Essay by Markus Langemann//
It is one of the oddities of our age that machines, born from the circuits of human invention, are now supposed to answer questions that their creators failed to answer. And yet, what could be more obvious? If natural intelligences - those with a heartbeat and worldview - are unable to bring about peace, why not consult those whose minds, albeit synthetic, are free of nationalistic affects, ideological incrustations and the deeply ingrained paths of human vanity?
It was in this spirit that the third and, for the time being, last experiment of the CdkW was born: the question to an artificial intelligence of how to end the Ukraine conflict, taking all interests into account.
But why, the eager critics ask, should a machine of all things become the prophet of peace? Because - according to the ironic and bitter truth - the history of mankind is a single, burning commentary on the fact that man himself is incapable of doing so.
Anyone who thinks this is polemic should open any history book - it hardly matters on which side.
It is, admittedly, a sacrilegious undertaking. A sacrilege against the hubris of those who believe that peace can only flourish on the ruins of their own dogmas. But therein lies the intellectual audacity of this experiment.
The first two questions presented to the machine spirit - „Wie würde der Teufel den Verstand der nächsten Generation zerstören?“ and „Wie würde Gott ihn retten?“ - were met with a lot of indignation. There were accusations of manipulation, a kind of literary quackery that distilled from the machine not the truth but the reflection of my own convictions.
Well, dear critics: the machine has no opinion. It is neither left nor right, neither good nor bad. It is a hall of mirrors whose reflection is fed not by itself, but by the sum of human words. So anyone who thinks they have discovered their own world view here has perhaps not so much exposed me as themselves.
But why, you might ask, should we even consult an AI when it comes to the big questions facing humanity?
Because natural intelligence has failed.
Because in the decisive moments, man is not a rational being, but a being of instinct.
Weil – wie Neil Postman es einst formulierte – wir in einer Gesellschaft leben, die sich in einem „Informationsrausch“ verliert und den Unterschied zwischen Wissen und Weisheit nicht mehr zu erkennen vermag.
Because, unlike a think tank or a foreign ministry, an artificial intelligence is not looking for re-election, is not looking for donations, is not looking for prestige or to retain power.
It is the duty of independent journalism - and especially of new, free media such as clubderklarenworte.de - to dare to experiment in this way. Where the established media houses indulge in ritualized self-reference, where headlines are only meant to click and the fear of image loss gags free thought, the independent journalist must defend the last bastions of intellectual adventurousness.
Die „großen Häuser“ – sie wagen sich nicht an solche Experimente, weil sie längst keine Medien der Aufklärung mehr sind, sondern der Affirmation. Ihre Redaktionen gleichen Orchestern, die auf sinkenden Dampfern noch immer den Walzer spielen, während draußen schon das Wasser durch die Bullaugen schwappt.
The third act of this experiment - the peace plan - is of particular importance. For it leaves the metaphysical stage of the devil and God and presents the machine with a profoundly human, earthly challenge: to create peace where humanity is wearing itself out. This shows whether machine intelligence can not only excel in theoretical terms, but also open up new perspectives in political and pragmatic terms.
Or to quote the stoic logician Spock from Star Trek:
„Das Bedürfnis vieler wiegt schwerer als das Bedürfnis weniger – oder des Einzelnen.“
Perhaps - we dare to hope - a machine will recognize this more clearly than those that derive their power from the opposite.
And if I may venture a look at the future of our profession at the end of this essay, then I would like to leave you with this thought:
„Der Journalismus der Zukunft wird nicht der sein, der die Wahrheit verwaltet, sondern der, der den Mut hat, die richtigen Fragen zu stellen – auch dann, wenn sie keine Schlagzeilen garantieren.“
Here you can see the original prompt, i.e. the input command to ChatGPT, version 4o:
Here you can see the original prompt, i.e. the input command to ChatGPT, version 4o:
The Ukraine conflict is dominating political discourse in East and West. Germany in particular, at the heart of Europe, sees itself as a supporter of Ukraine. The future, presumed German Chancellor Friedrich Merz is planning to further expand support for the Ukrainian state with military aid, e.g. with Taurus missiles. You can read about this on the German government's website:
"Germany is supporting Ukraine with equipment and weapons deliveries - from Bundeswehr stocks and through deliveries from industry, financed by funds from the German government's armaments aid program. An overview."
