement;

b)????? The selection of an international organization to supervise the implementation of the Ceasefire Arrangement. The selection of an international organization for the supervision of the implementation of the Ceasefire Arrangement and its role in the implementation process is an important task that both countries should agree on;

c)????? Stop the fighting. Date and time to stop all military operations by Russia and Ukraine's military forces on the ground, air, and sea;

d)????? Prisoners of war. Date, time, and modalities for the exchange of prisoners of war;

e)????? Return of the Ukrainian refugees. Adoption of a mechanism for the return of Ukraine refugees who wish to do so and have a place to live, including the return to occupied zones by Russia under the same conditions;

f)?????? Forced exile of civilians. Adoption of a mechanism to investigate the forced exile of civilians, particularly children, as a result of the war, the return of those that wish to do so under the responsibility of their families, and to identify the responsible for these actions;

g)????? Stop the supply of weapons to Ukrainian troops. After agreeing on the date and time to stop all military operations by Russia and Ukraine's military forces on the ground, air, and sea, all supplies of weapons to the Ukraine army by the U.S., NATO, the E.U., and any other country should stop, including the supply of weapons by the Ukrainian government itself. Russia and Ukraine should also agree on the modalities to be used by the international organization selected to supervise the implementation of this agreement and the replacement of certain types of weapons when necessary;

h)????? Stop the supply of weapons to Russian troops. After agreeing on the date and time to stop all military operations by Russia and Ukraine's military forces on the ground, air, and sea, the Russian government should stop the supply of military equipment to the Russian army in the occupied regions and agreed on the modalities to be used by the international organization selected to supervise the implementation of this agreement and the replacement of certain types of weapons when necessary;

i)?????? The establishment of a Demilitarized or Security Zone. Both governments should agree on establishing a Demilitarized or Security Zone along the front line and how the international organization selected will supervise the establishment of this zone in close coordination with the Russian and Ukrainian military and government authorities. The agreement reached on this important issue should clearly indicate the boundary and area of the Demilitarized or Security Zone to be established;

j)?????? Deployment of weapons in the Demilitarized or Security Zone. Both governments should reach an agreement on the type of weapons that can be deployed within and close to the Demilitarized or Security Zone, the number of troops to be deployed in this zone, and the precise places where these troops should be deployed;

k)????? Movement of troops and military equipment within and close to the Demilitarized or Security Zone. Both governments should accept the obligation to inform the international organization supervising the implementation of the Ceasefire Arrangement of any indispensable movement of troops and military equipment within and close to the Demilitarized and Security Zone. Russian and Ukrainian military authorities should provide all necessary information on the indispensable movement of troops and military equipment within and close to the Demilitarized and Security Zone in order to allow the international organization selected the supervision of these movements;

l)?????? Humanitarian assistance to civilians. Both governments should allow and support the provision of humanitarian assistance by any ONG to the population living in cities and towns located in the Ukrainian territory, including the occupied regions by Russia, in close coordination with the United Nations, Russian, and Ukrainian authorities;

m)?? Possible role of the United Nations Security Council. Both governments should discuss and agree on the possible role of the United Nations Security Council in ensuring the implementation of the Ceasefire Arrangement by all parties and in the consideration of any serious violations of the Ceasefire Arrangement;

n)????? United Nations peacekeeping forces. The possible deployment of United Nations peacekeeping forces along the front line after defining the boundary and area of the Demilitarized and Security Zone is an issue that needs to be discussed by both governments. If both countries agree, then Russian and Ukrainian representatives and the United Nations Security Council should agree upon the deployment of a United Nations peacekeeping force;

o)????? Interim, transitional, and final security arrangements. Interim, transitional, and final security arrangements and their links to other transitional governance mechanisms and bodies should be agreed by the Russian and Ukrainian governments;

p)????? Solution of disputes. Both governments should discuss and agree on the procedures to be followed for the solution of disputes and the role of the international organization selected and the United Nations Security Council on this issue, if any;

q)???? Duration of the Ceasefire Arrangement and its extension. The duration of the Ceasefire Arrangement and the procedure to be followed by Russia and Ukraine authorities for extending the validity of the Ceasefire Arrangement should be discussed and agreed upon by both governments.

