The only significant benefit for NATO in perpetuating the perception of security competition with Russia is that it gives NATO governments an important way of looking like NATO is not responsible for problems within alliance borders. (The Russian government doesn’t need the same benefit but derives it as well. Russians assume a foreign influence is at fault when there are imperfect experiences within Russia.)
This writer believes Russia has good reason to agree to a weapons-free Ukraine that allows Ukraine to continue its existing partnership with NATO. The Ukrainian government is respected globally. The Ukrainian population is welcome globally as a result. (This includes Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens!) The Ukrainian population can enjoy all of Europe and the Americas freely. Russia may feel comfortable with that happening as long as their is peace for the Russian people.
European media has been surfacing the possibility more countries will depart the EU. European disunity makes EU membership for Ukraine a little less important. (Probably countries are going to further close their borders to one another there.) But Ukrainians may appreciate further integration there anyway.
According to Russian President Vladimir Putin in May 2023, “Moscow wants a Peaceful, Free and stable Future.” He went on to say that, "For Russia there are no hostile nations in the West or in the East...” And in May 2024, the negotiating positions of the United States and Russia became nearly the same. Russia offered the entire map of Ukraine to the Ukrainians in the twelve point Chinese peace proposal. Russia also offered an immediate ceasefire. Russia and the U.S. are almost on the same page as a result. But that does not mean the conflict is over. Recent events in Ukraine suggest not.
This writer believes NATO populations are developing more peaceful intuitions as a consequence of patterning improvements in NATO news. Populations also watched ninety countries attend a Switzerland peace conference for Ukraine. So people may be ready for a resolution.
Russia is clearly doing everything possible to avoid influencing European and U.S. politics. Political neutrality was/is a very strategic attitude from Russia.
NATO will be run by new people - regardless of this year’s political developments in the United States and Europe because Mark Rutte is in the process of taking over for Jens Stoltenberg. NATO command and control changes may perpetuate or abbreviate the conflict.
This writer may or may not work on peace the same way in the future….
There may be enough progress on public safety in NATO states for this website to become less important. NATO news is also no longer inciting. New administrations and new media may benefit from having some information here on communication and foreign policy. But this writer hopes there is going to be real and lasting peace, and that their needs can consequently be met succinctly.
We’ll see how things develop this year.
The minimum all sides should agree to is a return to the "Minsk Peace Treaty," because it's essentially the same line of control that kept the peace there for almost a decade under an agreement entered into by then-Vice President Joe Biden and President Barrack Obama, and that was signed by several European leaders and the Ukraine head of state. There is arguably an existing moral obligation to it.
But perhaps NATO, Ukraine and Russia may not need to return to the Minsk peace treaty as a first step towards a comprehensive agreement for the entirety of the country. Peaceful people pray for understanding from all sides. Everyone can simply commit to a weapons-free nation now. NATO and Russia can simply keep weapons away from each others’ borders (unless alliance eventuallt forms between the Russian and NATO security teams).