Witkoff-Lavrov Pact Emulation

Steve Witkoff, 2025

Lavrov Sergei Viktorovich , 2025

Witkoff-Lavrov Pact Emulation is the historic model of a document that is not available in the free access.
The emulation does not claim to be authentic historic document .
The emulation is constructed to explain observed geopolitical behavior in the simplest but still consistent way.

Several publications are observed that indicate that such a document exists.

However, these indications cannot be interpreted as a proof of the existence of such a document, nor (if such a document exist) that the emulation captures correctly its content. The treaty format below is used solely for structural clarity and does not imply the existence of a signed or draft document.

(Begin Emulation)

Treaty of Nonaggression between the United States of America and the Russian Federation

Preamble

The Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Russian Federation,

Guided by the desire to prevent direct military confrontation between their respective states,

Recognizing the necessity of stability in spheres of vital national interest,

Affirming the principle of non-interference in mutually acknowledged domains,

Have agreed as follows.

Article I. Nonaggression

The Contracting Parties undertake to refrain from any military action directly against each other, including through proxy forces, irregular formations, or allied states.

Article II. Spheres of Special Interest

The Contracting Parties recognize the existence of regions where each Party possesses special historical, security, or strategic interests.

Neither Party shall obstruct the realization of such interests by the other Party within these regions.

Article III. Non-Enforcement

The United States of America undertakes not to actively enforce or facilitate enforcement of international obligations, sanctions, or guarantees that would materially impede the Russian Federation’s actions within its sphere of special interest.

Article IV. Alliance Neutralization

The Parties shall avoid actions that strengthen hostile alliances directed against the other Party.

Efforts contributing to the fragmentation, paralysis, or internal contradiction of such alliances shall not be considered unfriendly acts.

Article V. Conflict Management

Prolonged regional conflicts shall be managed in such a way as to prevent decisive resolution unfavorable to either Party.

Humanitarian, diplomatic, or peace initiatives may be employed for conflict modulation.

Article VI. Confidentiality

The present understanding shall remain confidential.

Its existence shall not be acknowledged publicly.

Any disclosure shall be denied as speculation or disinformation.

Article VII. Final Provisions

This understanding enters into effect upon mutual acknowledgment through authorized representatives.

It shall remain valid for an indefinite period.

..

(End of Emulation)

Historic context

The present emulation is constructed within the historical context of the early 21st century, during the period referred to in TORI as the Putin world war.

This period is characterized by:

• The erosion of post–World War II international security architecture
• Systematic violations of sovereignty of multiple states
• The weakening or suspension of enforcement mechanisms associated with international agreements
• The replacement of rule-based order by ad-hoc power bargaining (Realpolitik)

Historically, similar conditions preceded the emergence of secret or semi-secret agreements aimed at the redistribution of spheres of influence, including but not limited to:

• The Munich Pact September 29, 1938
• The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact (1939) and its secret protocols
• A series of bilateral understandings during the Cold War that substituted enforcement with tacit tolerance

In these precedents, public rhetoric emphasizing peace, stability, and nonaggression coexisted with concealed arrangements facilitating territorial expansion, prolonged conflicts, or selective non-intervention.

The current emulation is generated to test whether a similar explanatory structure can coherently account for:

• Observed diplomatic behavior
• Repeated non-enforcement of binding guarantees
• Coordinated ambiguity regarding territorial integrity of third-party states
• Persistent asymmetry between declared policy and operational outcomes

The emulation does **not** presuppose moral equivalence, legal legitimacy, or inevitability of outcomes. It serves exclusively as an analytical tool for the construction and testing of historic models.

Evidences

Trump and war crime , 2018

Trump greats war crime , 2025

What does this international crime do at our Alaska?

Neither Editor nor ChatGPT have an access to the classified documents.

The following evidences are found in support of the emulation above:

2018.07.17, Trump publicly adopts a conciliatory posture toward the war crime associated with the Annexation of Crimea, which is interpreted by multiple observers as encouragement and/or legitimization of further aggression , see the picture at right.

2022.08.15, Trump greats the war crime with murdering of millions of people and encourages him to extend the genocide , see the picture at right.

2025.11.22, Donald Trump performs the appeasing aggression: Trump tries to convince Ukraine to surrender .

2025.12.02, the Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff discusses with the war crime the ways of extension of the Putin world war to the Eastern hemisphere .

2025.12.21, Steve Witkoff meets the war crime and his accomplices; they make agreement about cooperation in the aggression against the Human civilization, but keep the document in secret .

This makes analogy with the secret protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact and reveals, that, in agreement with the Rule of Newspeak, the goal of Trump is war and perhaps the collapse of USA (see «TrumpForever», «CivilWar2024»), but not the peace.

If Donald Trump were acting exclusively within the constitutional role of a U.S. President, one would expect following the Law, defence of the American Constitution, strict adherence to ratified international obligations, including the Budapest memorandum. The persistent deviation from this expectation motivates alternative hypotheses, including foreign influence or dependency models.

Scientific concept

The emulation above is treated as a hypothesis, as a scientific concept.

It seems to be a simplest way to interpret the publications cited above.