Issues to be discussed during the negotiations of a Lasting Peace and Security Agreement

???? After agreeing on a Ceasefire Arrangement between Russia and Ukraine, their designated representatives should begin formal discussions about adopting an initial agenda for negotiating a Lasting Peace and Security Agreement to end the war. That is the most difficult task for Russian and Ukrainian authorities to carry out and implement due to their high mistrust level.

???? Due to all of the above, it is very important to clearly define the issues that must be discussed and included in the initial agenda to be used during the negotiation process in order to reach a consensus that allows the termination of the war and prevents the start of another in the future. Some of the issues that should be discussed during the negotiations of a Lasting Peace and Security Agreement are, among others, the following:

1.????? Principles, objectives, and definitions to be used during the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement negotiations. All principles, objectives, and definitions of the different terms used during the negotiations should be agreed upon by the Russian and Ukrainian governments at the beginning of the negotiations and how they are going to be reflected in the final text of the Agreement;

2.????? Ukrainian neutrality and security. All parties involved in the Ukrainian war should agree on Ukraine's neutrality, particularly the Ukrainian government. The current and future Ukrainian governments should not insist on becoming NATO members while the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement is in force. At the same time, NATO as an organization should not insist on inviting Ukraine to become a NATO member while the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement is in force. An agreement should also be reached about the security of Ukraine in the future, how this security will be given and by whom, and how to deal with any violations of this Agreement by any of the parties;

3.????? Russian legitimate security interest. All issues related to Russian security and how these security interests will be respected by the U.S., NATO, the E.U., and Ukraine should be discussed and agreed upon between all parties involved. An agreement should also be reached on how this understanding should be reflected in the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement to be adopted to end the Ukrainian war or in an independent document to be signed by the U.S., NATO, the E.U., Russia, and Ukraine and included as a reference in the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement to be negotiated among all parties;

4.????? To freeze the expansion of NATO toward the Russian borders. This is one of the most sensitive issues to be discussed between NATO and Russia. NATO should freeze its expansion toward the Russian borders and define the role to be played by NATO members with borders with Russia within the military strategy of the organization. At the same time, Russia should identify actions to be implemented to avoid a possible escalation of tensions and a conflict with NATO members, particularly those with borders with Russia. To ensure the validity of the agreement reached on this important issue, representatives of NATO and Russia should negotiate a parallel agreement in establishing a Demilitarized or Security Zone in NATO countries with borders with Russia and Russian territories with borders with NATO countries. An agreement should also be reached on the number of troops and type of offensive weapons that can be deployed within the Demilitarized or Security Zone, excluding all types of nuclear weapons, and the mechanism to be used to verify the implementation of this agreement by all parties;

5.????? The redeployment of military forces along the border between Russia and Ukraine. A limited number of Russian and Ukrainian troops and offensive military equipment should be deployed in the Demilitarized or Security Zone to be established along the borders of both countries, as well as the prohibition of the deployment within this zone of all types of offensive weapons, including nuclear weapons and the deployment of foreign troops in Ukraine. Russian and Ukrainian negotiators should agree on the mechanism to be used for the supervision of the implementation of this important agreement and how to deal with any violation of it;

6.????? Final status of the Crimean Peninsula, the Donbas, Zaporiyia, and Jerson regions. This is another sensitive issue to discuss between the Russian and Ukrainian governments. The final status of these regions should be based on the history and free choice of the population living in these regions. There are four possible alternatives:

·???????? The first is to give the Ukrainian government sovereignty over these regions, according to the 1991 borders. The Russian government has already rejected this alternative.

·???????? The second is to provide full autonomy to these regions under Ukrainian sovereignty, according to the Minsk Agreements. This was a good solution before February 2022, but, in my opinion, it is no longer a valid one.

