The 28-point plan negotiated by the White House with the Kremlin is not a final agreement. It is not even close to it. It is a draft, nothing more, nothing less. In any case, Donald Trump remains an unpredictable factor—he could withdraw from the process at any moment. But this time, he may not, according to an analysis by Wolfgang Munchau, a journalist for the Financial Times.
Nothing is good for Ukraine
The plan, initially leaked on a Telegram channel, is not good for Ukraine. Nevertheless, it does not constitute "surrender," and those who characterize it as such do not seem to genuinely desire a deal. Ukraine will be able to improve it—though not significantly. "You don't have the cards," Trump once told Zelensky. Unfortunately, after the recent corruption scandal, Kyiv's position is weaker than ever.
What the Americans know
Over the past three years, American officials have repeatedly stated that Ukraine has no chance of winning the war. And after the withdrawal of US support earlier this year, it became clear that they were right: Europe could not fill the gap. Europeans may present themselves as the moral defenders of the collapsing multilateral order, but when they needed to prove their support in practice, they were not ready to do so.
On average, European aid to Ukraine reached €4 billion per month in the first half of the year. In July and August, it collapsed to less than €1 billion per month, according to the Kiel Institute. No major European country was willing to cut spending or raise taxes to substantially fund Ukraine. Their strategy, beyond photo opportunities with Zelensky, was to have the Russians fight until they got tired. Unfortunately, America got tired first. And Europe had no alternative plan.
Europe is also out of cards
Now, Europe is out of money and ideas. Trump, however, has a plan. He was playing a long-term game. His tough rhetoric against Vladimir Putin was tactical, designed to conceal a long-term strategy of pressure to achieve a deal. As Phillips O’Brien argues in his "Long Con" analysis, even the secondary sanctions on Russian oil were part of this framework. The sanctions were supposed to come into effect on November 21. Yet, nothing happened. India and China continue to buy Russian oil without consequences. The sanctions were never serious.
Trump's goal
Trump has one primary goal—to end the war, at all costs. And he has two major advantages: the military dependence of Ukraine and Europe on the US and the fact that America is the only significant Western power with a direct communication channel to Moscow. The Europeans made a strategic mistake when they cut off talks with Putin simultaneously.
Thus, the 28-point plan was negotiated by Steve Witkoff with his Russian counterpart, Kirill Dmitriev. The leak of the text—written in Russian and somewhat clumsily translated into English—gives the impression of an unfinished draft. It is detailed but does not constitute an officially agreed-upon text.
The crucial points
However, there are some non-negotiable points. One of them is the territorial settlement that would cede to Russia a part of Ukraine that it does not yet occupy. Russia already controls about 90% of the Donbass—all of Luhansk and about three-quarters of Donetsk. The Trump plan would cede the rest of Donetsk to Russia, along with about 200,000 Ukrainian citizens still residing in Kyiv-controlled areas. The region would be demilitarized and would constitute a security zone.
Trump's team accepted this point, believing—correctly, in my opinion—that without it there would be no chance of an agreement. Putin would continue the war and eventually conquer more territory. Russia is already advancing. It recently captured the strategically important city of Pokrovsk. It could take another 12 months to capture the rest of Donetsk before turning towards the big prize, Zaporizhzhia, a city of 700,000 inhabitants and the capital of the region. At that point, Ukraine's independence could no longer be taken for granted.
What remains for Ukraine
However, the agreement is not as one-sided as its critics claim. It formally recognizes Ukraine's sovereignty and its right to join the EU. It also allows the country to maintain an army of up to 600,000 soldiers. And it does not prohibit aid from NATO states, except for certain types of weapons, such as long-range missiles.
But there are also points of real surprise. Point 14 provides for the investment of €100 billion from the frozen Russian assets for the reconstruction of Ukraine, with the US receiving 50% of the profits. This is authentic "Trump logic"—commercial games beyond any European imagination. Furthermore, Europe would be obligated to contribute another €100 billion from its own resources. An American-Russian investment fund would also be established.
Most importantly, however, the agreement would compel Europe to unfreeze the €200 billion in Russian assets held in European accounts, mainly in Belgium. This is a bitter development for Europe, which wanted to use them as collateral for loans to Ukraine. Trump does not have the authority to impose such a thing, and Friedrich Merz has already rejected the prospect, but the US can make life difficult for Europe if it refuses.
The sole European "strategy" was to hold these assets as a bargaining chip for future reparations—a strategy based on the fantasy that Ukraine would win the war.
What will bring Ukraine to the table
But if Russia and Ukraine finally agree on a peace solution, this plan collapses, as the assets would turn into a tool to impede a deal. Another red line in the plan is the gradual lifting of sanctions. Russia's return to the G7—reinstating it as the G8—would be painful for Europe. Russia was expelled in 2014 after the annexation of Crimea. A renewed G8 would essentially be led by Trump and Putin.
It is not surprising that European leaders at the G20 summit in South Africa issued a statement that they would submit a counter-proposal, primarily to block the Trump plan. They called for a ceasefire—a dead-end position. And after the meeting of senior American and European officials in Geneva on Sunday, they spoke of "progress" without giving details.
Ukraine, conversely, made more positive comments about a new version of the plan. The Kyiv Independent reported that Rustem Umerov, secretary of the National Security Council and a close associate of Zelensky, participated in the drafting of the plan and agreed with most of it, after presenting some modifications to Zelensky.
Domestic attitudes in Ukraine are also changing. Iuliia Mendel, former spokesperson for Zelensky, wrote on X: "My country is bleeding. Many who reflexively react to any peace proposal believe they are defending Ukraine. With all due respect, this shows they have no awareness of what is really happening at the front." She is absolutely right that Ukraine's most fervent supporters in Europe do not understand the military reality.
Will the Europeans encourage Zelensky to continue the war?
They will certainly try. But I am not sure they will succeed. Eventually, they will back down. Because if Ukraine rejects the agreement, Trump will disconnect the last remaining US military and intelligence support. The country depends on it for early warning of attacks and guidance for its own strikes.
Trump could even disavow American responsibility for European security, arguing that Europe is taking unacceptable risks. Europeans know this. Despite the rhetoric of defiance, their actions say otherwise: after imposing tariffs on European imports in the summer, the EU backed down and accepted an increase in defense spending. If Europe wanted real independence from the US, it would have created a single defense procurement with a "Buy European" clause and restructured its armies. None of this is happening—nor is it likely to.
In the coming days, there will be a plethora of statements from European capitals. Leaders will insist that they retain their sovereignty over decisions. Legally, this is true. The US has no jurisdiction over Russian assets in Europe. But this is not a legal dispute—it is a political one. Europe never had a viable strategy for the war. And now it is becoming clear that it does not even have a strategy for peace. The Europeans have no choice but to surrender: they no longer have any cards to play.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών