WASHINGTON/KYIV
Former U.S. President Donald Trump’s newly revealed 28-point Ukraine peace plan has triggered a wave of criticism across Europe, Ukraine, and global security circles, after leaked documents showed the proposal would require Kyiv to surrender large territories, limit its military power, and permanently abandon its bid to join NATO.
The draft, shared with Ukraine and several European governments this week, was presented by the U.S. as a potential framework to end the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Instead, the reaction has been swift and overwhelmingly negative.
Territory at the Center of the Controversy
According to the leaked proposal, Ukraine would be required to recognize Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk as Russian-controlled regions, while borders in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia would be frozen along current front lines. A demilitarized buffer zone would also be established in parts of eastern Ukraine.
For many in Kyiv, these terms represent an unacceptable loss of sovereignty. Ukrainian officials called the document “absurd,” “unworkable,” and “a reward for military aggression.”
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, while diplomatic in tone, said Ukraine needed a “dignified peace” not a settlement drafted at its expense.
Security Restrictions Anger Kyiv
The plan proposes strict caps on Ukraine’s future military strength, limiting its armed forces to 600,000 personnel and restricting long-range weapons. It also demands a constitutional ban on NATO membership, with all NATO troops barred from entering Ukrainian territory.
In exchange, the U.S. would provide security guarantees, though the draft offers few details on how such guarantees would be enforced.
European analysts warn that the plan leaves Ukraine vulnerable to future Russian aggression, arguing that security promises without NATO protections lack meaningful deterrence.
Economic Element Raises Further Concerns
One of the most controversial economic provisions involves using roughly $100 billion in frozen Russian assets to rebuild Ukraine. Under the plan, the U.S. would help create a joint investment fund involving both Washington and Moscow.
Critics argue that this approach could effectively rehabilitate Russia’s global financial status even as it retains control of occupied Ukrainian land.
The proposal also leaves the door open to restoring Russia’s membership in the G8, a move seen as highly premature by many European governments.
Elections and Cultural Measures
The plan calls for new elections in Ukraine within 100 days of the agreement and includes sections on minority rights, language rights, and “cultural tolerance programs.” It also proposes placing the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant under IAEA supervision, with energy from the facility shared between Ukraine and Russia.
Analysts note that these elements appear designed to appeal to Moscow’s long-standing political narratives.
Europe Pushes Back Hard
European leaders reacted with visible frustration, most criticizing both the content of the plan and the way it was drafted. Several major nations including France, Germany, and the UK said they were not properly consulted, warning that Ukraine must be treated as an equal partner in any negotiation.
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas warned that the plan risks legitimizing Russia’s invasion. Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson was even more direct, saying under Trump’s terms “Ukraine gets nothing.”
Russia’s Reaction: Cautious Optimism
Moscow has publicly welcomed parts of the document. President Vladimir Putin said it could serve as a “basis for final settlement,” though Russia opposes the use of frozen assets for reconstruction and has criticized the idea of sanctions being automatically reimposed if it breaches the deal.
U.S. Under Pressure
Reports indicate the U.S. pushed Kyiv to examine the proposal quickly, with suggestions that American support may weaken if Ukraine refuses to engage. This has added further tension between Washington and Kyiv, already strained by differing expectations on the pace of the war.
A Deal That May Never Take Shape
Although the proposal is being circulated as a peace framework, many global leaders say it is unlikely to lead to genuine negotiations in its current form. Critics argue the plan is heavily tilted toward Russia, undermines Ukraine’s long-term security, and sidelines European partners.
For now, President Zelenskyy has agreed to continue discussions but insists that Ukraine will not accept any deal that gives away its land or diminishes its sovereignty.
As it stands, Trump’s plan has succeeded in achieving one thing: igniting a global debate over how peace can be achieved without compromising the very principles at stake in the war.
Read Also USDA Expands Religious Expression Rights in Workplace
Discover more from VyvyDaily
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
