Key Points and Summary – As Russian forces tighten the noose around Pokrovsk and pound Ukraine’s energy grid, Kyiv now faces a second, political battle: a controversial U.S.-driven peace plan.
-The original 28-point proposal, widely seen as echoing Russian demands, would have barred NATO membership and forced Ukraine to cede most occupied territory and slash its army.
Putin with a Rifle. Image Credit: Russian State Media.
-After a storm of protest, U.S., European, and Ukrainian negotiators cut it to 19 points—but it still envisions Ukraine losing up to 20 percent of its land with vague security guarantees.
-Putin calls the revised draft a possible “basis,” while Zelenskyy warns Ukraine is being pushed toward an undignified peace.
Controversial Ukraine Peace Plan Slimmed Down
Ukraine has more than one fight on its hands this week. Its troops are attempting to hold their defensive lines while a controversial US peace proposal could render their fight fruitless.
Russian forces have tightened pressure around the eastern city of Pokrovsk, claiming a string of gains in surrounding districts and asserting “fire control” over the last supply routes feeding Ukrainian troops.
Kyiv disputes several of Moscow’s claims, insisting central neighbourhoods remain contested and accusing Russia of “lying” about capturing Kupiansk.
Still, Ukraine’s commanders acknowledge they are stretched thin.
Further strain has come from relentless Russian air and drone attacks that have pummelled Ukraine’s power grid and gas infrastructure – systems critical to keeping most Ukrainians warm through what is expected to be the harshest winter since the war began in 2022.
Western officials quietly fear the country may emerge from the season in a far weaker bargaining position.
That anxiety forms the backdrop to the diplomatic storm over a 28-point peace plan circulated by the Trump administration last week, a document that European leaders, members of Congress and Ukrainian officials all denounced as heavily tilted toward Russia.
The original text would have barred Ukraine from joining NATO, required it to surrender nearly all occupied territory, and forced a dramatic cut in troop numbers.
Reports suggest the plan was borrowed extensively from a Russian non-paper delivered to US officials in October.
Following the widespread protest, there has been an effort to tweak the details of the plan.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has since distanced himself from the initial draft, and American, European and Ukrainian negotiators have whittled the paper down to around 19 points.
European capitals have taken a harder line than Washington, insisting there can be no recognition of territorial conquest and demanding Ukraine retain a robust army.
Meanwhile, Russia continues to demand far from the demilitarization.
Yet even this slimmer version still leaves Ukraine facing the unpalatable prospect of losing up to 20 percent of its territory, with unresolved doubts about future security guarantees.
As POLITICO reports, this may be “the best Ukraine can realistically expect” after years of Western hesitation, arms delays, and political fatigue.
Russia, for its part, has played a calculated game of ambiguity. President Vladimir Putin said in Bishkek that the revised draft “can be the basis for future agreements,” but in the same breath warned that if Ukraine does not withdraw from key regions, Russia will take them “by force.”
Kremlin aides say parts of the plan are acceptable; others require “serious analysis.”
Moscow’s message is clear: negotiations may proceed, but on its terms.
Adding to the unease in Kyiv is a corruption scandal that has unsettled allies and handed ammunition to US figures opposed to further aid.
With finances strained, infrastructure damaged, and battlefield losses mounting, Kyiv’s room for manoeuvre is shrinking.
Zelenskyy has described this moment as a choice between “the loss of our dignity or the risk of losing a key partner,” and who can really blame him?
About the Author: Georgia Gilholy
Georgia Gilholy is a journalist based in the United Kingdom who has been published in Newsweek, The Times of Israel, and the Spectator. Gilholy writes about international politics, culture, and education. You can follow her on X: @llggeorgia.
