Washington, D.C.
A secret, 28-point U.S. peace framework for Ukraine, reportedly spearheaded by envoy Steve Witkoff, is demanding major sacrifices from Kyiv, including the permanent cession of large tracts of territory and acceptance of significant military restraints.
First detailed by Axios, the public revelation of the plan has reportedly left Ukrainian and European officials blindsided. This framework is allegedly driven by an ongoing diplomatic push from Washington, backed explicitly by the Donald Trump Administration.
The core difference between the alleged U.S. proposal and the existing Ukrainian Peace Formula is fundamental: Ukraine demands a peace based on full territorial integrity and justice, while the U.S. framework requires Kyiv to make sweeping territorial and military concessions for an immediate ceasefire.
Washington Optimism Met with Restraint
Despite reported negative reactions abroad, the Trump Administration is optimistic. U.S. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated at a White House briefing on Thursday, “The president supports this plan. It’s a good plan for both Russia and Ukraine… And we’re working very hard to get it done.”
Senior U.S. military officials are in Kyiv this week to present the plan. Following a meeting with U.S. Secretary of the Army Daniel Driscoll, Ukrainian President Zelenskyy posted on X late Thursday: “Our teams – of Ukraine and the United States – will work on the provisions of the plan to end the war. We are ready for constructive, honest, and swift work.” He stressed, however, that Ukraine is seeking “real and dignified” peace. The tone of the response suggests that Kyiv is seeking to avoid head-on confrontation and is biding its time to modify the current draft.
In a telephone conversation with the Ukrainian leader, Emmanuel Macron, Friedrich Merz, and Keir Starmer have stressed that “any solution must be reached with Ukraine’s full engagement.” The French President’s office reported that the three European leaders “reaffirmed that all decisions that have implications for the interests of Europe and NATO require joint support and consensus of the European partners and NATO allies.”
In Moscow, the initiative was publicly played down. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, as reported by Reuters, said: “Consultations are not currently underway. There are contacts, of course, but there is no process that could be called consultations.” But while insisting that the Kremlin has not received the U.S. plan officially, Peskov said Ukraine “Should better negotiate and negotiate now, rather than later. His [Zelensky’s] space for decision-making is shrinking as he is losing the territories” to the Russian offensive. The double pressure from Moscow and Washington is real, as a Reuters report citing unnamed sources said the U.S. has threatened to cut intelligence and weapons supplies to Kyiv unless a solution is reached promptly.
Experts Call Plan ‘Capitulation,’ Predict Failure
The U.S. proposal has drawn sharp criticism from foreign policy analysts, who say it heavily favors Moscow and risks undermining future Ukrainian security.
Daniel Kochis, a Senior Fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute specializing in Eurasian affairs, told Moambe.eu that the plan “reads as a Ukrainian capitulation” and is “highly unlikely to bring about an end to the Russian war against Ukraine.”
Kochis noted key points of concern that make the plan virtually impossible for Kyiv to accept. These include ceding heavily fortified territory, accepting limits to the size and lethality of the Ukrainian military, absolving Russia of culpability for its crimes, and agreeing to no allied military forces on the ground to deter a renewed Russian invasion.
Key Senators have called out the lack of input from either Ukraine or European allies, and EU officials have called out a lack of concessions from Russia
Daniel Kochis, Hudson Institute
Kochis stressed that “Key Senators have called out the lack of input from either Ukraine or European allies, and EU officials have called out a lack of concessions from Russia.” He believes Ukrainian and European leaders will now attempt to “amend the draft to include concessions from Moscow.”
Echoing this severe assessment, an internationally known expert of post Soviet space, Dr. Stephen Blank of the Foreign Policy Research Council in conversation to Moambe.eu in Washington called the plan “strategic incompetence and ignorance with regard to Ukraine,” adding, “Nobody will accept this deal… this is a deal negotiated over the head of Ukraine and all of Europe so it’s like Munich.”
Nobody will accept this deal… this is a deal negotiated over the head of Ukraine and all of Europe so it’s like Munich.
Stephen Blankm FPRC
Blank argues that peace in Europe requires two non-negotiable points: the restoration of Ukraine’s territory and its membership in NATO, noting that Russia has repeatedly broken past agreements.
Diplomatic Missteps and Risky Optimism
Veteran diplomat and former U.S. Ambassador to Georgia and Kazakhstan William Courtney, who now works as an analyst with the Rand Corporation, expressed caution. “Little is known about the proposal. It is risky to be optimistic given the negative reactions in Ukraine and Europe. Seasoned diplomats would be more cautious.”
U.S. might be overestimating its ability to gain Ukrainian or European support
William Courtney, Rand Corporation
Still, Courtney questioned the approach, stating that the U.S. “might be overestimating its ability to gain Ukrainian or European support.” He also suggested that a Russian amateur negotiator may have “oversold his doomed plan to Putin,” and the Kremlin may realize the proposal might be “dead on arrival.”
