American Peace Plan in Ukraine: Details of Trump’s Controversial Proposal and Its Consequences
Mehr News agency, International Desk: The release of a 28-article draft by the U.S.government proposing an end to the Russia-Ukraine war stunned the global political scene. This document, prepared by Steve Witkoff, former special envoy under Trump, with direct involvement from marco Rubio and Trump’s approval, was handed over to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Kyiv. It immediatly sparked one of the most important diplomatic debates between Europe and the United States.
Contrary to initial assumptions that it was a preliminary idea, this draft presents a precise and phased framework. In terms of scope and commitments, it essentially redefines East Europe’s security order. The document combines heavy concessions from Ukraine with conditional security guarantees from the U.S., alongside significant economic benefits for both America and Russia-offering effectively a model of “imposed peace.”
Redrawing Borders and De Facto Recognition of Russian Gains
The territorial provisions are among its most sensitive components. Article 21 explicitly recognizes Crimea, the self-declared Donetsk and Luhansk republics, and parts of eastern territories as Russian domains.Additionally, remaining areas of Donetsk controlled by Ukraine would become a “demilitarized buffer zone,” nominally neutral but officially designated as belonging to Russia.
Regarding Kherson and Zaporizhzhia provinces, the plan emphasizes “stabilizing current contact lines,” which effectively formalizes Russia’s military gains on these fronts. This move severely undermines Ukraine’s territorial integrity while permanently weakening critical defensive positions in cities like Sloviansk and kramatorsk.
Structural Limitations on Ukraine’s Military
The military section (Articles 6 to 9) outlines deep restrictions on Ukraine’s defense capabilities.Article 6 mandates reducing its armed forces to 600,000 personnel-down from more than 900,000 active-duty soldiers plus reserves today. Article 7 requires enshrining a permanent constitutional ban on NATO membership for Ukraine; NATO must also formally declare that Ukraine will never join.
Article 8 prohibits any form of NATO troop deployments within Ukrainian territory; instead proposing only limited deployment of European fighter jets stationed in Poland-a deterrent option with minimal impact. Together these conditions place Ukraine akin to Cold War-era neutral countries: ostensibly independent but militarily constrained significantly in practical terms.
Conditional and Vulnerable Security Guarantees
A controversial provision is Article 10’s reference to “security guarantees similar to NATO’s Article V.” The U.S promises that if Russia attacks again it will respond with “decisive coordinated military action” alongside renewed sanctions targeting Moscow.
Though, this guarantee is subject to strict limitations: if Ukraine launches even one missile against Moscow or St Petersburg-their protection ends immediately. This clause practically strips Kyiv entirely from offensive action or active deterrence capabilities-which reduces them solely to reactive responses at best. Moreover, Washington demands compensation for providing these security assurances-a precedent-setting condition worldwide.
The Economic package: Combining Reconstruction with Profitable Opportunities for America
This section notably exceeds previous documents regarding scope: Article14 proposes spending $100 billion frozen Russian assets on reconstructing Ukraine while assigning half profits generated through projects back directly to U.S interests; Europe is expected simultaneously contribute another $100 billion into this fund.
The plan further includes establishing an American-Russian joint investment fund covering sectors such as energy advancement, artificial intelligence research centers data infrastructure projects including Arctic initiatives underlining cooperation dynamics despite ongoing conflict discussions respectively outlined under article13 facilitating Russia’s reintegration into global economy including potential G8 reentry invitation . thus presenting Trump governance viewing Ukrainian conflict not just militarily but also economically beneficial chance allowing structural cooperation prospects even amidst hostilities .
Cautious Yet Concerned Reactions in Kyiv
While Zelensky initially described engagement around this proposal as “serious” productive dialog stressing any deal should result in ”genuine fair peace,” close sources have indicated Kyiv finds acceptance tantamount land concessions coupled permanent NATO exclusion almost impossible politically ; Defense Minister reportedly has aligned technically broadly some clauses yet withheld final political decision reflecting stark divide internally about future war trajectory handling relations Washington illustrating pronounced governmental rift remains pervasive
Political Shockwaves Across Europe & Feelings Of Isolation
Most European capitals were caught off guard confronting this text without prior consultation : Brussels Prime Minister Kaja Kallas condemned , saying ‘any blueprint disregarding participation Europe along Ukrainedisheaded for failure.’ Polish Foreign Minister warned ‘Europe stakes exceed America ‘s therefore cannot remain sidelined observers.’ Diplomats viewed text consistent continuation precedent demands articulated Mosscow Istanbul negotiations back late2022 then rejected outright ;currently ,Europe feels estranged uninformed facing fresh diplomatic impasse placing Washington Kyiv relationship under unexpected pressure testing existing alliances considerably .
moscow ‘s calculated Silence & Signs Of approval
Moscow has offered no formal comment thus far beyond spokesperson Dmitry Peskov describing situation as ”no new developments.” However American sources reveal Kremlin leadership engaged via Russian Direct Investment Fund briefed forthwith details expressing no considerable objections toward overall framework suggesting trump proposal aligns more closely than apparent outwardly Kremlin position signaling tacit cautious consent emerging meanwhile quietly so far .
Conclusion
This comprehensivedraft outliningTrump ‘s suggestedPeace Plan may be understood primarilyas ”American Peace” designed lesstowards genuinelyresolving entrenched disputesbut rather recalibrating geopoliticalbalancein Europe.The document diminishes Ukraineto limitedneutralized state,Russia obtains formal consolidationof territorialsuccessesandAmerica secures arrayeconomic geopolitical advantages.In current context success hinges criticallyupon tough acceptanceall three keyactors :Kyiv,MoscowandEurope.None appears fully aligned presentlyleavingdraft fate uncertain shroudedin ambiguity awaiting next pivotalstepsfrom actors involved .
