The well- known former leading UN diplomat Michael von der Schulenburg, at present member of the German BSW in the European Parliament (the six BSW members do not belong to any political group in the EP), who since the 1980ies has been actively engaged as key UN negotiator and mediator (-he was engaged for peace in conflicts such as Iran, Afghanistan, as well 2022 at the Istanbul peace conference on the Russia -Ukraine war March 2022-,)- has recently published a booklet “Never again war” that is supposed to serve as guideline for all those who want to have peace in the Ukraine conflict and pave the way for a “New Economic World Order.” One should emphasize that von der Schulenburg participated at the first peace conference between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul – a conference whose constructive approach to peace was immediately “sabotaged” by NATO and the US (still under President Biden) and by Boris Johnson from GB – all arguing along the line, that Ukraine should and must continue the war against Russia with the aim to win it.
Von der Schulenburg begins his booklet with a quote from the “preamble” of the UN Charter (1945) that was written with the aim to formulate the founding principles of the UN Charter. It was signed 1945 (by 50 of the original members June 26 1945) in San Francisco and serves today as guideline for 193 UN member states:
“We the peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small …
This Charter, enshrined 80 years ago has in the meantime been ratified by 193 states. Its commitment for peace is “universally” important and serves as basis of “International Law” for all states and human beings on earth, von der Schulenburg emphasizes. Yet, he also notes: “The reality is different. Instead of maintaining the principles of the Charter for solving conflicts and for diplomacy, people begin to prepare for a coming war along the line: “Si vis pacem, para bellum” (If you want peace, prepare for war.) The UN Charter which once wrote “Never war again” and “the dignity of man” on its banners,” is being perverted in front of our eyes.
In light of today’s threat of a nuclear war in the age of nuclear weapons, according to von der Schulenburg, the UN Charter is even more important today than after the second world war. “While in two world wars 80 Mio people died, a third world war could within minutes wipe out the life of our entire humanity on earth. Hence, we need these principles and in the hope that these wars are hopefully over one day and that responsible politicians will gather, in order to agree upon a “new global security architecture.” Especially today there is the challenge to defend peace, dialogue and mutual understanding. Whoever today fights for “diplomatic solutions”, is often called naïve or defamed as “appeaser” or representative of “foreign interests.” It takes a lot of courage to oppose todays “Zeitgeist.”
The booklet is addressing all those who believe in the power of “International Law” and defend the principles of the UN Charter- even if they may be qualified as “unworldly”. Ultimately it is those who preach “military prowess” (Kriegstüchtigkeit) and “rearmament” who are “unworldly” (weltfremd). Sustainable security and in the long- term “peaceful coexistence” will not be reached by more and more weapons but by mutual understanding.
In the first chapter of the booklet “War or peace” von der Schulenburg studies the two interstate conflicts: the Russia- Ukraine war and the war of “Israel against Iran.” Both wars mark the first conflicts since the nuclear bombing in Hiroshima carried out by the US at the end of the second world war. In both above mentioned wars today, the unthinkable is thinkable, von der Schulenburg states: “The deployment of nuclear weapons, some of which are 80 times more powerful than those deployed in Hiroshima. Hence both wars express a so far unseen danger for mankind. The decisive aspect is that in both wars the military defeat of the strategic partner of the West, the Ukraine and Israel, is looming. These defeats coincide with a period, where the self- conscious performance of the BRICS-Plus states and of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) marks a fundamental ‘geopolitical shift’ – political, economic and technological.” These defeats stand for the growing “disintegration” of the once existing world political dominance of the West and of West’s propaganda of an “international rules-based order”, von der Schulenburg notes.
“In case of nuclear war – Europe will be the battlefield”
According to him the central question is: “Will the West, in particular NATO States – accept the geopolitical changes and the loss of their once dominating role, or will it try to stop it by military escalation? The latter would bring the world close to a nuclear Third World War. In light of this the question is whether we should not commit ourselves again to the peace principle of the UN Charter and try to solve both conflicts by negotiations?” He further adds that “despite major criticism about Trump’s decision making, Trump’s diplomatic efforts, in particular his meeting with President Putin in Alaska is a sign of hope. The fact that many European NATO states try to “undermine” Trump’s peace initiatives in the Ukraine war, is not acceptable, given the looming threat for Europe: In case of war and nuclear escalation, the European continent would become the major battlefield. A major rearmament would also not help. Would it therefore not be preferable to chose the UN Charter path for negotiations?”
