‘Legions of devils in the details’: The world reacts to Trump’s full Russia–Ukraine ‘peace plan’
Over the past few days, media outlets around the world have been focused on a new plan to bring peace between Russia and Ukraine. First, it emerged that the plan was being prepared in secret by envoys of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin — without Ukraine’s involvement. Soon after, journalists reported its key details, and now the full text has been published. Yesterday, Meduza collected initial reactions from public figures to the initiative, which Trump reportedly intends to pursue seriously — and quickly. Now that the plan’s contents are clear, we’ve compiled a second round of comments from politicians, experts, and officials.
Volodymyr Zelensky, president of Ukraine
“This must be a plan that ensures a real, lasting, and dignified peace. We’re coordinating closely to make sure that key positions are taken into account. We have aligned on the next steps [with the leaders of the U.S. and the E.U.] and agreed that our teams at the appropriate levels will work together.”
Khrystyna Hayovyshyn, Deputy permanent representative of Ukraine to the U.N.
“We will never recognize […] the territory of Ukraine that is temporarily occupied by the Russian Federation as Russian. Our land is not for sale. Ukraine will not agree to any restrictions on its right to self-defense or on the size and capabilities of our armed forces. We will also not tolerate any infringements on our sovereignty, including our sovereign right to choose the alliances we wish to join. We will not reward the genocidal intent underlying Russian aggression by undermining our identity, including our language.”
Dmitry Peskov, Kremlin spokesperson
“There are certain concerns on the American side, and we’re seeing some new initiatives, but officially we haven’t received anything, and these points haven’t been subject to substantive discussion. […] We are open to peace talks and we want them to succeed, but in order for that to happen, we are not willing to discuss these matters in a public, high-profile way.”
Donald Tusk, Polish prime minister
“Decisions concerning Poland will be made by the Polish people. Nothing about us without us. All peace negotiations must involve Ukraine.”
Tatiana Stanovaya, political scientist and senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
“[While the published plan] reflects most of Putin’s demands (that until recently seemed unrealistic), it contains — from a Russian perspective — two major problems.
First, the wording reveals a dismissive and inaccurate understanding of how Moscow formulates its positions. The plan takes Russian demands into account, but Russia would not articulate them in this manner. […]
Second, although the concessions to Russia appear substantial, the plan would also require Moscow to abandon some of its earlier conditions — for example, the more radical reduction of Ukraine’s armed forces or parts of the political reform package. […] I am not suggesting that Putin would reject the plan outright, but he would almost certainly insist on scrupulous work on the formulations and on putting every commitment down on paper in detailed form. This creates a paradox: having received, in outline, much of what it wanted, Moscow now has to treat seriously something it is likely to view as fundamentally unsubstantiated and unreliable.”
Iuliia Mendel, Former press secretary of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky
“Whenever a new peace plan surfaces, the outrage is instant and deafening — and that’s completely understandable when emotions are raw. Yet real leaders can’t make decisions based on feelings alone; they have to coldly weigh what this deal actually gives Ukraine, what it permanently takes away, and whether it offers any realistic path sometimes to recover what has already been lost. Only that brutally honest balance sheet, not the heat of the moment, can tell us if we’re looking at capitulation, a bitter but necessary compromise, or something still worth resisting.”
Sign up for Meduza’s daily newsletter
A digest of Russia’s investigative reports and news analysis. If it matters, we summarize it.
Joerg Lau, international correspondent for Die Zeit
“Future historians might want to reconstruct when NATO ceased to exist IN ITS TRANSATLANTIC FORM.
Here’s a hint. Look at this passage of the Ukraine ‘peace plan.’ The U.S. will act as a ‘mediator’ between NATO and Russia.
As if they were no longer the lead nation.”
Mark Galeotti, Russia expert and honorary professor at University College London
“I’m sure this will be an unpopular opinion, but while the text of the U.S. plan for Ukraine is poorly drafted and incomplete, it is not a simple call for Ukrainian capitulation. […]
By sticking to acknowledging Russia’s de facto control of the occupied territories, it sidesteps the need for a Ukrainian constitutional referendum or even EU formal acceptance. This doesn’t preclude some peaceful future reunification, Germany-style.
