Switzerland hosted the first peace summit for Ukraine in June 2024. After several peace proposals, the summit marked the first major diplomatic step towards a “comprehensive, just and lasting” peace in Ukraine. Davide Genini examines the key outcomes of the summit and places them in the context of an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape

Results of the Ukraine Peace Summit

The Ukraine Peace Summit concluded on 16 June 2024 with the adoption of a joint communiqué signed by 80 of the 100 delegations. Based on the Ukraine Peace Formula, the final declaration represents a firm commitment to international law over pure power politics. In its introduction, the communiqué implicitly recalls Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter, citing the principles of territorial integrity, sovereignty, political independence and peaceful settlement of disputes.

Independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty were recognized by absolutely all participants of the Summit. The majority of the world

Volodymyr Zelensky, speaking at a press conference after the summit

Participants also agreed on three key points. First, they pledged to ensure the safe use of nuclear energy in accordance with the IAEA Convention on Nuclear Safety. To achieve this, Ukraine must regain sovereignty over the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. Signatories also condemned nuclear threats and called on Russia to abide by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Russia’s withdrawal from the Black Sea Grain Initiative has contributed to food crises in vulnerable regions of the world. The second key pledge of participants was therefore to ensure global food security and commercial shipping in accordance with the 1996 Rome Declaration on Global Food Security. Finally, the Summit agreed to facilitate the exchange of prisoners and the return of children illegally deported by Russia to Ukraine, in accordance with international humanitarian law.

Political significance

The final joint communiqué is not legally binding under international law. However, the political message is clear. The Ukraine Peace Summit brings together 92 states with different cultures, histories and alliances. The international community is therefore keen to play a key role in peace negotiations.

The summit is the starting point for discussions that could lead to a legally binding agreement between Ukraine and Russia

The summit in Switzerland is therefore the starting point for discussions that could lead to a legally binding agreement between Ukraine and Russia in the future. The Communiqué embodies the recognition of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty and rejects the Russian peace proposal from before the summit. Consequently, Ukraine’s accession to NATO and regaining control over its lost regions are inherent conditions for lasting peace.

Limits

However, the Joint Communiqué has methodological and substantive weaknesses. Of the first, the final declaration does not present a roadmap to peace with concrete actions. Instead, it focuses only on general principles of international law. In this respect, the Communiqué resembles the form and method of non-binding UN resolutions more than a peace plan.

Only 100 of the 160 invited delegations attended. China refused to attend and Russia was not welcome.

In terms of content, the absence of key actors is striking. Only 100 of the 160 invited delegations de facto participated. China refused to attend and Russia was not even invited. Moreover, 20 delegations did not sign the declaration: Armenia, Bahrain, Brazil (observer), Colombia, the Holy See (observer), India, Indonesia, Iraq, Libya, Mexico, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates. It is worth noting that traditionally like-minded partners – OAS, OSCE, UN (observer) and the Ecumenical Patriarchate (observer) – also did not sign the final declaration.

The first step on a long road to peace

The Ukraine Peace Summit was a successful first step in building peace between Ukraine and Russia. The joint communiqué signed by 80 delegations reflects the international community’s support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. It also reaffirmed the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act as building blocks for the future peace agreement. Meanwhile, the summit was a perfect reflection of our increasingly multipolar world.

Of the enlarged BRICS, only Argentina signed the Communiqué. It is clear that delegates at the Ukraine Peace Summit have a different worldview than those at the G7. In particular, the non-participation of China and Russia meant that the Summit’s ambition was inherently limited from the start. It is difficult to agree on a real peace plan without the directly involved actors.

The more support Ukraine receives, the more likely it is that a peace agreement will be reached at the diplomatic table.

As a result, the final statement marks the start of what is likely to be a long diplomatic road, inextricably linked to continued military and financial support for Ukraine from EU and NATO members. The more support Ukraine receives, the more likely it is that a peace agreement will be at the diplomatic table. In this scenario, the 2024 US elections will determine the fate of the next round of diplomatic negotiations on Ukraine.