Von der Schulenburg reminds that in the 1970ies and 80ies the UN Charter during the “Cold War” was not principally put into question. It contributed to the detente policy of the 70ies and 80ies such as the final Act of Helsinki (1975) to the arms control treaties and build- up of confidence building measures. Historically more and more often NATO states militarily intervened “without UN- mandate”, whether in Yugoslavia (1999), Iraq (2003), Libya (2011), Syria (2017/18). And a real “war hysteria” is gripping the West which follows the line that “rearmament” and increased “readiness for war” will save us from dictatorships such as from Russia, China and North Korea. Von der Schulenburg notes that in 2035 “NATO could control 70% (or more) of all military expenditures, while representing only 10% of world population, which stands against 90% of the world population.” It is this reality of the 90% of world population that begins to reassert itself in an emerging New World Economic Order:
“The BRICS States as well as the SCO emphasize again and again the central role of the UN Charter in a future multilateral world and an international order, that is based on the principles: peaceful coexistence and avoidance of wars, the right for social and economic development, equal sovreignity and non- interference in the internal affairs of other states. Does this not represent the unique chance for the US and the EU, to cooperate with the BRICS states and the SCO and other regional organizations in order to build up a UN Charter based collective security structure of equal states? The West doesn’t have any other alternative.”
Trumps 28-point peace-plan draft sparks fierce resistance from Ukraine and Europe
A new dynamic has started to develop in these days concerning the Ukraine war which has been faced with enormous losses on the battlefield perpetrated onto them by the Russian Armed forces: the Ukraine has essentially lost the important hub Pokrovsk, as well as the cities of Kupiansk, Siversk and other sites. The new dynamic was marked in the last days by the presentation of a 28-point peace-plan draft from the side of the Trump administration that within hours, i.e. from the start has met fierce resistance from the side of the Europeans and Kiew. At the G20 summit in South-Afrika (November 22-23) – a summit at which neither President Trump, nor President Putin and President XI from China -were present, the Europeans at the side of Ukraine’s President Selensky rejected the 28-point plan. Strongest opposition comes against the proposal that the Ukraine should agree on territorial concessions to Russia, renounce its entry into NATO and reduce its Armed Forces to 600.000 soldiers.
President Putin at a press conference (Nov.23) underlined that the peace plan had not been discussed in this form with the Russian government before being published. That in Anchorage at the US -Russia summit in August both the US and Russia had discussed a peace plan and that the US had asked then “Russia to show flexibility”. “We informed all our friends on all points, including China, the Global South and all our partners supported the possibility of an agreement. However, we saw a certain ‘pause’ on the American side after that.” According to Putin this has to do with the “Ukraine refusal” to accept such a peace. “Now a new peace plan was presented; we got the text which had not been directly discussed with us in concrete terms. The reason being that the US administration is not succeeding to get the consent from the Ukraine and the Europeans – both sides are still having the illusion to be able to inflict defeat on Russia.” Moscow thinks, Putin said, that they all have a total absence of information concerning the real situation on the battlefield, a recent example being the situation of the city Kupyansk, where on November 4th the “Russian Armed Forces” were about to take the city. The same day Kiew spread the information that Russia Armed Forces has just 200 men in the city and that Ukraine would get the city in their hands. But at that time the reality was that Russian Armed Forces had completely encircled the city. “Kiew,” he said, “is not able to understand. Both the Europeans and Kiew should understand what happens on all the other sites. We are ready for peace and we hope to resolve the situation with peaceful means.”
The 28-point plan that had been for some weeks subject of negotiations between Trump envoy Witkoff and Russian envoy Kirill Dimitriev, contains points that are supposed to be discussed between all sides. Among others it includes:
- A comprehensive non- aggression agreement is concluded between Russia, Ukraine and Europe. All ambiguities in the past 30 years are considered settled.
- Russia is expected not to attack neighboring countries and NATO is expected not to expand further.
- A dialogue will be held between Russia and NATO, mediated by the United States, to clarify all security issues and create conditions for deescalation with the aim of ensuring global security and expanding opportunities for cooperation and future economic development.
- Ukraine has to make certain territorial concessions.
- Ukraine will receive reliable security guarantees.
- The size of the Ukrainian armed forces will be limited to 600.000 soldiers.
- Ukraine commits to enshrining in its constitution that it will not join NATO, and NATO commits to include a provision in its charter stating that Ukraine will not be admitted in the future.
- Both countries commit to introducing educational programs in schools and society aimed at promoting understanding and tolerance of different cultures and reducing racism and prejudice.
- Ukraine will adopt EU regulations on religious tolerance and the protection of linguistic minorities.
- Any Nazi ideology and activities must be rejected and banned.
- Both countries will agree to abolish all discriminatory measures and guarantee the rights of Ukrainian and Russian media and educational institutions.
Wiesbaden, 23.11.2025
