A Ukraine Peace Plan That Could Actually Work on Putin — But Comes at a High Price for Kyiv

A controversial 28-point peace proposal on the table may offer Vladimir Putin something he can publicly accept — but for Ukraine, the cost could be steep.

What’s in the Plan?

The draft peace framework, reportedly brokered by U.S. and Russian envoys, calls for Ukraine to make major concessions that align closely with Moscow’s long‑standing demands: surrendering control over territories like Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk; permanently limiting its military size; and abandoning its path to NATO membership.

In exchange, the plan lays out security guarantees and a promise of reconstruction aid, funded in part by frozen Russian assets.

Ukraine would also hold elections within 100 days, and a demilitarized buffer zone would be set up – recognized internationally as Russian territory, though Russian troops would be barred from directly occupying it.

Why It Might Appeal to Putin

From the Kremlin’s perspective, the plan delivers many of its core demands: territorial recognition, restrictions on Ukraine’s future military power, and a retraction of NATO ambitions.

Some in Moscow are signaling cautious openness. According to Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov, “many provisions” of the plan are acceptable — though others still require detailed negotiation.

For Putin, such a deal offers political legitimacy without conceding too much. It might lock in gains he already holds, and provide a narrative of diplomacy rather than outright defeat.

Why Many in the West and Ukraine Are Alarmed

European leaders have expressed serious reservations, warning that the plan was drafted without meaningful input from Kyiv or its European partners.

Critics argue the deal is lopsided, effectively rewarding Russia’s territorial aggression while undermining Ukraine’s sovereignty.

A key concern: the language around NATO and security guarantees is vague. Analysts say that without concrete timelines or binding mechanisms, Russia could still pivot to future aggression.

There’s also skepticism that Russia would truly respect any demilitarized zone or neutral status for Ukraine, especially given its track record.

Is It Realistic – and Is It “Peace”?

Some observers argue that the proposal might not represent a genuine path to lasting peace, but rather a way for Moscow to entrench its control.

Others contend that even if Ukraine reluctantly signs on, the deal could enable a “frozen conflict” where Kyiv’s sovereignty is largely hollow, and Russia retains leverage indefinitely.

Meanwhile, voices within Ukraine question whether accepting such a plan — under pressure — would be tantamount to capitulation.

What Would Make It Work – or Collapse

For the plan to succeed, three conditions seem critical:

1. Robust, enforceable security guarantees. Ukraine would need more than vague assurances: third-party monitors, a credible backstop, and meaningful verification mechanisms.
2. Clear demarcation of territory and buffer zones. The neutral zones and election terms must be defined in a way that doesn’t give Russia loopholes to re-engage.
3. A fair reconstruction deal. Frozen Russian assets could rebuild Ukraine — but only if the terms are equitable, transparent, and not tilted toward empowering Moscow or foreign investors at Kyiv’s expense.

The Risk for Kyiv

If Ukraine signs on without securing these safeguards, it could face long-term strategic vulnerabilities: limited defense capacity, uncertain sovereignty, and a weakened bargaining position in future negotiations.