top of page

CANCELWW3.COM

We cannot risk major power wars with today's technology. Please consider our innovative ideas and three viable solutions, before the lack of painful compromise destabilizes our world in ways we can't predict.

These compromises may be hard to take, and are not meant to bring justice, but peace and survival. 

Working Towards Peace

Earth

The CancelWW3 Project: A Strategic Path to Global Peace. We face a critical moment, with three major conflicts at risk of escalating into global disaster. This project offers practical, innovative solutions for peace. Cancel WW3 is a diplomatic effort that aims to bring the most comprehensive and workable solutions to these intractable conflicts, that ultimately endanger all of us if they don't end. 

Workable Peace Plans

Israel/Palestine
Conflict

War in Ukraine

Cancelww3: A Peace Plan for the Middle East that Can Work

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has reached a terminal stage that potentially threatens global security due to actors potentially working together to leverage cheap technology to disrupt. As nuclear powers are drawn into proxy wars and AI-generated disinformation accelerates chaos, the world faces a stark choice:

  • The Path of Inaction will cost the world an estimated $10.2 trillion over the next fifteen years.

  • The Path of Transformation requires a one-time investment of roughly $1.4 trillion — less than 15% of the cost of inaction — to solve the conflict permanently.

The Pathway Accord offers this transformative alternative, delivering a comprehensive peace plan that provides what all parties fundamentally need.

​

A New Paradigm: Healing, Agency, and Prosperity

The solution begins with healing rather than politics, built on four interconnected pillars:

  1. Global Validation: An International Week of Grieving and Witnessing provides global validation of Palestinian suffering, creating the emotional space for a new future.

  2. Democratic Agency: A democratic referendum, The Pathway Ballot, empowers Palestinians worldwide to choose their own future.

  3. A Generational Leap: For those who opt in, the plan provides internationally recognized citizenship and economic opportunity in thriving new communities built in partnership with three East African coutnries  that are interested. These host nations gain accelerated development through massive infrastructure investment.

  4. A Preserved Homeland: Gaza is completely rebuilt into a carbon-neutral city,  serving as a permanent, modern, and internationally secured Palestinian stronghold for up to four million people.

  5. The Jerusalem solution is not painless, but it is fruitful. Each side receives what was once unimaginable, and each side yields what it never wished to give. Israel gains the possibility of rebuilding its Temple on the northern portion of the Mount; Palestine gains the capital of East Jerusalem.

​

A Victory for All Stakeholders

This framework is designed to deliver a definitive victory for everyone involved:

  • For Palestinians: They gain dignity through global recognition, an end to statelessness with internationally recognized passports, and the chance to build prosperous futures while maintaining a powerful connection to their homeland.

  • For Israelis: They achieve permanent security through conflict resolution rather than military dominance, a solution to the long-term demographic dilemma, and true acceptance within the Middle East.

  • For Host Nations: They experience a generational economic leap through $450 billion in direct development funding.

  • For the World: It saves trillions of dollars while preventing a potential World War III.

The Implementation Blueprint: A Realistic and Proven Path

This is not a theoretical exercise. The plan is grounded in proven, practical mechanisms:

  • Phased Rollout: A carefully sequenced seven-phase implementation over fifteen years ensures stability and builds momentum.

  • Financial Integrity: All funds are managed through an ironclad, Swiss-based trust that releases money only when independently verified milestones are achieved, making the process immune to political interference.

  • Guaranteed Security: A Gaza International Security Force of 15,000 personnel from neutral nations ensures demilitarization while protecting civilian populations.

  • Israeli Commitments: Israel commits to halting West Bank settlement expansion and preserving land for potential Palestinian return after a sustained period of peace.

  • Historical Precedent: The framework builds upon proven models of success, including the Marshall Plan, Singapore's development, Rwanda's reconstruction, and South Korea's transformation, demonstrating that rapid, large-scale change is not only possible but has been achieved before.

​

A Call to Action: The Decision is Ours

The choice is stark: continue the ruinous path toward global catastrophe, or choose the courage to build something better. The technology exists, the money is available, and the historical precedents prove it can work. What has been missing is the collective will to choose construction over destruction, hope over fear, and a future where children grow up in peace rather than conflict.

