Washington’s Two-Way Win in the Ukraine Crisis

Volodymyr Zelensky, the President of Ukraine, stated early Tuesday after negotiations with American representatives and European partners in Geneva that, considering the results of this round of talks, the list of necessary steps to end the war is now implementable. According to the Ukrainian President, within the new framework, many key and correct elements have been included, the number of agreed points has been reduced, and the plan no longer consists of the original 28 items proposed by U.S. President Donald Trump. Zelensky further emphasized that his team will soon present a new report on the draft steps and described this approach as “completely sound.”

According to Rokna, while reports indicate that after the Geneva negotiations Trump’s 28-point plan has been reduced to 19 points, Moscow has announced that it will not accept the European proposal. In this regard, Yuri Ushakov, aide to the Russian President, stated that the European proposal appears completely unconstructive at first glance and said: “The new plan is not acceptable for us.” Ukrainians and Europeans had previously expressed strong reactions to parts of Trump’s 28-point plan that referred to recognizing certain Ukrainian territories as de facto Russian and lifting sanctions against Moscow, demanding an alternative proposal. Meanwhile, only a few hours after Donald Trump commented on the prospects of progress toward a ceasefire agreement, Russia launched a combined missile-and-drone attack against Ukraine, heavily concentrated on Kyiv, the Ukrainian capital.

Is Putin an Observer or a Player in the New Game?

Throughout the past weekend, Ukrainian and European officials made extensive efforts to amend Donald Trump’s new 28-point peace plan for ending the war in Ukraine—which was drafted with Russia’s participation and was heavily skewed in favor of the Kremlin. Now, American and Ukrainian officials have also spoken of progress, including certain unspecified changes they claim to have applied to the draft. Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, has so far merely remained an observer. For the Russian leader, a peace plan friendly to the Kremlin that cements Ukraine’s permanent dependence and vulnerability constitutes a victory. Previously, in a video conference with his senior security officials, Putin stated that the 28-point plan could serve as a basis for a final peace agreement, provided that serious and meaningful discussions take place; otherwise, Russia could continue pursuing its objectives in Ukraine by force. In this regard, Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, told The New York Times: “The reality is that the West has entered a contest of ‘pain’ with Vladimir Putin. Who can endure more pain? In this contest, Putin can be resilient, and his system is resilient.”

Gabuev also noted that Ukrainians are equally resilient but suffer from a lack of resources; they face shortages of military personnel, weaponry, and funds, and they are disadvantaged by the absence of unified Western support. At the same time, Putin’s ability to continue the war is not unlimited. His economy is facing challenges, especially after a sharp decline in oil revenues intensified by Trump’s recent sanctions. Moscow has raised taxes to finance the war and reduced next year’s military budget. Russian forces remain on the offensive, but their advances have been slow and costly in terms of personnel and equipment. Nonetheless, Putin believes that, compared with Ukraine, time is on his side. The battlefield situation for Ukraine appears to be deteriorating rapidly. Zelensky is weakened domestically by an escalating corruption scandal, and Ukraine faces a cash shortage to fund its defense and economy, while its European allies hesitate to use billions of dollars of frozen Russian assets to support Kyiv financially. Meanwhile, Trump has once again attacked Ukraine, accusing Zelensky of not appreciating America’s efforts. According to analysts, these dynamics led to the presentation of the 28-point plan, which emphasized Putin’s unwillingness to retreat in the war and which Ukraine and its European allies are now trying to revise.

Is the Ball in Ukraine’s Court?

In recent days, the Kremlin has done virtually nothing—and has had no need to. The 28-point U.S.–Russia peace plan, which was unofficially leaked in the media last week, has left Washington, Kyiv, and European capitals confused, creating precisely the conditions that Vladimir Putin has long sought: a negotiation table tilted heavily in his favor, Ukrainians forced to evaluate conditions they cannot accept, and the looming threat of losing their most important ally. Since Donald Trump’s return to power, both Putin and Zelensky have sought relentlessly to convince the United States that they are not resisting peace. Trump himself, however, has been inconsistent, attacking one side with angry posts and threats. After the Trump–Putin summit in Alaska—which, according to most accounts, left Trump dissatisfied—he briefly aligned more openly with Kyiv and accused Russia of obstructing peace efforts. Significant U.S. sanctions on Russian oil followed. But last week’s 28-point peace plan dramatically shifted this dynamic. According to the Guardian, Moscow has remained notably silent. For days, the Foreign Ministry pretended to be unaware of any peace initiative. Washington, however, is pressing Kyiv to agree to the peace plan before the American delegation travels to Moscow to finalize the terms. The Kremlin believes that any move by Zelensky to accept something close to the 28-point draft would spark a political crisis in Ukraine—an outcome Moscow would welcome. In any case, Putin knows that Ukraine cannot easily abandon the negotiations, as the country remains dependent on U.S.-supplied weapons and intelligence, and if its main ally withdraws, it will face a potentially disastrous winter. Even if Kyiv supports the peace plan, analysts and Russian insiders expect Putin to push for further concessions. Anton Barbashin, a visiting fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said: “Perhaps 70 percent of this plan is acceptable, but the remaining parts include items that Putin will almost certainly never agree to.”

