By Ephraim Agbo
When the 28-point U.S.-drafted peace proposal for the Ukraine war surfaced in November 2025, it landed like a geopolitical thunderclap. Presented as a blueprint to “end the war responsibly,” the document reads less like a ceasefire agreement and more like a forced geopolitical reset—one that demands painful concessions from Ukraine, offers sweeping reintegration opportunities for Russia, and attempts to restore Washington’s grip over a conflict that has defied all diplomatic engineering.
Below is what the plan actually contains—all 28 points, reflected faithfully in context—and what each means for the balance of power in Europe.
1. Sovereignty Promises vs. Territorial Realities (Points 1–5)
The plan opens with a declaration that Ukraine’s sovereignty and independence will be “fully recognised.” But the clauses that follow immediately undercut that idealism.
Within the first cluster of points, the plan proposes:
- De facto recognition of Russian control over Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk.
- A freeze of the front lines in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia—cementing Russia’s battlefield gains without requiring full withdrawal.
- The establishment of internationally monitored demilitarised zones, acting as buffers between Ukrainian and Russian positions.
- A framework for future territorial negotiations, but with no timeline and no enforcement leverage.
This architecture signals the first hard truth of the plan:
Ukraine keeps sovereignty on paper but cedes territory in practice.
2. The NATO Question and the 600,000-Troop Cap (Points 6–9)
One of the most consequential clusters involves Ukraine’s long-term security posture.
The draft demands that:
- Ukraine permanently renounce NATO membership in its constitution.
- NATO formally forswear any future Ukrainian membership.
- No NATO troops, bases, or offensive weapons will be deployed on Ukrainian soil.
- And most critically,
Ukraine’s military will be capped at 600,000 personnel.
That troop cap—explicitly written into the draft—would reshape Ukraine’s defence model for a generation. For a country with a 2,300-km border with Russia, limiting its armed forces to 600,000 is, in effect, a structural vulnerability.
Western critics see this as a “demilitarisation-lite” clause designed to satisfy Moscow’s long-term security demands by keeping Ukraine permanently weaker than Russia.
3. U.S. Security Guarantees—With Strings (Points 10–12)
In exchange for NATO abandonment, the U.S. offers what the draft calls “robust bilateral guarantees.”
However, the guarantees come with heavy conditions:
- The U.S. can withdraw guarantees if Ukraine violates the deal.
- Ukraine would owe compensation to the U.S. if guarantees are activated.
- Guarantees terminate if Ukraine attacks Moscow or St. Petersburg.
- Washington and Moscow would jointly sit on a Security Oversight Board, giving Russia an unprecedented voice in Ukraine’s security affairs.
This is not a classical Western security umbrella—it is a conditional, reversible, and co-managed one.
4. Elections in 100 Days and a Blanket Amnesty (Points 13–16)
The plan forces a compressed political timetable:
- National elections within 100 days, despite ongoing displacement and occupation.
- Wartime amnesty for all combatants and political actors.
- A binding Peace Accord to be ratified by the newly elected administration.
- International monitors to oversee both the vote and political transition.
Critics argue that holding elections under territorial occupation and mass displacement could legitimise Russian leverage and weaken Ukrainian democratic coherence.
5. Reconstruction and Frozen Russian Assets (Points 17–20)
The plan envisions a massive economic program:
- $100 billion in reconstruction funds, including use of frozen Russian assets.
- A revenue-sharing mechanism giving Russia partial economic stake in reconstruction projects.
- Full reopening of Black Sea trade corridors.
- A World Bank-coordinated program to rebuild critical Ukrainian infrastructure.
This section reads like a technocratic post-conflict blueprint—but one heavily conditioned on Western and Russian cooperation.
6. Sanctions Relief and Russia’s Reintegration (Points 21–23)
The document then pivots sharply toward Moscow:
- Phased sanctions lifting begins as soon as Russia complies with initial steps.
- Full reintegration into the global financial system.
- Possibility of Russia’s return to the G8 and expansion of U.S.-Russia economic cooperation (energy, AI, Arctic development).
This is the section that most angered Baltic and Polish officials, who see it as a geopolitical concession that rewards aggression with restored global legitimacy.
7. Nuclear Commitments and the Zaporizhzhia Plant (Points 24–25)
The plan mandates:
- Ukraine to remain a non-nuclear state, with reinforced NPT commitments.
- The IAEA to resume full control over the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant.
- Power production from Zaporizhzhia to be shared 50/50 between Ukraine and Russia, under international oversight.
This effectively turns the largest nuclear plant in Europe into a jointly managed economic asset—an unprecedented arrangement in wartime diplomacy.
8. Humanitarian Measures and Prisoner Exchanges (Points 26–28)
The final cluster offers humanitarian provisions:
- “All-for-all” prisoner exchanges, including return of detainees and bodies.
- Reunification mechanisms for families separated by the war.
- A permanent Humanitarian Committee to manage missing persons, trauma support, and war-affected populations.
These are the least controversial clauses—but also the least politically transformative.
What the 28-Point Plan Really Achieves
1. It ends active fighting—but freezes an unjust territorial map.
Ukraine retains its statehood, but not its land.
2. It transforms Ukraine into a non-aligned, militarily limited buffer state.
The 600,000-troop cap and NATO ban create structural military inferiority.
3. It rehabilitates Russia faster than expected.
Sanctions relief and G8 reintegration are major geopolitical gifts.
4. It restores U.S. centrality—but also binds Washington to a risky oversight role.
The U.S.-Russia security board is unprecedented and legally delicate.
5. It leaves Europe divided.
Eastern European states see the deal as appeasement.
Western Europe sees it as stabilisation.
6. It forces Ukraine into elections under pressure.
A political reset in 100 days favours whoever Moscow and Washington can tolerate.
The Bottom Line
The 28-point peace plan is not merely a diplomatic document—it is a geostrategic reordering of Eastern Europe, one that demands Ukraine trade land, sovereignty, and military autonomy in exchange for the promise of peace, reconstruction, and Western protection.
To Kyiv, it is a painful compromise.
To Moscow, it is a partial victory.
To Washington, it is a reset attempt.
To Europe, it is a fault line.
This is not peace as Ukraine imagined it.
It is peace as great powers negotiate it.
No comments:
Post a Comment