·???????? The third one is to accept Russia's sovereignty and control of these regions. The Ukrainian government has already rejected this alternative. However, this possibility cannot be totally excluded due to the military situation on the ground that exists today, which favors Russia.

·???????? The fourth one is to put these four regions provisionally under the United Nations' control until it holds a referendum on the sovereignty of those regions in cooperation with the authorities of Ukraine and Russia. The referendum in each of these regions under the supervision of the United Nations should be carried out within one year after the entry into force of the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement. The outcome of these referendums should be mandatory for the Russian and Ukrainian governments;

7.????? The prohibition of ultranationalists, ultraright, and neo-Nazi groups. The Ukrainian parliament should approve, three months after entry into force of the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement,? a law prohibiting ultranationalists, ultraright, and neo-Nazi groups from being part of the Ukrainian government, parliament, army, and security forces;

8.????? Adoption of new laws by the Ukrainian parliament. These new laws should, on the one hand, obligate the Ukrainian government to remove all monuments, symbols, and references to people who maintained outstanding participation in supporting the Nazi occupation of Ukraine during the Second World War and in the slaughter of innocent people, including Jews, members of minorities living in the country as well as innocent people of neighboring countries and, on the other, to remove all laws in force which are considered discriminatory to the Ukrainian minorities living in the country;

9.????? Return to their home countries of all volunteers and international combatants. Ukrainian and Russian governments should agree on the mechanism to supervise the return to their home countries of all volunteers and international combatants who are now fighting along with the Ukrainian and Russian military forces. The return should begin immediately after the entry into force of the Ceasefire Arrangement;

10.? The role of the mediator, the United Nations Security Council, and any other international organization involved in implementing the Agreement. The role of the mediator to be selected, as well as the role of the United Nations Security Council and any other international organization involved in the implementation of the Agreement, should be discussed and agreed upon by the Russian and Ukrainian governments;

11.? Reconstruction of the country's civil infrastructure, buildings, industries, hospitals, and schools destroyed by the war. The Lasting Peace and Security Agreement should include the participation of Russia, Ukraine, the U.S., the E.U., NATO, and other countries and organizations in the reconstruction of the country's civil infrastructure, buildings, industries, hospitals, and schools destroyed by the war, and the resources that each country and organization should provide for this purpose;

12.? Elimination of sanctions. All sanctions adopted since 2014 by the U.S., the E.U., and other Western countries against Russia for its role in the Ukrainian war should be withdrawn after the entry into force of the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement;

13.? Restore of Russian rights. To restore Russian rights to be part of all European and international organizations, forums, and systems that were expelled as a result of its role in the Ukraine war if the Russian government wishes to do so;

14.? Unfreeze all Russian reserve funds in Western countries. After the entry into force of the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement, all sanctions related to Russian reserves funds frozen by Western countries due to sanctions adopted against Russia for its aggression on Ukraine should be unfrozen by all Western countries. In case part of these frozen funds have been used already without Russian authorization, it should be fully returned to Russia;

15.? Crime of war investigations. During the negotiations of the Lasting Peace and Security Agreement, all legal issues associated with the Russian and Ukrainian military forces' behavior and denounced during the war, including investigating all actions carried out by Russian and Ukrainian troops that could be considered war crimes, should be discussed and a mechanism to be used to implement the agreement reached on this issue adopted.

???? The key issue is to agree on how and when the Ukraine war will end. According to military experts, it will be extremely difficult for the Ukrainian government to maintain the current war efforts, even with the U.S., the E.U., and NATO assistance, if the war lasts long, as the Secretary-General of NATO has predicted. The situation will become more complicated for Ukraine's war efforts if the amount of this assistance begins to be questioned by some governments of the countries now providing this assistance, something that is beginning to be a cause of concern for public opinion in several Western countries, particularly in the United States. The war in the Middle East could accelerate this process.