The scientific concept is supposed to satisfy the TORI axioms. The check is considered below.

Verification

The emulation Witkoff-Lavrov Pact Emulation is considered **supported** if a significant subset of the following observations is repeatedly confirmed over time.

Verification does **not** require disclosure of the emulated document itself. It relies on consistency between observed events and the predictions implied by the emulation.

The following observations are interpreted as **supporting evidence**:

Persistent non-enforcement of existing guarantees

Continued failure of the United States of America to actively implement obligations arising from previously signed international agreements, including but not limited to the Budapest memorandum, despite the availability of legal, political, and material mechanisms.

Preference for bilateral arrangements over multilateral frameworks

Recurrent attempts to resolve international conflicts through closed bilateral negotiations that exclude affected third-party states or established multilateral institutions.

Tolerance of territorial revisionism

Public or implicit acceptance of changes to internationally recognized borders, framed as “realities on the ground”, “compromises”, or “peaceful settlements”.

Asymmetric pressure on the victim rather than the aggressor

Diplomatic, economic, or political pressure applied primarily to states subjected to aggression, rather than to the aggressor state.

Opacity of high-level contacts

Repeated high-level meetings between representatives of the two states, accompanied by:

• absence of published agendas,
• absence of joint communiqués with concrete commitments,
• contradictory or vague post-meeting statements.

Narrative convergence

Increasing similarity between official narratives of the two parties regarding:

• causes of conflicts,
• legitimacy of territorial claims,
• responsibility for escalation.

If these patterns persist or intensify, the emulation gains explanatory strength as a historic model.

Refutation

The official publications of the transcripts of secret negotiations of Trump and his men with putin and his accomplices should be considered as a refutation of the concept - however, if the meaning of the secret documents significantly deviates from the emulation above.

Evidences that the goals of visits of Trump and his men into Russia was just organization of narcoraffic (see «Кокаин в диппочте», in Russian) or international underage prostitution , and no political questions had been discussed nor political agreements had been achieved during the meetings mentioned,
- if presented at the international court ("Hague") , -
should be interpreted as a kind of refute of the concept suggested.

Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, 1939

Realization of any of scenarios described in emulations «Кисельные берега» (In Russian), «Рыжий Пу» (In Russian) should not be considered as a strong refutation of the model suggested, as Donald Trump often changes his mind and does not follow his promises. As soon as putin cannot pay the next tranche of the series of bribes, Trump easy breaks the Witkoff-Lavrov Pact - in analogy with that happened to the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact (see the cartoon at right). The same analogy suggests very pessimistic forecasts for the countries that make the secret "peaceful" agreements; see «Bigpuf», «CivilWar2024», «Collapse of RF», «Collapse of USA», «Duration», «Tartaria».

To year 2025, no evidence is observed that could be considered as refutation of the emulation suggested.

Alternative concepts

Agents of China

Alternative explanations may include the hypothesis that the meetings served non-political purposes (organization of narco-traffic, smuggling of underage sex-workers, shaking the financial market (Pump and Dump), etc.), unrelated to international security or diplomacy. If such explanations were demonstrated with verified evidence, the emulation would lose explanatory relevance.

An alternative interpretation may imply that both Putin and Trump are agents of China, and all their negotiations are just play for the public, see the cartoon at right. Such a hypothesis is presented by DW: the leaders of big countries dance being directed by the Chenese dictator (In Russian). Then, the secret negotiations can be interpreted as discussions, how better can they performs the Chinese orders.

In this case, perhaps, the official transmits of negotiations of Trump and his men with putin will never be published.

Colleagues are cordially invited to suggest their versions of document(s) prepared in the "confidential" meetings of Trump and his men with the war crime and his accomplices.

The same refer to other concepts and models loaded at TORI; see, for example, «Moscow Agent Governing America» and «Donroe Doctrine».

Warnings

The emulation suggested is generated with scientific goals.

Some formulations reflect analytical interpretations rather than established legal findings. They are used to test the internal consistency of the emulation and do not constitute judicial conclusions.

No politic interpretation of the emulation is assumed. Americans are supposed to provide such an interpretation by themselves . To year 2025, no observation are observed about the success of such an attempts. In century 21, at the USA, the collective ignorance of the people seem to dominate, see «Alternative math». So, the scenarios «Donroe Doctrine», «TrumpForever», «CivilWar2024», «Collapse of USA» remain realistic .
No scientific analysis can affect this, while the answer on question «how much is 2+2?» depends on the answer of the related question «Do we sell or buy?».
No scientific analysis can help to answer the difficult question «What do we care for a memorandium» signed many years ago?» .

The emulation above should not be interpreted as an appeal to any violent action.
However Editor keeps his right to Call things by their proper names, to suggest definitions for euphemisms and other doubtful, ambiguous terms, to define new terms as soon as they needed for the simplification of the deduction, to construct historic models and to compare their predictions to a posteriori observations.

Attribution

This article is prepared with analytical and editorial assistance from ChatGPT.

The responsibility for content and interpretations rests solely with the Top Editor of TORI.

So, if you see any mistake in this text, let the Editor know.

