Key elements in Trump’s 28-point peace proposal and why much of it is unacceptable for Ukraine

Ukraine Faces Diplomatic Crossroads as U.S. Peace Proposal Meets Russian Approval

Ukraine finds itself navigating treacherous diplomatic waters following the emergence of a U.S.-crafted peace plan that has gained Moscow’s endorsement but was developed without Kyiv’s input. The 28-point proposal, authored by President Donald Trump’s administration in coordination with the Kremlin, cedes to numerous Russian demands that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly rejected since Russia’s full-scale invasion began nearly four years ago.

Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed support for the plan late Friday, suggesting it “could form the basis of a final peace settlement” if the United States can convince Ukraine and European allies to accept its terms. Zelenskyy, adopting a measured diplomatic tone in his nightly address Thursday, emphasized that any peace must prevent future Russian aggression, while indicating a willingness to work with both American and European partners.

The proposal’s territorial provisions have sparked particular concern in Kyiv. While ostensibly confirming Ukrainian sovereignty, the plan would effectively recognize Russian control over Crimea, Luhansk, and Donetsk regions. Additionally, the current frontlines in the partially occupied Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions would become frozen borders, creating a demilitarized buffer zone internationally recognized as Russian territory.

In practice, this arrangement would require Ukraine to withdraw from areas in Luhansk and Donetsk that Russian forces have failed to capture through military means. Russia would, however, relinquish control of territories outside these five regions, potentially including parts of the northeastern Sumy region and areas around Kharkiv that border Russia.

“The plan is definitely a nonstarter, but I don’t rule out that it might be part of Trump’s game,” said Oleksandr Merezhko, head of Ukraine’s foreign affairs parliamentary committee. “He starts with something absolutely absurd, ludicrous, which causes shock, and then he becomes more reasonable.”

Security provisions in the proposal impose significant limitations on Ukraine’s sovereignty. The country would be required to constitutionally commit to never joining NATO, while the alliance would adopt measures formally barring Ukraine’s future membership. Ukrainian armed forces would be capped at 600,000 soldiers, and NATO forces would be prohibited from stationing in the country – effectively restricting Kyiv’s right to choose its military partnerships.

While the plan references security guarantees from Western allies, it lacks specific details on how the United States would prevent future Russian aggression. This remains a critical concern for Ukraine, as Zelenskyy has consistently argued that NATO membership represents the most cost-effective security guarantee for his country.

The proposal also addresses broader geopolitical considerations, stipulating that Russia must not invade neighboring countries and that NATO will cease further expansion. This provision is particularly significant given NATO’s consensus-based decision-making structure, where the United States wields considerable influence despite having stepped back under Trump’s leadership.

Perhaps most controversially, the plan would require Ukraine to abandon any claims to hold Russia accountable for its actions during the war. This would deny thousands of Ukrainians the opportunity to seek reparations or justice for their suffering, despite UN-backed human rights experts having classified Russian torture of Ukrainian civilians and prisoners of war as crimes against humanity.

Ukrainian political analyst Volodymyr Fesenko described accepting the plan as potentially “catastrophic” for Zelenskyy, while acknowledging the difficult position Ukraine faces. “The problem is, we can’t say no to Trump because there will be fierce pressure from the White House,” Fesenko noted.

Implementation would face additional hurdles, as certain provisions – such as declaring Ukraine a neutral country or granting Russian language official status – would require constitutional amendments that Zelenskyy cannot unilaterally approve. “Ukraine could offer to hold a referendum on these issues – that’s a compromise,” Fesenko suggested.

The proposal does include a financial component, calling for $100 billion of frozen Russian assets to be invested in Ukrainian reconstruction. However, Russian officials have previously threatened legal action against any attempt to repurpose these assets, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warning that those involved “will all be held accountable.”

As diplomatic efforts intensify, Ukraine’s leadership must balance maintaining vital U.S. support while preserving the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of continued Russian aggression.