Capping the Ukrainian army to 600,000 isn’t as draconian as I imagine the Russians wanted. […] Withdrawal from the rest of Donetsk Region continues to be a tough one; making this a DMZ *may* make it easier to swallow, as it addresses the issue of the region being used as a [springboard] for future attacks.
Sanctions relief is staged, likely not complete, and Moscow must allow $100B of its frozen funds to go to Ukraine reconstruction. That’s better than I imagined, even though the form of reconstruction looks a little exploitative/colonial (to US gain).
I’m certainly not saying this is a *good* plan. There are some weird anomalies (START-1?) and whole legions of devils in the details, from monitoring to security guarantees. But arguably it’s the closest to the basis for talks that we could have expected.”
Carlo Calenda, Italian senator, former economic development minister, and former permanent representative to the E.U.
“The plan that’s been revealed is not a ‘U.S. plan.’ It’s Putin’s plan, being carried out through his asset, Trump. The survival of Ukraine and the E.U. will depend on whether we say no to this plan. Is there a leader in Europe capable of blocking the joint plans of Trump and Putin? That’s the real issue.”
Sign up for The Beet
Underreported stories. Fresh perspectives. From Budapest to Bishkek.
Gitanas Nausėda, president of Lithuania
“I would like to remind everyone of a very, very simple principle for any peace negotiations: nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. […] We must find a formula that preserves Ukraine’s territorial integrity and provides certain long-term security guarantees. […] And of course, the voice of the European community must be strong. We cannot sit on the sidelines and merely comment on peace plans. We must be actively involved in shaping them.”
Leonid Volkov, head of political projects at the Alexey Navalny-founded Anti-Corruption Foundation
“Nothing has actually happened. Trump put heavy pressure on Putin [with sanctions on the oil sector]. Now he’s putting heavy pressure on Zelensky. This is literally how Trump always operates. […] He believes that by applying alternating — and preferably shock — pressure on both sides of a conflict, he can force them to sit down at the negotiating table and push them toward compromise. And that’s exactly what he’s doing.
[But] fundamentally, nothing has changed. Putin still believes he will eventually get everything without making any concessions, so he will continue to avoid negotiations while pretending that it’s Zelensky who is avoiding them. For Ukraine, as before, any solution involving the withdrawal of troops from territories that Putin did not seize by military means remains politically unacceptable. […]
So now we’re going to see yet another round of ritual gestures aimed at not offending Trump, showing that the other side torpedoed the deal, and signing nothing.”
Ruth Deyermond, co-chair of the Russian and Eurasian security research group at King’s College London
“The Trump administration has turned the US into such an unreliable security partner that Russia is now treating it as a neutral arbiter between Russia and NATO as part of this same peace plan so a Trump-era US guarantee modeled on Art. 5 would be entirely meaningless.”
Janis Kluge, senior associate at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs
“The latest ‘peace plan’ has many problems, but this is a big one: There is ZERO credible enforcement if Russia violates it. Security guarantees? The US under Trump is not a credible security guarantor. Reimposing sanctions later? It would be weaker than what we have today.”
Roman Alekhin, Russian pro-war blogger
“I’m confident that Zelensky will start changing the conditions [of the peace plan] and adding demands that will make it impossible for Russia to sign. […] As for the plan itself, in essence, one could argue that on paper it achieves its goals: Russian [language] won’t be penalized, the Ukrainian Armed Forces will be downsized, and Ukraine will become permanently non-aligned. But what’s really important isn’t what’s on paper now, it’s the future. This plan could be positive, or it could simply freeze the conflict for us down the line.”
Meduza is the world’s largest independent Russian news outlet. Every day, we bring you essential coverage from Russia and beyond. Our independence lets us tell the stories others can’t and help you make sense of one of the world’s most enigmatic regions. Explore our reporting here and follow us wherever you get your news.