According to Barbashin, Putin will certainly say yes, let us work on this — but these items are my amendments. At the same time, Tatiana Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, told the Guardian that the current draft of Trump’s peace plan, which she believes was clumsily prepared, leaves considerable room for interpretation and is the kind of document Putin would never sign. Stanovaya added that the vague language regarding Ukraine’s neutrality and NATO’s future development requires specific “documents, timelines, and commitments.” She noted that it is unlikely Putin will abandon his main objective of dominating Ukraine and instead will pressure for a revised version of the plan that further reflects Russian interests. However, she added that if diplomacy stalls, Putin would have no problem continuing the war, because the Kremlin believes Ukraine’s position will worsen over time, especially if Trump follows through on threats to cut U.S. military aid. Stanovaya said Putin is likely waiting to see how the apparent internal disagreements within the U.S. government over the plan unfold. Marco Rubio, the U.S. Secretary of State, previously stated on Saturday—after a Republican senator claimed he had distanced himself from the plan and called it a Russian initiative—that the United States had drafted the peace plan. Stanovaya stated: “The Kremlin is watching to see which faction inside the U.S. government prevails. It is still too early for Moscow to celebrate.” On the other side, Ukraine hopes that, along with its European partners, it can turn the plan into a document acceptable to Kyiv and persuade Trump to support that version. On Monday, the United States and Ukraine presented a 19-point peace plan that is significantly more favorable to Kyiv but defers the most politically sensitive issues. Moscow will almost certainly reject this counterproposal, returning everything to square one. According to Fyodor Lukyanov, a foreign-policy analyst close to the Kremlin, given the rapid pace of developments, Putin is likely to continue playing the role of spectator for now. Lukyanov also stressed that Russia will likely maintain its current level of military pressure to force Ukraine to accept the original 28-point plan, after which Moscow will be ready to engage in more detailed discussions.

The Visible and Hidden Aspects of Trump’s 28-Point Plan

According to The New York Times, most of the provisions in the initial 28-point draft reflected Putin’s longstanding demands, including restrictions on Ukraine’s military and banning its membership in NATO. It also included protections for the Russian language and the Russian Orthodox Church in the form of references to EU laws concerning minority languages and religions. However, Putin stated on Friday that when he met Trump in Alaska in August, American officials had asked Russians to show flexibility, and he was prepared to do so. Observers believe that Putin was likely referring to the issue of occupied territories. Russian negotiators dropped their initial demand for full handover of the four regions that Moscow “annexed” in 2022, even though Russia does not control large portions of those areas, including two regional capitals. In Alaska, Putin expressed readiness to halt the war, provided that Ukraine, in addition to meeting other Kremlin demands, cedes the remaining part of the Donetsk region under its control. The 28-point plan now calls for Ukraine’s withdrawal from this territory, which would become a “demilitarized zone” and be recognized as Russian land. Since Putin has framed the war domestically as a mission to save Russian-speaking people in Donetsk and the neighboring Luhansk region, it would be difficult to present an internal victory that does not involve capturing the rest of Donetsk. Russia currently controls Luhansk. In this context, Stefan Meister, a Russia analyst at the German Council on Foreign Relations, said it remains unclear whether Putin is willing to compromise. According to Meister, Putin may be trying to separate Trump from the Ukrainians and Europeans and pave the way for Russia’s dominance over Ukraine by force. In his comments to The New York Times, Meister said: “Putin calculates that he hopes Trump becomes frustrated with Zelensky and withdraws all support, and if there is no intelligence-sharing or long-range missiles, Europeans cannot replace Washington. Putin wants to break Ukraine!”

Peace or Confusion?

