Introduction
Today is Valentines Day 2025, in the Western world, and so some people might be thinking, “what is this person doing second guessing or suggesting what could happen in geopolitics instead of concentrating on ordering curry or doing any of the other things people do on Valentines Day?”. To such I say, Valentines Day is also a day in which we remember a significant eponymous massacre, and therefore in order to show a way forward which might stop an ongoing set of massacres and prevent quite a lot more, I would like to place to the public arena, and not for the first time, my views on how the current European situation should be addressed between Trump and Putin.
In essence I have been saying the same things since 2014, as those who follwed my videos back then or my occasion statements in Social Media since then will know. Looking at the borderline fo where the conflict in Ukraine now is, it is moving almost exactly towards the borderline I foresaw even back then, and the dead giveaway for where this borderline belongs can be shown by the below two maps
These are taken from Wikipedia, they accurately show that on two separate occasions Ukraine demonstarted that in the eastern and southern oblasts there was over 60% (in all cases) support for Russophile Yanukovitch and the converse was true with the Westernising Timoshenko/Omelchenko candidtaes being preferred by over 60% in eacgh of the northern and western oblasts.
Generational, nation-defining decisions were made on two occasions in the UK over referendum results far less clear than these, in the case of both the Scottish Independence Referendum and the Brexit Referendum. Here we have in the Ukraine a clear map – two clear maps six years apart – showing the two directions in what was called one people.
The various watchdogs did at no time claim that there had been any foul play over either of these two elections, incidentally. They do presumably reflect the will of the people. That is, they reflect two wills and two peoples, in a single state.
In the Soviet Union it was part of the raison d’État for a second strong partner republic after Russia to exist so as to justify the USSR’s self-identification as a Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – to this end in fact Ukrainains and Georgians always punched above their weight vis a vis ethnic Russians in the Supreme Soviet and in most ministries. Stalin was it seems the main author of this, and he ceded initially the territory and republic status to Ukraine, his lead being follwed by Ukrainophile Russian Khrushchev and actual Ukrainian Brezhnev for most of the remainder of the glory years (if you can accept that ironic use of the term “glory” under those circumstances) of the Soviet Union.
For this to work, two different people were both named ‘Ukrainians”. People who spoke the Ukrainian language on the one hand, who had been largely wrangling with Poles and living under the Polish state for a lot of their history, and Russian speakers (including those with the “surzhuk” dialect) who were in many cases Cossacks – a rather wild ethnicity with its own culture but who regarded themselves as part of a Russian continuum and were loyal to the Tsar – on the other. Beyond these two main grouping you had ethnic Hungarians and Chasidic Jews in sizeable numbers on the western side and you had a special nation called the Crimean Tatars (not really closely related to the Tatar horde – their language is close to Turkish proper, mutually intelligible, at least in writing, with Turkish) who were an overspill of the years of Selcuk expansion, and in the past Crimea also was home to people speaking Gothic. So Gothic, an East Germanic langage, survived there until the late 18th Century, a millennium longer than it did anywhere else. People from the various Caucasian nations also had settlements there and also various German groups, Amish-style. But the main two nations that this is all about are the Russian speakers vs the Ukrainian speakers.
In the main, these two ethnicities had been very friendly. Ukrainian was known as “little Russian” and these “little RUssians” were to be found all over the Russian empire as it extended east. Ukrainian was taken as far east as Vladivostok as a minority language. Friendliness between all the Soviet peoples was obligatory under Communism. Of course people had plenty of prejudices against each other but it would have been very unwise to state them openly. After the break-up of the Soviet Union it appeared initially as though these friendly relations would continue and it seems that the Russian pride is the main one to be piqued by the fact that this is not so.