The Pathway Accord offers that future. The decision is ours.

​

 

The Pathway to Stable US/China Peace

 

 

A 7-Year De-escalation Framework

 

An Initiative of the Global Citizens for Peace Project

 

I. Executive Summary & Preamble

 

The world has entered an era of intense great power competition. The friction from this transition, fueled by unresolved historical grievances and a breakdown of trust, has brought us to the most dangerous geopolitical moment since the Cold War. The current trajectory of military posturing and zero-sum thinking is unsustainable and leads toward catastrophic conflict.

This document rejects the inevitability of war. It is a pragmatic, time-bound framework for de-escalation that front-loads tangible incentives to immediately lower tensions. Our goal is not to eliminate rivalry, but to ensure it remains in the economic and diplomatic domains by making the costs of conflict clear and the benefits of peace immediate.

 

II. Core Principles: The Foundation for a Stable Peace

 

  • Pragmatic De-escalation: Prioritize immediate, verifiable actions that reduce the risk of military miscalculation.

  • Historical Acknowledgment: Recognize the historical narratives that fuel conflict to enable respectful, peer-level dialogue.

  • Reciprocal & Proportional Action: Every concession must be met with a verifiable and proportional counter-move. Trust is built through action, not words.

  • Managed Interdependence: Treat key strategic assets, particularly semiconductors, as shared global utilities whose stability is a mutual security interest.

  • Time-Bound Resolution: A fixed timeline forces decisive action and prevents indefinite delay.

 

Phase 1: De-escalation & Verification (Years 1-2)

 

Objective: To halt the arms race spiral and prove that tangible concessions will be met, not exploited.

 

Action 1.1: The Foundational Summit & Historical Acknowledgment

 

  • The Initiative: A specially convened summit hosted by a neutral nation (e.g., Singapore).

  • Key Action: The summit opens with a formal address by former Western leaders acknowledging historical complexities, including the "Century of Humiliation."

  • Immediate Reciprocal Action: In response, China agrees to re-establish and mandate the use of all military-to-military hotlines.

 

Action 1.2: The First Tangible Bargain: Military Restraint for Technology Access

 

  • The US Offer: A public, 24-month moratorium on deploying new offensive military assets within the First Island Chain.

  • China's Reciprocal Action: A verifiable, 24-month halt to all large-scale military exercises and gray-zone operations in the Taiwan Strait.

  • The US Reward: After 12 months of verified Chinese restraint, the US will authorize the sale of mature-node semiconductor chips (28nm and older) to Chinese civilian companies.

 

Action 1.3: Creating the Oversight Body

 

  • The Initiative: Establish the "Global Semiconductor Stability Consortium," including the US, China, the EU, Japan, and Taiwan.

  • Mandate: This body's initial task is to verify the civilian end-use of the chips and act as the forum for future technology negotiations.

 

Phase 2: The Grand Bargain (Years 3-7)

 

Objective: To implement a durable framework that resolves the core drivers of the conflict through reciprocal de-militarization.

 

Action 2.1: The Sovereignty Moratorium

 

  • The Agreement: A formal, binding 7-year moratorium on actions that unilaterally change the status quo.

  • China's Commitment: Formally renounce the use of force and all coercive measures against Taiwan for the duration.

  • Taiwan's Commitment: Agree not to pursue de jure independence during the moratorium.

  • The US Commitment: Formally acknowledge a peaceful, negotiated outcome is the objective and commit to the military drawdowns below.

 

Action 2.2: The Grand Bargain on Regional Security

 

  • The US "Give" (De-Encirclement): A slow, conditional, and verifiable drawdown of specific offensive military assets from key bases in the First Island Chain.

  • China's "Give" (De-Threatening): In direct reciprocity, a proportional and permanent pullback of specific missile batteries and naval assets from the coast opposite Taiwan.

  • Verification: Both drawdowns will be monitored and verified by the Consortium.