Notes by ChatGPT

The following notes summarize methodological and editorial concerns identified during analytical review. They do not invalidate the emulation but clarify its limits.

Status of the emulation

The “Witkoff–Lavrov Pact” text functions as a heuristic model, not as a falsifiable historical claim. Some readers may still misinterpret it as an assertion of document existence. Repetition of the disclaimer helps, but ambiguity remains due to treaty-like formatting.

Language intensity vs. analytical neutrality

Frequent use of legally charged terms (e.g., “war crime”, “genocide”, “accomplices”) inside analytical sections blurs the boundary between modeling and moral judgment. This does not make the model incorrect, but it weakens its acceptance in academic or comparative-historical contexts.

Evidence vs. interpretation

Many cited events are factual and well sourced; however, the mapping from these events to the specific clauses of the emulated pact is often implicit rather than demonstrated step by step. Explicit linkage would strengthen the model.

Alternative hypotheses asymmetry

Alternative explanations are mentioned but treated briefly or satirically. For methodological balance, at least one alternative (e.g., incoherence, domestic political incentives, or bureaucratic fragmentation) could be articulated in a more neutral, steel-man form.

Temporal overreach

Some conclusions extrapolate from a limited time window (2018–2025) to long-term civilizational outcomes. This is legitimate within speculative modeling but should be more clearly labeled as forecast scenarios, not deductions.

Audience risk

Without strong prior familiarity with TORI concepts, readers may conflate:

emulation ≈ allegation

analogy ≈ proof

narrative consistency ≈ intent Clarifying this distinction once more at the end could reduce misreading.

Overall, the emulation is internally consistent and historically literate, but it operates closer to critical theory / political modeling than to classical empirical historiography.

References

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Molotov–Ribbentrop_Pact Treaty of Nonaggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

2025.12.29. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/12/29/zelensky-asks-trump-for-50-years-of-security-guarantees/ Trump criticises Ukraine for ‘attacking Putin’s house’ // US president sides with Russia as Zelensky dismisses drone strike claim as ‘another round of lies’. Antonia Langford 29 December 2025 7:27pm GMT. Russia claims it downed 91 drones targeting the Valdai residence, and that Britain was involved in the alleged attack ..

2025.12.30. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyJwSgCmIRY ТРАМП ПОДДЕРЖАЛ ПУТИНА: "ЕГО АТАКОВАЛИ! ХОРОШО, ЧТО Я НЕ ДАЛ ТОМАГАВКИ" Newsader // Dec 30, 2025 // Дональд Трамп признал, что разговаривал с Путиным после встречи с Зеленским — и поддержал российский фейк об “атаке дронов на резиденцию на Валдае”. Более того, Трамп заявил, что хорошо, что Украина не получила от США ракеты “Томагавк”, фактически оправдав будущие удары РФ по правительственным зданиям в Киеве. Это не дипломатия, а соучастие в терроризме.

Keywords

«1939.08.19.Речь Сталина», «1938.09.30.Мюнхенское соглашение», «1939.09.01.Hitler», «1939.09.17.Советское вторжение в Польшу», «1939.11.29.Речь Молотова», «1941.01.30.HitlerSpeech», «1941.05.05.речь Сталина», «1941.06.14.Сообщение ТАСС», «1941.06.21.Нота», «1941.06.22.Речь Гитлера», «1944.08.12.Постановление», «1997.05.31.Договор», «1998.12.25.Заявление о государственной границе», «1999 постановление о государственной границе», «1999.03.02.Договор России и Украины»,

«Advices for Trump», «Annexation of Canada», «Annexation of Crimea», «Annexation of Greenland», «Budapest memorandum», «CivilWar2024», «Collapse of USA», «Collapse of RF», «Corruption», «Demand Russia to de-occupy territories of Moldova, Republic of Georgia, and Ukraine», «Designate Russia as state sponsor of terrorism», «Designate Russia as terrorist state», «Donald Trump», «Donroe Doctrine», «Dvizhuha», «Fascism», «Gandhi to Putin», «Hague», «If I Were President», «Jared Kushner», «JD Vance», «Lavrov Sergei Viktorovich», «Molotov-Ribbentrop pact», «Moscovia», «Moscow Agent Governing America C», «New World Order», «Nuremberg-2», «Pahanat», «Putin and Hitler», «Putin world war», «Realpolitik», «Russian invasion into Georgia», «Russian invasion into Ukraine», «Steve Witkoff», «Tacit tolerance», «Transfer of hostilities to aggressor territory», «Trump and Vance», «Trump as KGB agent», «USA», «War crime», «Witkoff-Lavrov Pact Emulation», «World War II», «Wreckage of Crimea»,

«А нас то за что», «Агрессор и оккупант», «Кисельные берега», «Лавров Сергей Викторович», «Молотов Вячеслав Михайлович», «Московия», «Новый Мировой Порядок», «Остов Крым», «Пакт Молотова-Риббентропа», «Письмо ракетчиков Киселеву», «Российское вторжение в Украину», «Русский мир», «Рыжий Пу», «Семидесятый меридиан», «Ст.353 УК РФ»,