Moreover after the breakup of the Soviet Union certain assurances were given about the strategic assets of the Soviet Union such as military ports and nucelar power stations which were supposed to be part of the package of both assets and liabilities that were agreed to fall to the Russian Federation after the break-up. Russia feels that these conditions were not kept to and also the ascendancy of the West Ukrainians (who even during the Second World War under Bandera had shown their animosity to Russians) over the East Ukrainians worried them, I might rather say offended them.
It’s also worth noticing that as far as how well an open free economy was developing in these countries after giving up Communism, everyone knows about the Russian oligarchs, but it is an underreported truth that the oligarchy and mafia tendencies in Ukraine were no better than what could be found in Russia and whereas by the second decade of the twenty-first century Russia had managed to achieve a fairer distribution of wealth in that nobody was particularly hard done by, and quite a lot of laws started to mimic those of the west (for example smoking bans, the structure of labour law and company law, VAT, etc), the state of play in Ukraine was not going anywhere fast, leading to the situation where some in the West looked for a change by getting closer to Europe and in the East they sought positive change by emnulating Russia more, and adhered to Yanukovich.
And this is why no lasting peace is possible until these two nations stop pretending to be a single country. What works for Switzerland has lasted 800 years because of the canton system. What works in Belgium has been the fall out of the Spanish Netherlands run by the inquisition and to be honest barely works today, but at least has stood a certain test of time. What was patched together under a Soviet doctrine which failed ought not to be regarded as an idee fixe by anyone. What the two individual ethnicities showed that they wanted in both 2004 and 2010 would presumably, barring Stockholm Syndrome, still be today the biggest clue we have to seeing an end to the bloodshed.
I have lost dear friendships for stating this – people have stated that I have too much sympathy for Russia because of speaking the language and reading its literature, having many friends there and having worked there. This is not the case. I got a harsh experience which I have spoken about elsewhere during the Soviet Union and have more reason to be wary than most here in Poland if I were to go by my own experience. This is simply an attempt to find a solution to a two nation in one problem, which is not going to go away otherwise.
There is much for Western Ukrainians to gain from being their own people and fast-tracked into the EU.
It’s my hope that some people who are influential will pick up on this and allow it in some ways to influence what is coming next. If not it will be interesting to see in the coming weeks how close my proposed deal set out below reflects what is actually done between President Trump and President Putin.
In The Art of the Deal, Donald Trump urges us to think big when doing deals, and that’s why we should try to resolve right here and right now, a series of not dissimilar confliucts involving Russia and its neighbours in which there are sizeable Russian-identifying sectors of the population.
The deal I would propose if I were Trump
The ongoing conflicts and geopolitical tensions in Eastern Europe have had far-reaching consequences for regional stability and global security. To address these complex issues, it is imperative to consider a comprehensive peace plan that balances political, economic, and military interests. This proposal outlines a multi-faceted approach to achieve lasting peace and cooperation in the region.
1. Division of Ukraine into two independent countries along the lines suggested by the 2004 and 2010 elections
Ukraine has been a focal point of conflict due to its cultural, linguistic, and political divisions. Historical electoral preferences and cultural differences suggest a solution in dividing the country into two distinct entities: East Ukraine and West Ukraine.
- East Ukraine: Aligns more with Russia and could join the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
- West Ukraine: Aligns more with Europe and could join the European Union (EU). This could be done more easily than if Ukraine were the full size it is now.
- Neutrality: Both East and West Ukraine would remain militarily neutral and not part of any military alliance, reducing the risk of further conflict. Only UN peacekeepers would have a military presence there and at minimal levels required.
2. Ethnic and Cultural Considerations
Recognizing the cultural and linguistic differences within Ukraine is crucial for lasting peace. To address potential displacement, a supervised home-swapping scheme online for properties of similar value could be implemented, allowing individuals to relocate to the region that aligns with their identity, over a defined number of years (seven at the outside) after which it would cease. Factual residence then decides nationality.
