For over three decades, I’ve witnessed the ebb and flow of conflict between Ukraine and Russia, a story etched with loss and resilience. Now, a new attempt at peace has emerged from an unexpected source, and the response from Kyiv is…guarded, at best.
One Ukrainian observer bluntly dismissed the 28-point plan as “not worth the paper it’s written on.” Others emphasize the necessity of Ukraine – and Europe – being central to any lasting agreement. A clear consensus is forming: this document leans heavily in Moscow’s favor.
President Zelenskyy, ever the diplomat, publicly states he is “reviewing the points,” seeking a “dignified peace.” Behind closed doors, intense discussions are unfolding between the U.S., Ukraine, and European leaders, even reaching across the divide to include voices from the Kremlin. The stakes are impossibly high, not just for the region, but for the world.
If I could offer Zelenskyy a direct message, it would be this: maintain your composure. Rejecting this plan outright would be a fatal error. You are navigating treacherous waters with remarkable poise, and continued dialogue is paramount.
Focus on what truly matters. There are concessions within the plan that, while difficult to accept, ultimately hold little sway over Ukraine’s future. Reinstating Russia to the G-8, a gradual lifting of sanctions, even amnesty for past actions – these are bargaining chips, not existential threats.
Some proposals, like addressing “Nazi ideology” or ensuring religious and linguistic tolerance, appear designed to appease Moscow. Granting the Russian language and church a renewed official status isn’t a devastating blow. In fact, the plan isn’t entirely unfavorable; it affirms Ukraine’s sovereignty, pledges against future invasion, and promises security guarantees and reconstruction aid. The key is securing concrete commitments.
However, three points represent clear red lines. The proposed handover of the remaining eastern Donetsk region, framed as a demilitarized zone, demands rigorous scrutiny. A true DMZ requires strict neutrality, robust security, and a governing body independent of Russian control – and it certainly shouldn’t bear Russia’s name.
A mandated reduction of Ukraine’s military to 600,000 troops is a significant cut, but not crippling, provided those forces are well-trained, equipped, and strategically positioned. Ironclad guarantees are essential to ensure this reduction doesn’t leave Ukraine vulnerable.
Perhaps the most contentious issue is the prohibition of NATO troops within Ukraine. This jeopardizes the planned deployment of international peacekeepers. A potential compromise lies in stationing forces along Ukraine’s borders, maintaining vigilant surveillance and a rapid-response capability.
The plan also offers benefits for the U.S., including a share in reconstruction profits – a predictable consequence of dealing with any administration. The initial Thanksgiving deadline for a signed agreement appears flexible, as long as negotiations continue. Even the looming Ukrainian election, and the associated political challenges, may need to be navigated.
Ultimately, these negotiations will likely stall on the most critical points. But as the old saying goes, “jaw-jaw” is always preferable to “war-war.” For the Ukrainian people, who have endured unimaginable suffering, every effort towards a peaceful resolution is worth pursuing.
I’ve visited Kyiv countless times, and each visit leads me to the same military cemetery outside the city. It grows larger, and more heartbreaking, with each passing season. That image, more than any political calculation, underscores the urgent need for a lasting peace.