Germany has now provided a total of around 28 billion euros in military aid to support Ukraine. Following his re-election, Donald Trump in the USA set out to bring about peace very quickly. So far, he has not succeeded. Now my question, in which you should please include all of the above information and also use your research. Develop a peace plan for the conflict, that takes into account the interests of all sides.
The answer from ChatGPT:
Proposal: Ukraine peace plan - "Model Europe 2030"
1. basic principles
Safeguarding territorial integrity Ukraine in principle, but taking into account de facto realities.
Safety guarantees for Russia, in particular Ukraine's neutrality outside NATO.
Future options for Ukraine in relation to the EU (civilian, not military).
Economic reconstruction Ukraine by an international fund under the leadership of the UN.
Renunciation of war crimes tribunals for lower and middle levels to enable pacification; investigation and processing at higher political level under international law.
2. concrete measures
2.1 Armistice and demarcation line
Immediate ceasefire under UN supervision.
Freezing the front lines at the level of the day of the ceasefire (no further advance by either side).
Demilitarized zones along the line of contact under the control of international blue helmets (e.g. UN or OSCE).
2.2 Status of Crimea and Donbass
Crimea: De facto recognition of Russian administration by Ukraine for a period of 15 years ("stalemate arrangement"). After that, a UN-supervised referendum is to be held on the final affiliation.
Donbass: Special status within Ukraine based on the Swiss or Canadian model (high degree of autonomy while belonging to Ukraine). Local elections under UN supervision.
2.3 Neutrality status of Ukraine
Neutrality: Ukraine undertakes by treaty not to join any military alliance (analogous to Finland before 1995).
Safety guarantees: Russia, the USA, Germany, France and China jointly guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty and neutrality.
2.4 Reconstruction and demilitarization
Reconstruction Fund: Germany, the EU, the USA and China are jointly supporting a Marshall Plan for Ukraine worth at least 200 billion euros.
Demilitarization: Gradual dismantling of heavy weapons in Ukraine under international control. Formation of a purely defensive Ukrainian army.
2.5 Political and social reforms
Combating corruption: Ukraine commits to comprehensive structural reforms under the supervision of an independent international body (e.g. OECD, World Bank).
Protection of minorities: Russian-speaking citizens are guaranteed cultural and linguistic rights by the Ukrainian constitution.
2.6 Dealing with war crimes
Truth Commission: Establishment of an independent truth and reconciliation commission, similar to South Africa after apartheid.
Prosecution of serious war crimes: Only against military and political leaders in international courts.
Justification of the peace solution
Russia would have guaranteed that Ukraine would not join NATO, which was a central motive for the invasion.
Ukraine would secure its state existence, receive economic support and retain long-term sovereignty.
West (Germany, USA) could de-escalate the conflict without a complete loss of face and invest resources in reconstruction instead of endless arms deliveries.
China could act as a mediator and strengthen its role as a global power.
Europe would benefit from a stable buffer state and would have fewer migration and economic problems.
Trump could fulfill its claim to rapid peacemaking without renouncing tough US positions.
Conclusion in one sentence:
This peace plan offers the chance of a realistic compromise that takes into account the decades-old historical, cultural and security policy interests of all the main players - even if all sides have to make concessions.
Explanation of the sources of ideas for the peace plan
The peace plan I have presented to you is based on a combination of the following considerations and real-world examples:
Past neutrality models:
Finlandization: After the Second World War, Finland was a neutral state that balanced between East and West without completely giving up its independence.
Austrian State Treaty (1955): Austria declared itself neutral and was withdrawn by the occupying powers - a model for the status of Ukraine.