3. Territorial Adjustments
- Transdnistria: This region could either become part of East Ukraine or become an independent country. DOing so could enable the rest of Moldova more alignment with the EU sponsored by Romania. It could enter more easily that way than it could in its present shape with the conflicted zone of Transdnistria. Moldova mius Transdnistria would be fast tracked through applying the acquis communautaire.
- Crimea: Returned to the new East Ukraine by Russia or becomes a separate country in the CIS, preferably militarily neutral with the Black Sea fleet of the RF moved to Sochi.
4. Inclusion of Abkhazia, Kaliningrad, and Turkey
Addressing other regional tensions is essential for comprehensive peace:
- Abkhazia: Recognized as a separate country, free to join the CIS but not a military alliance. Georgia joins the EU, again fast-tracked but not NATO.
- Kaliningrad and Turkey:
- Turkey: Remains in NATO but free to join the Russian-based economic alliance, as unlikely to be an easy EU partner.
- Kaliningrad: Joins the EU but remains in the Russian military alliance, fostering economic and military balance.
5. Economic and Military Balance
Creating mutual stakes in different alliances can reduce the likelihood of conflict:
- Russia: Gains a stake in the EU through Kaliningrad.
- Turkey: Gains a stake in the Russian-based economic alliance, while remaining in NATO.
- CIS, EU and AUKUS to accord one another favoured status for trade and educational exchange, and co-operate on the combatting of international crime and terror.
6. Conflict Ban and Sanction Removal
- Conflict Prohibition: Ban conflicts in Europe for the rest of the 21st century, with violations resulting in ceding parts of Ukraine. All further negotaitions and territorial disputes to be shelved for 75 years and then resolved at first diplomatically.
- Sanction Removal: Lift all sanctions on Russia and Belarus upon signing the agreement. Sanctions are the punishment of the private sector by the public sector whichever side they are on and must be used only whgen there is no other way, and removed as soon as possible.
7. Rebuilding Efforts
- Reinvestment: Pledge 10% of incremental economic benefits (10% of GDP growth after the removal of sanctions) to rebuild infrastructure in East and West Ukraine to a high standard, by the respective sponsors of each new Ukrainian country.
- Gaza and Black Sea as a Riviera development: Engagement of the USA in rebuilding Gaza still possible as the damage to West Ukraine from the war has been less than the East. Russia and its CIS partners should concentrate on investment into East Ukraine and the Black Sea as a Riviera)
- West Ukraine: Rebuilding efforts led by the EU and AUKUS. Contracts for rebuilding fairly shared based on the expenses undertaken at the time of the conflict.
- East Ukraine: Rebuilding contracts open to Russia, its economic allies, Turkey, and BRICS.
Conclusion
This comprehensive peace plan aims to balance economic, political, and military interests, fostering long-term stability and cooperation in Eastern Europe. By addressing underlying cultural and geopolitical divisions and promoting mutual stakes in different alliances, this plan offers a pragmatic approach to achieving lasting peace in the region.
The ceding of the parts of Ukraine with rare earth metals can hopefully be mitigated for the West by the consolidation of Greenland’s resources as currently under discussion, whether by joining into the USA or by a lease. The inclusion of Canada into the USA to be done only if the Canadian people wish it but this should be done by referendum on a province by province basis and the eleven Canadian provinces, or as many of them that wish it, become American states, Canade does not become “the 51st state”. The rights of representation of post Canadian states should be on the basis of how many electoral seats they would have had if they had been in the USA from the beginning.
In the main the deal should have the effect of taking NATO/Russian relations off the current knife edge and allowing a return to peaceful and fruitful relations between the two blocks. It effectively taken Russia out of Gog and puts it back into Magog, where most of the readers of the current article are, if they did but know it. But more about that on another occasion. Suffice it to say that Chinese-Russian border issues as well as Japanese issues have been left out of this discussion. The East Asian states have a chance to see how the deal suggested here, if it is anything like what happens, and then construct something along the same or other lines depending on what they want.
Quoracy Consulting & Publishing 
You must be logged in to post a comment.