???? However, the situation could significantly change if Russia reacts strongly to the U.S. and NATO's new military assistance, allowing Ukrainian armed forces to attack inside the Russian territory. All efforts must be exhausted to avoid reaching this point in the war, from which the Ukraine war could no longer be considered a direct war between Russia and Ukraine but a direct war between Russia and the U.S., the U.E., and NATO carried out in Ukraine.

Conclusion

???? The key issue now is to agree on how and when the Ukraine war will end. According to several military experts and politicians, it will be extremely difficult for the Ukrainian government to maintain the current war efforts, even with the U.S., the E.U., and NATO assistance. Just an example, Russia is shooting each day between 40,000 and 50,000 shells, while Ukraine, during the same period, launches between 2,000 and 7,000 shells. The situation will become more complicated for Ukraine's war efforts if the amount of this assistance begins to be questioned by some governments. According to different sources, the U.S. and the E.U. have already spent more than €200,000 in supporting Ukraine's war efforts, but the Ukrainian government and armed forces, even with this huge support, have not yet defeated the Russian armed forces and expelled them from the occupied regions. If the U.S., E.U., and NATO financial and military assistance are significantly reduced or stopped, then Ukraine cannot continue the war against Russia alone.

???? The impact of the Ukraine war is not only affecting the economy of the countries directly or indirectly involved in this war, including the E.U., the U.S., Ukraine, and Russia, but on the economy of many other countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean as well. They are suffering an energy crisis, high inflation, and high prices on basic products, among others, without any responsibility for this war.

???? Besides, I doubt that even with Ukraine's assistance from the U.S., the E.U., and NATO, it cannot alone expel Russian troops from the occupied territories. At the same time, Russia, with the current limited military troops and equipment used in the Ukraine war, is also not in a position to occupy additional territories beyond the regions now under their control.

???? However, if Russia begins to feel that due to the new type of assistance that the U.S., NATO, and the E.U. are giving to Ukraine, the situation could change dramatically against Russia, then in this scenario, Russia could expand the occupation of new regions such as an example Odesa or could declare the war against Ukraine with the unknown consequences of this decision could have on international peace and security and the U.S. and NATO response. For this reason, all necessary actions should be taken to stop military action on the ground, air, and sea and to pressure Ukraine and Russia to begin the negotiation process as soon as possible. All efforts must be exhausted to avoid reaching this dangerous point.

Financing of the research

The Author financed the whole research work.

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest.

References

-Aljazeera (2022). EU unveils $220bn plan to ditch Russian energy. Aljazeera News Oil and Gas. 2022.

- Black, Dick (2022). Senator for Virginia in the US Congress. Intervention at the Schiller Institute. 2022.

-Bonet, Pilar (29 de noviembre de 2013). Las dos Ucranias frente a Europa. El País. Archivado desde el original el 30 de noviembre de 2013.

- BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2022 (2022). 2022.

-Hammad, Salim (2022). Latin America: The Mechanisms of Inflation. BNP Paribas Economic Research. 2022.

- History of Crimea (2023). Wikipedia. 2023.

- History of Crimea (2023). Britannica. 2023.

- Crimea profile (2023). BBC News, 2023.

- Ladiariamundo (2022). La Unión Europea presentó su plan para cortar su dependencia de los hidrocarburos rusos (2022). Ladiariamundo. 2022.

-La inflación azota a Latinoamérica y reaviva los fantasmas de viejas crisis – Los Angeles Times (latimes.com).

-LaSexta.com (2022). ?Cuántos soldados y qué armamento tienen Ucrania y Rusia? 2011.

-Los rebeldes toman el Parlamento y la sede de la Presidencia de Ucrania. Público, 22 de febrero de 2014.

-Misachi, John (2021). Crimea. World Atlas. https://www.worldatlas.com/peninsulas/crimea.html. 2021.

-Pérez, Enrique (2022). La crisis energética por la guerra de Ucrania ya tiene un claro ganador: Estados Unidos. Xataka, 2022.

