top of page

Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks: Balancing Justice and Peace

The Russia-Ukraine conflict has inflicted immeasurable suffering and devastation upon both nations and the international community. As the possibility of peace talks between Russia and Ukraine emerges on the horizon, the fate of justice in these negotiations is a matter of paramount importance.

Balancing the pursuit of criminal accountability with the imperative to secure lasting peace is a complex challenge that requires thoughtful consideration.

The Russian government's reluctance to entertain any proposals for accountability is a major hurdle. They are expected to vehemently resist any attempts to bring their officials and personnel to justice for their actions in Ukraine. Their resistance may take the form of arguments for immunity or amnesties aimed at shielding individuals from criminal prosecutions. To navigate this intricate issue, two overarching strategies are being considered: one that prioritizes peace objectives exclusively and another that seeks to intertwine justice and peace goals.

The people of Ukraine, supported by their global allies, are fervently seeking justice for the victims of heinous crimes committed during this conflict. These crimes encompass a range of atrocities, including genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression on Ukrainian territory. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's 10-Point Peace Plan notably emphasizes "justice." This includes the establishment of a Special Tribunal to prosecute aggression against Ukraine and the creation of an international compensation mechanism.

One approach is to keep peace negotiations completely separate from accountability efforts. This strategy would focus solely on achieving peace objectives while allowing criminal accountability to proceed independently. Negotiators would prioritize ending the conflict, securing the withdrawal of Russian troops, upholding territorial integrity, addressing reparations, facilitating the return of Ukrainian children, and arranging for the exchange of prisoners.

Importantly, this strategy would not involve discussions about justice objectives. While this simplifies the negotiation process, it could potentially result in a slower and less predictable path to accountability.

Under this strategy, accountability would primarily rely on non-Russian courts, international organizations, and civil society groups. There would be no effort to leverage peace negotiations to compel Russian cooperation in atrocity crimes investigations or the enforcement of arrest warrants. This approach allows justice to advance independently, free from the potentially disruptive influence of being linked to the peace talks.

An alternative strategy is to incorporate justice objectives into the peace agreement, albeit with flexibility. Ukrainian negotiators, representing a population eager for accountability, may find it challenging to completely dismiss justice. However, Russian negotiators are likely to resist any accountability measures that could be perceived as an admission of guilt.

Balancing justice and peace is essential to address the complex aftermath of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. While justice may be delayed, it should not be denied. These strategies provide a pragmatic framework for pursuing both peace and accountability in the quest for a better future for the people of Ukraine and Russia.


bottom of page