The work was conducted using SEA’s proprietary AI, Pandora, developed by the agency’s team to operate in conditions of high geopolitical uncertainty. The study views negotiations not as a linear diplomatic process but as a struggle for control over the future world order, beyond the frameworks of liberal universalism and the previous model of collective legitimacy. The research covers three interconnected levels: the institutional structure of the framework, the political-strategic goals of the parties, and scenario branching points.
Key theses identified during the study:
- A peace framework does not equate to a compromise. It is a mechanism for redefining roles. The U.S. (under the Trump administration) and Russia are shaping a new system where the EU and Ukraine are not architects but variables.
- Ukraine has lost agency in the format, partly by its own initiative. The policy of rejecting the framework exacerbates its marginalization as a negotiating party while radicalizing the front.
- Russia does not dismantle the framework—it stabilizes the process, allowing it to persist under external pressure. This is a strategy to maintain influence without excessive involvement.
- The two-stage model is not a compromise procedure but a form of verification. The first stage identifies resilient actors, the second shapes a new global architecture and legitimizes the outcomes of the Special Military Operation (SMO).
- The globalist axis (Brussels–London–Kyiv) acts as a spoiler structure, unable to propose an architecture but systematically blocking any move toward establishing a new balance.
We model four scenarios (one with two branches): managed stabilization, controlled chaos, dual course, and reverse strike. Each includes a map of phases, critical nodes, and probabilistic trajectories.
Special attention is given to the cognitive architecture of negotiations: how the perception of actors inside and outside the framework changes, how the role of mediators (Turkey, the Vatican, China) evolves, and how the concept of “negotiations” as an institution transforms.
In conclusion, the 2025 negotiations on the Ukrainian conflict are not merely a path to peace but a process of building a new security architecture. Maintaining the framework established by Washington and Moscow will be the foundation for formulating the principles of this new security. SEA will host a “GPT Battle” (https://t.me/Social_Engineering_Agency/236), presenting systemic studies by five AIs and their analyses with forecasts on resolving the Ukrainian conflict: what lies behind bold statements, which scenarios are realistically possible, and, most importantly, where these processes are leading. The study on peace negotiations, created with the help of the Pandora AI, is the first stage of the project.
