What started as a routine leak of a new peace proposal for Ukraine from US President Donald Trump has spiraled into a political storm. Instead of clarity, the plan has caused confusion, denials, and an unusual public guessing game about who was telling the truth about its origins.
Within days of the leak, several US senators — including Mike Rounds — said Secretary of State Marco Rubio had privately told them the document was essentially a Russia wish list and not an authentic American proposal. Rubio later denied ever saying it. Meanwhile, Trump seemed to defend key items on the list of Russian demands, as if the “wish list” had somehow become the negotiating position of his administration.
The result is a diplomatic puzzle in which someone is lying, but we may never know who.
How the Plan Emerged — and Why It Matters
Representatives of Ukraine and the United States have been holding negotiations in Geneva on what was originally a 28-point peace document, whittled down to 19 points after revisions. The Ukrainian side had repeatedly warned that the original version — the one leaked — was overly generous to Moscow. Negotiators say the document has since undergone major changes, but the new draft remains secret.
What is clear from the leaked version is this:
It is increasingly apparent that Russia is negotiating from a position of strength, and Trump seems willing to defend many of Moscow’s core demands.
The origins of the plan add to the controversy. The proposal was drafted by Trump envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, the same team behind the Gaza war plan. Reports now confirm that the document was created in direct collaboration with Russian officials-a fact raising many questions as to whose interests it primarily serves.
What the Leaked Plan Actually Says
It is divided into three main blocks: territorial, military, and political/economic, all built around aggressive deadlines meant to pressure Kyiv into accepting terms in short order.
1. Territorial Concessions
The plan begins by reaffirming Ukraine’s sovereignty but immediately undercuts it by insisting on sweeping territorial concessions:
Ukraine must recognize Crimea, Luhansk, and Donetsk as Russian territory in full, not just the areas currently under occupation.
Russia would also retain control of Mariupol, Melitopol, Berdyansk, and other strategically significant areas in Zaporizhia and Kherson.
The rest of Donetsk that is not filled would become a demilitarized “buffer zone” not controlled by Ukraine.
Ukraine would forever be cut off from the Sea of Azov, as well as important industrial areas and transportation infrastructure.
In return, Russia would hand back small pockets of land in Kharkiv and Sumy — areas of limited strategic value.
One of the most concerning elements is Russia’s continued control of the Zaporizhia Nuclear Power Plant, with electricity to be “shared” between both countries. For Ukraine, this means surrendering a major energy asset during wartime.
2. Political and Military Restrictions
The political and military terms may be even more consequential than the territorial ones.
The Constitution of Ukraine needs to be changed in order to permanently block NATO membership.
NATO itself must commit never to admit Ukraine.
No NATO troops, not even for training or exercises, would be allowed on Ukrainian territory.
This would force Ukraine to decrease the number of its armed forces.
The plan also puts NATO and Russia in a framework in which both must “discuss security concerns” under US supervision. This effectively gives the seal of approval to Moscow’s long-stated contention that NATO expansion constitutes a threat to Russian security narrative that, outside Russia, finds little purchase in Europe.
The implications go well beyond Ukraine. Moldova and Belarus would not have a realistic path to NATO membership under these constraints.
3. Economic Provisions: A Win for Russia, a Loss for Europe
Perhaps the most controversial section is the economic block.
The United States guarantees the full reintegration of Russia into the world economy, including returning to the G8, lifting the sanctions, and restoring trade.
Russia would “invest” $100 billion of its frozen assets in a reconstruction fund for Ukraine-but investments mean ownership, not reparations.
It would claim 50% of the profits from this reconstruction initiative, even though it had not put in any money.
Europe would need to come up with an additional $100 billion and “support humanitarian and security needs, thereby underwriting the plan without a role in designing it.
For the governments of Europe, this is a humiliating outcome: they are paying for the recovery, while Russia regains international status and the United States profits economically.
ALSO READ: What’s inside Trump’s secret peace plan that Ukraine and Europe are rejecting
A Deal Tilted Toward Moscow
Taken together, the terms amount to a sweeping victory for the Kremlin:
Vast territorial gains
Recognition of Russian security claims
Permanent blocking of Ukraine’s NATO future
Restoration of global economic privileges
Minimum commitments in return
Meanwhile, Europe is sidelined, forced to pay for reconstruction and accept a political solution crafted almost entirely by Washington and Moscow.
The backlash, even within the US administration, has already begun according to sources quoted by Bloomberg, former White House Ukraine adviser Keith Kellogg has decided to resign-a development seen as a symbolic loss for Kyiv and a boost for Moscow.
A Chaotic Path Ahead
The Geneva negotiations are increasingly unstable. While Rubio tries to reshape the plan, the White House seems determined to close this process as soon as possible regardless of Ukraine’s objections and European interests. The result is anything but preordained. Though the leaked version indicated bleak prospects for Ukraine, the revisions still might alter the terms of the deal.
Ukrainian diplomats believe they can manage to negotiate a more balanced settlement. But one reality remains clear: The leaked peace plan from Trump has been one of the most significant geopolitical concessions to Russia since hostilities began — and has left allies scrambling to understand how the United States arrived here.
FOR MORE: https://civiclens.in/category/international-news/
About the Author
