In the run-up to the Munich Security Conference and the escalation surrounding Ukraine, there only seems to be further escalation. After the de-escalation calls, which the German ex-NATO General Naumann also signed, his reaction to the proposal by the former ÖVP member and President of the Council of Europe Walter Schwimmer regarding neutrality for Ukraine based on the Austrian model was as follows

“I made the suggestion of neutrality for the separatist areas together with others back in 2014. I think the South Tyrol solution would still be an option for the separatist areas. On the other hand, in view of the associated restriction of Ukraine’s rights under the Helsinki Agreement, the Charter of Paris and the Budapest Agreement, I consider neutrality for Ukraine as a whole to be hardly acceptable. It would amount to a compulsion for Ukraine, which would also have to change its constitution. I don’t think this option is currently negotiable. „

 Global Review sees it differently and commented as follows:

„Dear General Nauman,

 it should be clear that Russia will never accept neutrality of the Donbass. It’s all about neutrality. for all of Ukraine, which Global Review supports for  2 reasons. It’s the only way to de-escalate. We would even go so far as to offer neutrality to Ukraine and Belarus as buffer and bridge states. What always amazes me about General Domroese and you is the incorrect analysis of power relations, in my opinion. Somehow you are so socialized that the old West still exists in the strength of the Cold War or in the globalization euphoria and the End of history in the 90s, but that’s over and that  just since dot-com, the Iraq and Afghan wars, China’s WTO entry and the 2008 financial crisis, Brexit and whatelse weakened the West you know that the hegemony of the West is no longer the case. We therefore find it logical to first try to consolidate the remaining West, B3W, Global Gateway, i.e. the western New Silk Road, international minimum tax, the US and EU high-tech self-sufficiency program, but to refrain from further NATO and EU expansions, which would further undermine coherence, and to refrain from doing so. If the West wants to expand further, it is doomed to decline as a result of an imperial overstretch that the US already has. The aim must be to group a hard EU and NATO core with allies in other parts of the world and a liberal-democratic political hard core that will no longer expand for the time being, perhaps even kicking Orban out of the EU and consolidating itself and making it so hard that the new West is prepared to face the future hard cores of China, Russia and other authoritarianisms. And that is not only possible through the military, but first through political and economic consolidation. Ukraine’s neutrality would bring about de-escalation, relaxation and breathing space for the consolidation of a hard Western core, and would prevent further imperial overstretch, especially since that wouldn’t push Putin even more into China’s arms. Of course, it is clear that NATO will not roll back before 1997. So much for a few night thoughts.“

General ret. Naumann then commented on this as follows:

„Thank you and I think we’re closerto each other than you think. Nor am I thinking of further NATO enlargements, except for SWE and FIN, but I would like to see the order of the Paris Charter preserved. If one came to the result of neutrality of UKR within and after negotiations at the request of the UKR, ok. I can also imagine security agreements with RUS and I am absolutely with you when it comes to consolidation of the core West, ie US, CA and a core Europe. What is important to me is an order that protects and preserves the freedom of the individual.“