Juha Christensen, Tapio Kanninen, Heikki Patomäki – A Concept Proposal for a Peace Process in Ukraine

As the war in Ukraine is nearing its end and Trump has noticed he has hardly any bargaining chips for his “deal” it is time for the adults to start thinking of a serious global peace process for the conflict

Juha Christensen, Chairman, PACTA Asia, Singapore

Tapio Kanninen, Former Chief of Policy Planning at the UN Department of Political Affairs

Heikki Patomäki, Professor of World Politics, University of Helsinki

Image

Introduction

The ongoing war in Ukraine demands a structured, historically informed peace process that integrates lessons from past diplomatic successes. This concept proposal synthesises insights from the OSCE’s Helsinki Process, UN peacekeeping and peacemaking efforts, and the Aceh peace process to outline a framework for conflict resolution. By analysing these precedents, it is possible to design a viable path toward de-escalation, negotiation, and lasting peace in Ukraine.

The Helsinki Process and Its Relevance

Historical Background

The Helsinki Final Act of 1975 was a landmark agreement that brought together 35 countries, including both NATO and Warsaw Pact members, to establish principles of security, human rights, and economic cooperation. It facilitated dialogue during the Cold War and played a role in easing East-West tensions.

Key Lessons

  1. Dialogue and Confidence-Building Measures (CBMs): The Helsinki Process stabilised borders and introduced CBMs that reduced the risk of conflict. Applying this approach to Ukraine requires reactivating similar mechanisms to create trust between Russia on one side and Ukraine and NATO on the other.
  2. Inclusive Security Arrangements: The OSCE framework recognised the importance of cooperative security over exclusive alliances. A peace process must ensure that all relevant actors, including Russia, Ukraine, NATO, and key international organisations, participate in security arrangements.
  3. Addressing Long-Term Socioeconomic Factors: The post-Cold War period has shown that political agreements must be supplemented with economic policies that promote social justice and development and prevent grievances that fuel future conflicts.

The Role of the United Nations

UN Peacekeeping and Mediation Efforts

The United Nations has historically played a crucial role in peacekeeping and conflict resolution. It has successfully facilitated ceasefires and post-conflict stabilisation in conflicts such as the Suez Crisis (1956), the Yom Kippur War (1973), and the Yugoslav Wars (1990s). The UN’s capacity to monitor demilitarised zones and support post-conflict governance is critical in resolving the Ukraine war.

UN-Based Approaches for Ukraine

  1. Peacekeeping and Monitoring Missions: Establishing a UN-led peacekeeping mission in Russian-occupied territories could ensure stability and create space for negotiations.
  2. Demilitarised Zones and Ceasefire Monitoring: Lessons from Cyprus and the Korean Peninsula highlight the potential of buffer zones. A proposal has suggested a 30-km-wide demilitarised zone to separate Russian and Ukrainian forces.
  3. Inclusive Political Dialogue: The UN has facilitated analogical process in Iraq through the UN Assistance Mission in Iraq (UNAMI). A similar approach could support political inclusion and governance reforms in Ukraine.

The Aceh Peace Process: A Model for Ukraine?

Background and Key Features

The Aceh peace process, facilitated by Finland in 2005, successfully ended decades of conflict between the Indonesian government and the Free Aceh Movement (GAM). The process followed key principles:

  1. No preconditions for dialogue
  2. Nothing is agreed before everything is agreed”
  3. Respect for the dignity of all parties

Lessons for Ukraine

  1. Third-Party Facilitation: Finland played a neutral mediating role in Aceh. Now Indonesia, as a non-aligned state with experience in conflict resolution, has been suggested as a potential facilitator for Ukraine.
  2. Gradual Implementation: The Aceh agreement included phased demobilisation, political reforms, and economic reintegration—an approach that could be replicated in Ukraine.
  3. Monitoring Mechanisms: The Aceh Monitoring Mission (AMM), involving both the EU and ASEAN, ensured compliance with the agreement. A similar international mechanism, possibly led by the UN, OSCE, or a coalition of neutral states, could oversee implementation in Ukraine.

Steps for a Peace Process in Ukraine

Step 1: Appointing an Impartial Facilitator

The first step is for Russia and Ukraine to invite a neutral party – we propose Indonesia for such a role – to facilitate negotiations. The support of key global actors, including the UN Security Council, BRICS, the EU, and ASEAN, would be essential.

Step 2: UN Security Council Endorsement

For legitimacy and effectiveness, the UN Security Council must approve the peace process, ensuring commitment from major powers such as the US, Russia, China, France, and the UK.

Step 3: Establishing a Ceasefire and Demilitarised Zone

A ceasefire agreement should be implemented within 60-90 days, with UN peacekeepers deployed to monitor compliance and patrol demilitarised zones.

Step 4: Addressing Key Political and Legal Issues

Negotiations must tackle contentious issues, including:

  • Ukraine’s neutrality and security guarantees
  • The legal status of Russian-occupied territories
  • Treatment of minority populations and language rights
  • War crimes accountability and judicial reforms
  • Economic reconstruction and development

Step 5: International Peacekeeping and Post-Conflict Governance

A UN-led peacekeeping mission, comprising personnel from BRICS, ASEAN, the African Union, and possibly from selected G20 and EU countries, should ensure security and provide a foundation for a long-term political solution.

Conclusion

The Helsinki Process, UN peacekeeping precedents, and the Aceh peace model provide a solid foundation for developing a comprehensive peace framework for Ukraine. By prioritising inclusive dialogue, phased implementation, and impartial facilitation, our proposal offers a pragmatic path toward ending the war. Success will depend on the willingness of the key actors to cooperate and commit to a balanced and sustainable resolution.

BRAVE NEW EUROPE is one of the very few Resistance Media in Europe. We publish expert analyses and reports by some of the leading thinkers from across the world who you will not find in state and corporate mainstream media. Support us in our work.

To donate please go HERE

2 Comments

  1. “Negotiations must tackle contentious issues, including:” also:
    Russia’s security – i.e. a comprehensive security treaty for the whole of Europe, as previously requested by Russia, and including the role of NATO and the presence of US Forces in Europe.

    And, the outlawing of Neo-Nazi movements in Europe, including in the Ukraine

    As for “The legal status of Russian-occupied territories” there are very few of these – the four oblasts which hold most of the Russian forces have already voted, and are now part of Russia. There may also be other oblasts which would like a similar vote. This must be catered for.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*