On March 7, Russia stated three aims for its invasion of Ukraine: official Ukrainian neutrality, recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea and recognition of the independence of pro-Russian separatist regions in Luhansk and Donetsk.
The United States and NATO have not spoken publicly about a final diplomatic settlement, and, with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s government focused on maintaining national unity and armed resistance to Russia, Ukraine has publicly stated its positions only in somewhat contradictory bits and pieces. But Zelenskyy, in consultation with the U.S. and Europe, which are backing Ukraine’s war-fighting capacity, should formulate and state what a reasonable peace settlement would look like.
Here, in my view, is what Ukraine’s government should say. First, Ukrainian neutrality is not only acceptable but prudent if the negotiated peace settlement offers sufficient security guarantees. Neutrality will help to keep NATO and Russia separated — a positive good for all parties and for the world. Ukraine can thrive as a non-NATO country, just as Austria, Cyprus, Ireland, Malta, Finland and Sweden thrive.