Despite the analysis in Western capitals, Trump’s proposed peace plan for ending the war in Ukraine may appear to be a dream document for Russia. Even Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, has told U.S. senators that the plan is “Moscow’s wish list.” Since then, Rubio has appeared alongside the Ukrainian delegation to present an updated and revised peace framework that fully guarantees Ukraine’s sovereignty. Americans now appear set to travel to Moscow to discuss the details of this plan. However, despite all this, Kremlin leaders are likely unsatisfied with what has been presented so far. The draft text is vague, contradictory, and at times even absurd. According to the European Council on Foreign Relations, several articles in the plan relate directly to the core of Russia’s demands: namely turning Ukraine’s NATO membership into an aspiration only. Under the draft, Kyiv must insert a “non-NATO” clause in its constitution, and depending on how the poorly phrased language is interpreted, NATO must refrain from admitting Ukraine and possibly from expanding its influence in other regions. No NATO personnel should be stationed in Ukraine, and Ukraine must reduce the size of its military from about one million to 600,000. Moscow endorses the “non-NATO” clause but will likely demand binding legal guarantees—for example, a formal rejection of the 2008 NATO Bucharest Summit decision that Ukraine could one day become a member. However, a 600,000-strong Ukrainian military is not acceptable to Moscow. Russia may be willing to negotiate the precise figure, but this ceiling remains far from the “demilitarization” that Russian officials have insisted upon since the beginning of the war. Nonetheless, the issue of territory is a much more problematic matter for Moscow. The draft gives Russia only de facto status, fixes the boundary lines at the line of contact, and creates a demilitarized zone in the remaining Ukrainian-held areas of Donetsk province. This situation is unacceptable for Ukraine due to the violation of its sovereignty, but for Moscow it is also insufficient, because Russia seeks full legal recognition of its territorial gains. For Moscow, a de facto arrangement implies that conditions could change and Russia’s control of these areas could be challenged. The European Council on Foreign Relations notes that security guarantees create another deadlock, as the document does not specify what Ukraine will receive under the agreement. Russia accepts only guarantees over which it holds veto power and which allow it effectively to determine what constitutes a breach of the peace agreement and what responses are appropriate.

Peace for Ukraine or a Two-Way Deal for Washington?

This contentious plan also achieves a major American objective: profiting from providing security and participating in Ukraine’s reconstruction. The document states that the United States will use USD 100 billion of Russia’s frozen assets for reconstruction, keeping 50 percent of the profits. The remaining assets will be used for a special U.S.–Russia investment instrument for joint projects aimed at strengthening mutual interests and long-term stability. Overall, Washington will use roughly USD 300 billion in frozen Russian assets. Moscow may grudgingly overlook these funds if its other demands are met. However, a more important issue for Moscow is lifting sanctions. The draft provides no clear framework for lifting sanctions and only states that sanctions will be reviewed separately and removed gradually by agreement. Moscow will certainly insist on a binding and enforceable timetable for lifting sanctions, one that neither the United States nor the European Union can alter unilaterally. Nevertheless, the Kremlin may be informally pleased by the absence of the European Union. The 28-point plan assigns no role to the EU in shaping the agreement and instead sets direct instructions from the United States to its European counterparts. First, the European Union must hand over all frozen Russian assets in its possession. The U.S.-backed plan also calls for EU/NATO forces to be stationed in Poland, requires the EU to spend USD 100 billion on Ukraine’s reconstruction, and stipulates that sanctions on Russia be lifted according to a timetable determined by the United States and Russia. The EU is expected to accelerate Ukraine’s accession process, while having no essential role in the post-war security architecture for Ukraine. According to the research institute, there are even stranger ambiguities in the plan—sections containing completely odd clauses, such as the provision stating: “If Ukraine unintentionally fires a missile at Moscow or Saint Petersburg, security guarantees are voided,” which implicitly appears to suggest that attacks on other cities are permissible.

Europe and Peace in Ukraine

The reality is that Russia’s fundamental demands have not shifted even one step so far. It does not matter how well a European plan is drafted or how carefully any subsequent American draft is prepared; no proposal involving the United States, the European Union, and Ukraine stands a realistic chance of being accepted by the Kremlin. This situation leaves two possible outcomes: first, Moscow ignores the proposal entirely. This scenario allows Trump to avoid blaming Ukraine and continue his support. Second, Moscow engages just enough to create a hypothetical opportunity for compromise. However, the latter scenario remains unlikely. In any case, even if Western observers believe the plan is a gift to Russia, the 28-point plan still falls short of Moscow’s long list of desired outcomes.

The more likely scenario is that the United States, the European Union, and Ukraine arrive at some form of minimal compromise, but ultimately Moscow rejects the plan for failing to satisfy its core demands, because the gap between the desired final outcomes for both sides remains wide and largely irreconcilable.

Russia seeks an agreement that consolidates and expands its territorial gains, while Kyiv and European capitals insist on preserving Ukraine’s sovereignty. Neither Trump nor Rubio has provided details of the changes made to the original 28-point plan — a plan in which European leaders played no role and under which Ukraine was kept out of NATO and European fighter jets were stationed in neighboring Poland.