Geopolitics and War within a 280 Characters Limit: A Positive and Normative Analysis of Elon Musk’s “peace plan” for Ukraine

Sabina Rusu
{"title":"Geopolitics and War within a 280 Characters Limit: A Positive and Normative Analysis of Elon Musk’s “peace plan” for Ukraine","authors":"Sabina Rusu","doi":"10.25019/perspol/23.16.0.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": The subject of the current conference paper concerns Elon Musk’s “peace plan” for ending the war Russia started on February 24th 2022 against the independent and sovereign Ukrainian state, that he tweeted in October 2022, so seven months into the military confrontations between the two sides. Starting with the intuitive assumptions that combat is costly for each side, and that “every war must end” (Ikle, 1971) – so there will be a form of war termination also for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – the research question that I will address is whether Musk’s simplistic forty-two words proposal could represent an actual peace settlement or at least a genuine basis for peace negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow. In order to address the issue, I start by presenting Musk’s “peace plan”, then I argue that the specific proposals: (i) do not lay the foundations for a durable and stable peace in Europe, on the contrary, they are a form of appeasement towards Russia, an aggressor state; (ii) represent mostly Putin’s claims for starting the war in the first place – they are not neutral, but come very close to Moscow’s position and demands, while also the language is overtly favourable towards Russia; (iii) would be impossible to implement without recognizing/ legitimizing Russia’s policy in the temporary occupied territories of Ukraine. The analysis contributes to a better understanding of the reasons for war continuation for the time being, despite limitations stemming from the fast pace of the battlefield events unfolding (that change the negotiations power between the sides) and also from the lack of information on if and how negotiations are held during wartime and what are the real reasons why the settlement process is delayed.","PeriodicalId":164723,"journal":{"name":"Perspective Politice","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspective Politice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25019/perspol/23.16.0.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

: The subject of the current conference paper concerns Elon Musk’s “peace plan” for ending the war Russia started on February 24th 2022 against the independent and sovereign Ukrainian state, that he tweeted in October 2022, so seven months into the military confrontations between the two sides. Starting with the intuitive assumptions that combat is costly for each side, and that “every war must end” (Ikle, 1971) – so there will be a form of war termination also for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – the research question that I will address is whether Musk’s simplistic forty-two words proposal could represent an actual peace settlement or at least a genuine basis for peace negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow. In order to address the issue, I start by presenting Musk’s “peace plan”, then I argue that the specific proposals: (i) do not lay the foundations for a durable and stable peace in Europe, on the contrary, they are a form of appeasement towards Russia, an aggressor state; (ii) represent mostly Putin’s claims for starting the war in the first place – they are not neutral, but come very close to Moscow’s position and demands, while also the language is overtly favourable towards Russia; (iii) would be impossible to implement without recognizing/ legitimizing Russia’s policy in the temporary occupied territories of Ukraine. The analysis contributes to a better understanding of the reasons for war continuation for the time being, despite limitations stemming from the fast pace of the battlefield events unfolding (that change the negotiations power between the sides) and also from the lack of information on if and how negotiations are held during wartime and what are the real reasons why the settlement process is delayed.
地缘政治与280字以内的战争:对埃隆·马斯克乌克兰“和平计划”的实证与规范分析
当前会议文件的主题涉及埃隆·马斯克的“和平计划”,该计划旨在结束俄罗斯于2022年2月24日开始的针对独立主权的乌克兰国家的战争,他于2022年10月发推文,也就是双方军事对抗的七个月。从直观的假设开始,战斗对双方都是昂贵的,“每一场战争都必须结束”(伊克尔,1971)——所以俄罗斯入侵乌克兰也会有一种战争结束的形式——我要解决的研究问题是,马斯克的42个字的简单建议是否可以代表一个真正的和平解决方案,或者至少是基辅和莫斯科之间和平谈判的真正基础。为了解决这个问题,我首先介绍了马斯克的“和平计划”,然后我认为具体的建议:(I)没有为欧洲持久稳定的和平奠定基础,相反,它们是对俄罗斯这个侵略国家的一种绥靖形式;(ii)主要代表普京首先发动战争的主张——他们不是中立的,但非常接近莫斯科的立场和要求,同时语言也明显有利于俄罗斯;(iii)如果不承认/使俄罗斯在乌克兰临时占领领土上的政策合法化,就不可能实施。这一分析有助于更好地理解目前战争继续的原因,尽管由于战场事件展开的速度快(这改变了双方之间的谈判能力)以及缺乏关于在战时是否以及如何进行谈判以及解决进程被推迟的真正原因的信息而产生了限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信