The minimum you need to know

U.S. - Russian relations are in great need of repair. But they may improve more rapidly than people expect because of a historically improved attitude from U.S. communication and the recent reelection of President Donald J. Trump, who is already planning to meet with President Vladimir Putin to create real and lasting compromise and peace for Ukraine. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and his Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Smith are already doing a great job in this regard, and achieving substantial diplomatic progress, including with Belarus. This writer is very optimistic as a result.

Belarus is a peace-loving former Soviet Union state that enjoys close relations with Russia. But the government has traditionally sought improving relations with the European Union as well, and has done a lot to deserve the opportunity.

Belarus is geographically important to peace because the country has large borders with Poland, Ukraine and Russia, and aligns closely with Russia. Belarus reportedly has accepted a substantial Russian military presence. But Belarus is very influential with Russia, and important because the Belarusian government authored a historic "Minsk peace treaty" between Europe and Russia that held the peace for eight years. It was “signed” in the Belarusian capital, Minsk, in 2014, and was in effect through early 2022. The agreement received bipartisan U.S. support and was agreed to by Europe. The deal held throughout former President Donald Trump’s term in office. Then-Vice President Joe Biden and Then-President Barack Obama originally signed it. France and Germany were direct parties to the Minsk peace agreement as well. The rest of NATO became bound by it as a result. It established approximately the same line of control that the media reports exists today very successfully.

Ukraine ended the agreement in the press - not Russia. Ukraine unilaterally exited from the treaty in 2022 in response to what Ukrainians said was unkind behavior from Russia. (Russia was trying to help NATO then but was not believed. The U.S. instead seemed to believe Russia was on the offense until we learned from President Biden and the Pentagon in late 2024 that there were virtually zero U.S. military casualties during the Biden administration. Their statements clearly showed the U.S. military received entirely peaceful treatment from Russia.) So Ukraine’s dissolution of the Minsk treaty should have seemed unnecessary from the U.S. side. There was no need to precipitate subsequent conflict across the line of control.

Russia used to request peace keepers on both sides of the line of control at the United Nations to preserve that treaty but obviously doesn’t anymore. Those peace keepers would have included Europeans and Americans. Russia’s current very understandable position is that heavy weapons - in fact all weapons - should be removed from their border now. (There was a twelve point Chinese peace proposal acceptable to Russia for weapons to be removed by all sides from the entirety of Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine regaining control over contested areas. But that proposal had nothing to do with Belarus. See the Ukraine and Russia pages for more information.)

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, who was re-elected in January 2025 with overwhelming support, showed tremendous leadership and integrity in this writer’s opinion in trying to resolve the Ukraine matter a second timeline. Instead of presenting an unnecessarily tough-guy image to the media, which he might have understandably done to deter, he instead showed that he cares deeply about peace. And he led on peace again. He has more than enough credibility to make a second Minsk peace agreement happen. And he offered to work towards that possibility. It can take moral courage as a Head of State to commit to peace. This represented exemplary leadership on peace from the President of Belarus.

The media was very important to the success of the Minsk I peace agreement because news presenters had to presume to audiences everywhere that the deal was real for it to then become real militarily. There were face-to-face meetings between heads of state. But those meetings may not have been as important to the deal’s success as what the media said.

Perhaps the media can help make a deal like this happen again with go-aheads from the Presidents of the United States, Ukraine and Russia. Simple articles and evening newscasts from all sides might lead to resumption of peace. Russia told the media in 2023 that they would support a ceasefire with approximately the same borders that existed under the Minsk peace agreement. So there’s some possibility a Minsk II peace accord could succeed.

During the first week of March 2023, Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced on CNN's Fareed Zakaria's show that he supported European Union membership for Ukraine. (See video below.) The Ukrainian government was obviously very pleased. Ten to twenty million Ukrainians reportedly fled to Europe. This writer believes it would be wonderful for them to gain European citizenship this way. That would also open up Ukraine for substantial amounts of trade. But NATO has a 2010 OSCE obligation to Russia not to expand its military presence all the way to the Russian border. So an agreement clearly must be reached with the Russian side. We don’t know yet whether President Trump plans to pursue non-NATO E.U. membership for Ukraine. This writer thinks that would benefit the Ukrainian population already residing throughout Europe.

The possibility of a second Minsk Peace Treaty is surfacing currently in British politics as well. Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson told the media in July 2024 that he wants, “Kremlin ruler Vladimir Putin… [to return to] to at least the pre-invasion borders of 2022. To prevent future conflict and uncertainty, the rest of Ukraine would have to be recognized as a free country with the right to determine its own future, including potential membership in the EU and NATO, and should be welcomed to join as soon as possible.”

Perhaps Europe can offer Ukraine the same open market access enjoyed by other European membership states without expanding NATO all the way to the Russian border. Perhaps Europe could agree to expand its marketplace but not its military presence towards Russia this way. And perhaps Russia would be understanding as a result.

Here is what Russia's chief diplomat said about returning to the Minsk peace accord and OSCE commitments.

This writer understands from the Minister of Foreign Affairs’ comments (above) that Russia can tolerate an expansion of the European marketplace but not an expansion of the European military.

China clearly hopes for peaceful resolution.

This writer believes NATO journalists should continue patterning “Russia peace.” That can increase the possibility of a peaceful result.