Why the very fact of the emergence of 20 points of the "peace plan" is more important than their content

Is it worth seriously analyzing 20 points if they will not be implemented or even accepted by Russia anyway?

These points can be seriously regarded as exclusively diplomatic courtesies to Trump, on whom it depends what weapons Ukraine will receive with European money. Therefore, the effectiveness of this document is measured not by what is written there, but by the results Ukraine will achieve as a result of Trump's current efforts.

It is important that weapons continue to be supplied to Ukraine, and if/when these efforts are disrupted, it should not be Ukraine's "fault."

Although the reaction to the published "20 points" is a good illustration of the fact that any final document of this stage of the Russian-Ukrainian war (of course, if it is signed at all) will not please anyone. It's just that today, geopolitical circumstances are such that, unfortunately, there will be no complete and total surrender of Russia. And therefore, the final document will contain things that will seem absolutely unfair to us.

But world history is rarely fair. At least not right away. And the Russian-Ukrainian war is precisely such a case.

On the other hand, these same geopolitical circumstances will force the West not to leave Ukraine alone with Russia. A defeat for Ukraine would directly contradict the interests of the vast majority of NATO countries, and therefore the final document (again, if it is signed at all) will contain enough mechanisms to preserve a sovereign Ukrainian state. And again, this is not about justice, but about the national interests of Western countries.

A truce is indeed possible at some point. First and foremost, because Russia, despite its jingoistic propaganda, may also need a pause. Especially if economic and military strikes on the Russian gas station continue.

I would venture to suggest that the window of opportunity for realistic agreements may appear sometime in late January – when the deadline for Russia's response to Trump's initiatives actually expires and when the results of Russia's attempts to destroy Ukrainian energy become apparent.

But even if peace documents are signed, the most important thing will not be their text, but what happens during the truce. If Ukraine and Europe use this hypothetical pause as intended, and during the temporary peace, large-scale investments in military production are launched, defensive structures are built near the front line, and a new architecture of common European security is designed, then there is a chance that the pause in the war will last for a long time.

In the history of world politics, there is no peace agreement that is guaranteed to be fully observed. If it were otherwise, there would have been no wars in the world long ago. But, despite all the agreements in the world, military conflicts are increasing. However, the value of any peace agreement can be assessed – not by the fact of "eternal peace," which will never exist, but by how successfully these agreements have made it possible to prepare for a future war and thereby deter the aggressor.

This is precisely how the "20 points" currently being discussed in Ukraine should be evaluated.

The value of international agreements is measured not by their text, but by their consequences.

Original