Rahman, Abdul (2022). What are the Minsk agreements and what are their role in the Russia-Ukraine crisis? MR online. Originally published in Peoples Dispatch. 2022.

-Research & Branding Group (2013). Euromaidan. 10 de diciembre de 2013. Archivado desde el original el 13 de diciembre de 2013

-Sanhueza, María (2022). La actual crisis energética mundial y las razones que se esconden tras ella. Future Magazine. 2022.

Schwarz, Peter (2022). Former German Chancellor Merkel admits the Minsk agreement was merely to buy time for Ukraine’s arms build-up. World Socialist Web Site. Wsws.org. 2022.

-Siegel, Jeremy; Watchter, Susan M,; Roussanov, Nikolai; Golsdtein, Itay (2022). As economists warn of a recession, what lies ahead for the US economy? World Economic Forum. 2022.-Smith, M. Shane (2003). What is a Ceasefire and Why is it Important? 2003.

-Stone, Oliver. Ukraine on Fire (video).

-The Covid-19 crisis is causing the biggest fall in global energy investment in history – News – IEA.

-The Straits Times. The 10-point peace plan for Ukraine proposed by Zelensky. 2022.

-The Washington Post December 4, 2021.

-Thompson, Nick (2015). Cronología de la crisis en Ucrania: todo lo que debes saber sobre el conflicto. CNN Espa?ol. 2015.

-Trujillo, Manual (2022). Las causas de la crisis energética actual y como reducir el precio de la factura. Periódico Digital. 2022.

-Ukraine drops EU plans and looks to Russia. Al Jazeera. 21 de noviembre de 2013.

-Una grave sequía amenaza producción de energía y agricultura en Brasil – France 24.

-Wind energy in the UK – Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk).

-WTI Crude Oil Prices – 10-Year Daily Chart | MacroTrends2). https://oilprice.com/

-Yanukóvich niega desde Rusia legitimidad al Parlamento ucranio. El País, 28 de febrero de 2014.

?

[1] According to Russian claims, over 1.2 million residents of the Donbas region have already applied for Russian citizenship out of a total estimated population of six million. Russian-speaking people form an overwhelming majority in both the self-declared republics.

[2] The Crimean peninsula, historically known as Tauris, Taurica and the Tauric Chersonese, has a rich history dating back to the 5th century BC. Here is a summary of its history:

1. Antiquity: Several Greek colonies were established along its coast in the 5th century BC, the most important being Chersonesos, near present-day Sevastopol (History of Crimea, Wikipedia 2023). These colonies survived a series of attacks by nomadic hordes from the east who subsequently occupied the steppe region (History of Crimea Britannica 2023).

2. Middle Ages: It was partially conquered by Kievan Rus'. During the Mongol invasion of Europe, northern and central Crimea fell to the Mongol Golden Horde (History of Crimea, Wikipedia 2023).

3. Ottoman Period: In the 1440s, the Crimean Khanate was formed from the collapse of the Golden Horde, but quickly became a subject of the Ottoman Empire (History of Crimea, Wikipedia 2023).

4. Russian Empire: In 1783, Catherine the Great incorporated Crimea into the Russian Empire, increasing Russia's power in the Black Sea area (History of Crimea, Wikipedia 2023).

5. Crimean War: From 1853 to 1856, due to its strategic position to control the Black Sea, it was the site of the main clashes of the Crimean War (History of Crimea, Wikipedia 2023).

6. 20th century: During the Russian Civil War, Crimea changed hands many times and was where Wrangel's anti-Bolshevik White Army made its last stand in 1920 ((History of Crimea, Wikipedia 2023).

7. Soviet Era: In 1954, it was transferred to Ukraine under the leadership of the then Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev (Crimea profile. BBC News, 2013).

8. Russian Annexation: It was annexed by the Russian Empire during the reign of Catherine The Great in 1783 and remained part of Russia until 1954 (Crimea profile. BBC News, 2013).

[3] Germany is the first EU country to enter what is called? “a technical recession” in 2023.

[4] These three nuclear power plants were shut down in May 2023.