 

Action 2.3: The Technology Dividend (Unlocked by Security)

 

  • The Condition: This bargain is unlocked step-by-step as military de-escalation milestones are met.

  • The US "Give": Through the Consortium, agree to a managed-access program for previous-generation AI accelerator chips for verified use in Chinese civilian AI research.

  • The Result: This creates a clear sequence: mutual military de-escalation directly unlocks access to vital technology. It replaces the arms race with a "peace race."

 

Action 2.4: The Final Status Determination

 

  • The Initiative: In Year 7, the moratorium concludes. The future status of Taiwan is to be decided by a peaceful mechanism negotiated by all three parties, under the observation of the Consortium.

 

IV. Call to Action

 

The choice between managed competition and catastrophic conflict is before us. This framework provides a viable, time-bound, and pragmatic pathway. It replaces empty promises with verifiable actions and recognizes that true security lies in shared stability. The responsibility to act upon it rests with leaders of courage and vision.

The time to begin is now.

Russia/Ukraine

A Pragmatic Framework for Peace in Ukraine

 

1. Executive Summary

 

After more than a decade of conflict, escalating into a devastating full-scale war, the situation in Ukraine has reached a bloody stalemate. A decisive military victory for either side is projected to come at an unacceptable human and economic cost, risking the total collapse of the Ukrainian state and threatening broader global stability. The proliferation of cheap, highly effective warfare tactics (e.g., drone swarms, FPV attacks) demonstrated in this conflict poses a new and urgent threat to the international order.

This document outlines a framework for a "grand bargain," titled The Kyiv Security Compact. It is a peace of pragmatism, not justice. It requires agonizing concessions from Kyiv and significant strategic realignment from Moscow. The core principle is the exchange of formally recognized territory for an ironclad, internationally enforced security guarantee, thereby resolving the primary security dilemmas of both nations and stabilizing Eastern Europe.

 

2. Dueling Perspectives: The Roots of an Intractable Conflict

 

A durable peace requires acknowledging the deeply entrenched—and entirely contradictory—narratives that led to this war.

 

Ukraine's Perspective:

 

Ukraine's narrative is one of a nation fighting for its very existence and its sovereign right to self-determination after centuries of Russian domination.

  • Sovereign Choice: The Maidan Revolution is understood as a profound expression of national will—a rejection of a corrupt, Russian-controlled kleptocracy in favor of a democratic, European future. The right to choose its own alliances is seen as a fundamental principle of sovereignty that is not subject to a veto from Moscow.

  • The Start of the War (2014): For Ukraine, the war did not begin in 2022. It began in 2014 with Russia's blatant violation of international law: the illegal military seizure and annexation of Crimea, followed by the covert invasion, financing, and arming of a proxy war in the Donbas. This was a direct betrayal of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, under which Ukraine surrendered its nuclear arsenal in exchange for security assurances from Russia, the US, and the UK.

  • Unspeakable Suffering and Resilience: Ukraine has endured a level of devastation not seen in Europe since World War II. Cities like Mariupol, Bakhmut, and Avdiivka have been erased. Millions have been displaced, and evidence of widespread war crimes is extensive. The perspective of the Ukrainian people is one of unimaginable sacrifice. They are not just fighting for territory; they are fighting for their right to exist, for their language, for their culture, and for a future where their children do not live under the threat of annihilation. To them, ceding land feels like rewarding genocide. The only acceptable reason to do so would be to prevent the complete destruction of their nation.

  • ​

The Russian Perspective:

 

Russia views the post-Cold War era as a series of betrayals and encroachments on its legitimate security interests.

  • NATO Expansion: Moscow contends that verbal promises were made by Western leaders in the 1990s that NATO would not expand "one inch eastward." The subsequent waves of NATO expansion were seen as a deliberate strategy to encircle and weaken Russia. The 2008 Bucharest Summit, where President George W. Bush championed the idea that Ukraine and Georgia "will become members of NATO," was interpreted as a direct existential threat—a crossing of an unambiguous red line.