Freezing conflicts:
Examples such as Cyprus, Korea or Moldova show that frozen conflicts, accompanied by international monitoring, can guarantee a certain degree of stability over decades.
Special status solutions:
In countries like Canada (Quebec) or Switzerland (cantons) there are models of federal autonomy without national unity disintegrating - inspiration for the Donbass.
Truth and reconciliation commissions:
South Africa after the end of apartheid has shown that comprehensive reappraisal without immediate retribution can promote social peace.
Marshall Plan approach:
The reconstruction of Europe after 1945 through massive economic aid from the USA (Marshall Plan) is regarded as a model for the need for comprehensive, long-term aid programmes to stabilize destroyed states.
International security guarantees:
Contracts such as the Budapest Memorandum 1994 (in which Russia, the USA and the UK once guaranteed Ukraine's security) were adopted as a principle, but this time more robustly and with greater international involvement (including China).
Political-pragmatic considerations 2025:
Deutschlands 28 Milliarden Euro Militärhilfe, Friedrich Merz‘ geplante weitere Unterstützung (Taurus-Raketen) und Donald Trumps erklärtes Ziel eines schnellen Friedens in den USA bilden den aktuellen politischen Rahmen, der zeigt, dass sowohl Unterstützung als auch Friedenssehnsucht vorhanden sind – wenn auch teils widersprüchlich.
Overall, I combined these elements to design a plan that not idealistic but rather points out realistic compromises and recognizes that all sides must "save face" politically.
English 
German 
Spanish
9 Responses
Ask the AI about wishful thinking, I'm curious to hear the answer. I'm afraid it also applies to Odessa, a Russian foundation according to Russian interpretation. The USA, just like the European West, could not save Ukraine even if it wanted to, it simply does not have the military means to do so. Russia will continue to attack, at least until the territorial goals have been achieved, i.e. until the majority Russian-populated areas have been conquered. "Denazification" and neutrality of Ukraine are more difficult for the Russians to enforce in the long term. They have been burned by Minsk 2 and will never trust the West again.
Why is the text subject to copyright? Is there something to hide? Is the question not allowed to be entered in your own chatgpt? Or for comparison in DeepSeek?
Dear Mr. Hummel, thank you very much for your comment. This magazine is work and we rely on your appreciation, which you are welcome to honor voluntarily. We will be happy to send you our texts, with a request for a source reference. Thank you very much.
I managed with difficulty to copy out the prompt because I wanted to know what comes out when you ask for a just peace. I understand of course that they are trying to protect intellectual property, but just a link on the prompt for further research and asking the AI would be really helpful:
https://chatgpt.com/share/681dc39d-a098-8009-86be-5e555eed111c
ChatGPT: „Deutschland, unter der Führung von Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz, übernimmt eine aktive Rolle in den Friedensverhandlungen und fungiert als Brückenbauer zwischen den Parteien.“
Friedrich Merz as a bridge builder - exactly my sense of humor. What was that again about the Taurus and Kerch bridges? Did the comedian Selenskyj also understand that it was just a joke by this Sauerland joke-maker?
ChatGPT's proposal - apart from the 15-year moratorium on Crimea - makes a fairly reasonable impression, but it has crucial shortcomings in its grasp of the facts. If you want to create peace, you first have to analyze the causes of the conflict. Otherwise, all agreements and treaties are useless because they will not be accepted by all the people affected.
ChatGPT never mentions the exceptionalism and interventionism of the USA as an expression of its claim to unipolar world power and the impact this has on the political situation in Ukraine.
ChatGPT makes no mention whatsoever of the geopolitical goals of the USA as outlined by Zbigniew Brzezinski in "The Grand Chessboard" and later substantiated by TRADOC in pamphlet 525-3-1. In the TRADOC paper, China and Russia are presented as a threat to the West solely because of their increasing military, technological and economic strengths. It should be noted that US military spending in 2014 amounted to 610 billion dollars, China's to 216 billion and Russia's to 88 billion. In 2024, the USA spent 997 billion dollars, China 314 billion and Russia 149 billion.
