The U.S. administration has circulated a controversial 28-point proposal intended to end the war in Ukraine. Officials and critics say the package contains provisions that many in Kyiv view as tantamount to surrender, even as the White House signals urgency and pressure for a rapid agreement.
Key provisions and red lines
The draft reportedly includes several major concessions that would reshape Ukraine’s postwar standing:
- Territorial concessions: Ukraine would be expected to cede territory not currently under Russian control, including areas that would hand Moscow firm control over the Donbas region.
- Military limits: The Ukrainian armed forces would be capped at 600,000 troops, down from roughly 900,000 at present.
- NATO and foreign forces: Kyiv would be required to enshrine a ban on seeking NATO membership and to prohibit foreign troops from operating on Ukrainian soil.
- Frozen assets: A clause would allocate 50% of revenues from frozen Russian assets to the United States, complicating European plans for financing Ukraine’s reconstruction.
Mixed guarantees and major concerns
The proposal gestures toward security guarantees, keeps the door open to eventual EU membership and reiterates respect for Ukrainian sovereignty in limited terms. Yet many Ukrainian officials and civil society leaders argue the package, as drafted, effectively strips Kyiv of key defenses and diplomatic options.
“The government must reject it. Ukrainian society won’t accept this,” said Olena Halushka, a civil society activist with the International Center for Ukrainian Victory.
Timing, pressure and diplomatic confusion
U.S. diplomats have reportedly pressed for a quick resolution, setting informal deadlines around Thanksgiving and early December. Kyiv officials say they were warned that military assistance and intelligence sharing could be reduced if they refuse the deal. The rapid timetable, combined with reports of drafting errors and inconsistent authorship, has fueled skepticism about whether the document is a final demand or an opening offer for negotiation.
The draft is said to have been shaped by private envoys in contact with Russian financial and political figures, prompting concerns about amateurish drafting and whether it reflects a coherent U.S. strategy. At the same time, senior U.S. spokespeople have publicly voiced support for pursuing the plan as a viable path to peace.
Domestic politics in Kyiv and Europe’s role
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy faces domestic turmoil—recent dismissals of senior officials, a widening corruption scandal and calls to remove his chief of staff—that weakens his negotiating position. European governments say they were caught off guard by the package and are scrambling to coordinate a response. Some analysts argue Europe could blunt the plan’s impact by mobilizing financing from frozen assets and reinforcing military assistance.
Will it satisfy either side?
Even as the draft leans heavily toward Russia’s demands, it may still fall short of Moscow’s red lines. It speaks of "de facto" rather than formal recognition for some occupied territories and would require Russia to relinquish claims to parts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia—terms that may or may not be acceptable to the Kremlin. For Kyiv, the proposed limits on territory, forces and alliances are politically and militarily untenable as written.
In sum, the 28-point proposal has intensified diplomatic activity and raised urgent questions about leverage, timing and the balance between pressuring Kyiv and preserving a durable settlement. The coming weeks will determine whether this draft becomes a negotiated basis for peace, an ultimatum that Kyiv rejects, or a catalyst for a broader European strategy to preserve Ukraine’s defenses and sovereignty.