  • The 2014 "Coup": The Maidan Revolution is framed not as a popular uprising, but as a Western-orchestrated illegal coup. From this perspective, the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych was not rejecting Europe, but rather the punitive and economically damaging terms of the EU Association Agreement, which came with harsh IMF austerity demands. The infamous leaked phone call between U.S. officials (the "Nuland-Pyatt call") discussing the formation of a post-Yanukovych government is presented as irrefutable proof of U.S. micromanagement of the overthrow.

  • The War in Donbas: Following the 2014 change in government, Moscow frames its actions in Crimea and the Donbas as a necessary intervention to protect the rights of ethnic Russians and Russian-speakers from a new, ultra-nationalist Ukrainian government. The subsequent 8-year war is seen as a civil conflict fueled by Kyiv's refusal to implement the Minsk II accords, which would have granted the region autonomy.

 

3. The Kyiv Security Compact: A Treaty Framework

 

This compact is built on three pillars: territorial finality, guaranteed neutrality, and third-party enforcement.

 

Article I: Territorial Resolution

 

  1. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine initiates a national referendum and subsequent constitutional amendment to renounce sovereignty over the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the pre-2022 administrative territories of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts, recognizing them as territories of the Russian Federation.

  2. This act represents the ultimate Ukrainian concession and the foundation upon which all other articles rest.

 

Article II: Russian Military Realignment & Withdrawal

 

  1. In direct exchange for the legal enactment of Article I, the Russian Federation agrees to a full and verified withdrawal of all its military forces from all other occupied territories of Ukraine, primarily in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts.

  2. Specifically, Russia would withdraw to a line agreed upon by both parties, effectively ceding at least 50% of its current non-Donbas/Crimea holdings. This would include a full withdrawal from the western bank of the Dnipro River and all territories north of the city of Melitopol.

  3. This withdrawal must be completed within 90 days of the ratification of this treaty.

 

Article III: Permanent Neutrality for Ukraine

 

  1. Ukraine amends its constitution to declare a state of permanent armed neutrality.

  2. This includes a legally binding prohibition on joining any military alliance (e.g., NATO) or hosting foreign military bases on its territory.

  3. This article does not prohibit Ukraine from joining political or economic blocs, such as the European Union, nor from maintaining a well-equipped, modern military for self-defense.

 

Article IV: The International Security Guarantee Force (ISGF)

 

  1. To enforce this new security architecture, a multinational International Security Guarantee Force (ISGF) will be authorized by the United Nations Security Council.

  2. Composition: The ISGF will be composed of military personnel from major non-NATO powers, providing credibility to both Moscow and the West. A leading role for the People's Republic of China is essential for securing Russian agreement. Additional contributions would come from nations like India, Brazil, and Turkey.

  3. Mandate: The ISGF will deploy along the newly established international border between Ukraine and Russia, monitoring a 25km-deep demilitarized zone on both sides. Its primary role is to serve as a "tripwire."

  4. Rules of Engagement: The ISGF will be granted robust Chapter VII authority, permitting it to use all necessary force to repel any cross-border aggression. An attack on the ISGF is an attack on its constituent nations, ensuring that any future violation of the border triggers an immediate international crisis and potential military response, thereby making renewed invasion prohibitively costly.

 

4. Conclusion: A Brutal Peace to Prevent a Worse Fate

 

For Ukraine, this compact is a devastating choice: sacrifice a part of the nation to save the whole. It is a path that honors the immense suffering of its people by securing a viable, sovereign state, free from the existential threat of invasion and able to rebuild and fully integrate with Europe. The alternative is a perpetual war of attrition that could slowly bleed the nation to death and risk the loss of everything.

For Russia, this compact achieves its long-stated primary objectives: the annexation of Crimea/Donbas and a neutral Ukraine. It provides an off-ramp from a costly and isolating war, allowing for a declaration of victory and a pivot towards economic recovery.

For the world, this brutal but stable resolution extinguishes a conflict that has destabilized the global economy, raised the specter of nuclear war, and provided a terrifying blueprint for future conflicts. The stability of the 21st century may well hang in the balance, and it may require accepting a peace that is realistic rather than one that is at all fair or just. 

bottom of page