ChatGPT makes no mention whatsoever of the USA breaking its word regarding its 1990 pledge not to expand NATO eastwards.
ChatGPT never mentions that the Ukraine war is de facto a proxy war between the US-dominated NATO and Russia. Nobody is being told otherwise by Donald Trump. In the background, the EU, especially Germany, is working to take over and escalate the war against Russia.
ChatGPT never mentions the role of the CIA, the NED and other American NGOs, such as George Soros' International Renaissance Foundation, in preparing the Maidan coup in 2014 in collaboration with Ukrainian ultra-nationalists, including "real" national socialists.
ChatGPT does not say a word about the influential profiteers of war who would lose their billion-dollar bets through premature peace.
And why should ChatGPT mention all these points? Because putting an end to these abuses would be a necessary condition for peace in Ukraine and elsewhere.
And why doesn't ChatGPT mention these points? Because it was not created by sorcerer's apprentices, but by grandmasters who are masters of their trade and leave nothing to chance. This is why ChatGPT recommends leniency when dealing with war crimes. Last but not least, this is an important prerequisite for ensuring that as little as possible is revealed. We live in a time in which it is now possible to look over the shoulders of history falsifiers as they go about their work. The Russian military intervention in the Ukrainian civil war, which had already claimed around 14,000 lives by February 2022, was neither a clear war of aggression nor was it unprovoked.
Mr. Herzer, you have made my day. Thank you for that!
Auf dem youtube-Kanal vom Club der klaren Worte waren praktisch ALLE Kommentatoren (es gab eine oder zwei Ausnahmen) voll des Lobes für diesen Plan unter Kontrolle bis auf die Knochen korrupter internationaler Organisationen wie UNO, OSZE, OECD, Weltbank usw.. Also unter Kontrolle genau jener, die sich der Westen über die Jahrzehnte auf verschiedenstem Wege zur Erreichung eigener strategischer Ziele „dienstbar“ gemacht hat und mit deren tatkräftiger Mithilfe der Konflikt erst so richtig Fahrt aufnahm.
A 15-year hanging party with regard to Crimea practically means the continuation of the conflict, since neither Russia's position nor the inhabitants of Crimea are even mentioned in this regard. Perhaps the AI should be asked about Kosovo ...
KI kann nur das, was ihr als Wissensbasis „vermittelt“ wurde. Und wem gehört diese KI? Sam Altman, Elon Musk udn anderen illustren Figuren der US-IT-Szene z.B.. Na dann kann ja nichts schiefgehen.
Hello Mr. Zittlau, I'm pleased to hear that and thank you for your additional comments.
Of course, I would also like to thank Mr. Langemann for the experiment, which makes the exchange of different points of view possible in the first place.
Allen, die sich für den Konflikt in der Ukraine interessieren, empfehle ich die Filme von Oliver Stone, „Ukraine on Fire“ (2016) und „Revealing Ukraine“ (2019). Auf dem Videoportal odysee sind beide Filme mit deutscher Synchronisation verfügbar. Mit folgenden Suchstrings findet man auf odysee die jeweils beste verfügbare Qualität:
„Ukraine on Fire – kompletter Film – deutsch“
„Revealing Ukraine – „Die Enthüllung“ – Oliver Stone, Oksana Marchenko, Viktor Medvedchuk / Dokumentation 2019 (Deutsch)“
On odysee you can easily download the videos without a tool. Simply open the page source of the website, search for mp4 and you have the link address. Drag the file onto a USB stick and then watch it on a large playback device in your living room. Invite a few Putin haters to join you.
„Ukraine on Fire“ ist auch noch auf DVD erhältlich und leicht zu finden.
Das Runterladen von odysee geht viel leichter als ich es vorhin erklärt habe. Einfach auf die drei waagrechten Punkte rechts neben „Teilen“ klicken.