As the war between Ukraine and Russia drags on, there is a growing urgency to find a resolution that can bring about lasting peace. One intriguing proposal has emerged from Oleksiy Arestovych, a former adviser to the Ukrainian president. While Arestovych currently holds no official government position, his suggestions have sparked considerable debate and speculation. Arestovych was one of the few people to be prescient enough to predict the current war before it began. He squarely blames the West for everything that has happened.

In the early stages of the war, Arestovych provided updates on the war’s progress, even suggesting that a peace deal was imminent and that the fighting might subside within a few weeks or months. However, his new proposal raised in July of this year has caused a stir, particularly within the Ukrainian government and the public at large.

Arestovych’s solution to the ongoing war is bold, to say the least. He seems to be suggesting that Ukraine should consider relinquishing Crimea to Russia (and presumably granting some form of self-rule to the Donbast) in exchange for the rest of the country being granted NATO membership. This proposition, while aiming for peace, directly contradicts the current stance of the Ukrainian government and is unlikely to gain widespread support from the public.

During a YouTube interview with Russian journalist Yulia Latynina, Arestovych shed light on the complexities of Ukraine’s relationship with its Western allies, particularly concerning the contentious issue of NATO membership. He roughly mentioned four potential ways to bridge the divide between Ukraine’s objectives and those of its Western counterparts.

The first option, according to Arestovych, is for Ukraine to persuade its Western allies to align with its viewpoint. However, he emphasised the challenges that Ukraine might face in mustering the necessary political resources to achieve this goal. This is the most unlikely ending, according to Arestovych, because it would mean that Ukraine could persuade its Western allies to back its maximum goals for retaking the whole country.

The second option he proposed mirrors the “Federal Republic of Germany” model, wherein a partitioned Ukraine is allowed to enter NATO, with the hope that reunification will occur through peaceful means in the future. Effectively this means that 80 percent of Ukraine remains independent and was allowed to join NATO, while Russia retains direct or indirect control of 20 percent of the country (e.g. ceding Crimea and self-rule for the Donbast).

Arestovych’s third option involves finding a compromise that doesn’t involve abandoning the ambition of liberating Crimea and other occupied territories but seeks to achieve this goal through peaceful negotiations. Despite this, the Ukrainian government has consistently maintained that its war aims include the full liberation of all occupied territories, including Crimea.

Without further explanation, Arestovych said he believed the fourth option, ‘March of Justice Two’, referring to Yevgenny Prigozhin’s Wagner mutiny on June 24.

The former presidential adviser’s proposal has faced significant criticism from within Ukraine, with accusations of spreading unverified information and supporting Russian propaganda narratives. Notably, Arestovych’s references to the German division after World War II as a potential solution for Ukraine’s NATO membership dilemma have been met with mixed reactions. In fact, the idea of trading land for peace in Ukraine has been around before Arestovych’s statement and has received various responses, including President Volodymyr Zelenskyy angrily rebuffing the suggestion. Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger suggested at the World Economic Forum in Davos that Ukraine should let Russia keep Crimea, which it annexed in 2014. However, Zelenskyy criticised this view, stating that it seemed like Kissinger was addressing the audience in Munich of 1938, instead of the audience in Davos of 2022. Some media outlets have highlighted that a negotiated peace might require Kyiv to make some hard decisions, given a decisive military victory is not realistic.

While Arestovych’s suggestions have stirred controversy, they underscore the complexities and challenges involved in finding a sustainable resolution to the Ukrainian-Russian war. As the war persists, the need for innovative, yet practical, solutions remains paramount. Arestovych’s proposal serves as a testament to the pressing need for diplomatic efforts that can pave the way for lasting peace in the region. However, the road ahead remains fraught with challenges, and the search for a viable path to peace continues to be an arduous journey for all involved parties.

It should be noted, however, that many think that Arestovych has presidential ambitions and is trying to secure the Russian vote within Ukraine to bolster his position.

The image used first above is from Enrique