Exclusive: Ukraine expected to give up land, some arms under US peace plan, sources say
Source: Reuters
The U.S. has signalled to President Volodymyr Zelenskiy that Ukraine must accept a U.S.-drafted framework to end the war with Russia that proposes Kyiv giving up territory and some weapons, two people familiar with the matter said on Wednesday.
The sources, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter, said the proposals included cutting the size of Ukraine's armed forces, among other things. Washington wants Kyiv to accept the main points, they said.
...
On Wednesday, citing a U.S. official with direct knowledge of the matter, Axios reported that the new U.S. plan envisaged Ukraine granting Moscow part of eastern Ukraine it does not currently control in return for a U.S. security guarantee for Kyiv and Europe against future Russian aggression.
...
Another European diplomat said the suggestion that Ukraine cut its army seemed like a Russian demand rather than a serious proposal.
Read more: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraines-zelenskiy-set-talks-turkey-new-peace-drive-2025-11-19/
Axios: https://www.axios.com/2025/11/19/trump-ukraine-peace-plan-russia-donbas (not sure how reliable their contacts are in this arena)
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ray Bruns
(5,833 posts)“Another European diplomat said the suggestion that Ukraine cut its army seemed like a Russian demand rather than a serious proposal”
Ray Bruns
(5,833 posts)
Putin says to jump, and trump says how high. Putin is the boss, and these are HIS demands.
RazorbackExpat
(797 posts)Even worse than pee tapes.
Safe as Milk
(183 posts)Zelenskyy should tell Donny to go blow Bubba and come back when he feels better.
BadgerMom
(3,372 posts)
NotHardly
(2,360 posts)
maxsolomon
(37,944 posts)In theory, it should curb Russia from coming back for another bite.
republianmushroom
(22,122 posts)on boarders in the 1990. We see how well that worked.
mitch96
(15,564 posts)LudwigPastorius
(13,867 posts)last one didn't do shit to prevent an invasion and war.
The only agreement it would (or should) go for is full membership in NATO.
maxsolomon
(37,944 posts)Russia will want that off the table as a condition of a settlement.
Ukraine remains in a tight spot.
cstanleytech
(28,073 posts)If Trump agrees to force Ukraine to give up that land to Russia then Russia will suddenly find that it no longer cares what Ukraine does,
Emrys
(8,815 posts)maxsolomon
(37,944 posts)Same with Georgia and Moldova with the Transnistrian occupation. NATO Article 5 means in practice that new member states cannot have ongoing territorial conflicts.
This war is not going to end with Ukraine driving Russia from Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk. They haven't moved Russia back at all in 2 summers. I don't know how that changes.
Emrys
(8,815 posts)If you pay attention to what Lavrov consistently says, it's not about territory or NATO, it's about the mythical "nazism" that the special operation was supposed to root out, it's about the concocted stories of the persecution of Russian speakers in Ukraine (of which Zelensky is one), it's about the supposed suppression of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine (a front for the Russian FSB), and if you listen to Putin - as Trump got thoroughly fed up of doing in Alaska - it's about historical grievances stretching back to the time of the Vikings and beyond.
If you listen to Russia's state-sponsored propagandists, it's about imposing Russkiy Mir on the whole of Europe and beyond through literally bloodthirsty and genocidal means.
As for Ukraine not having driven Russia back over the course of two summers, you seem to be the victim of selective and faulty recall.
This was in March 2022:
This was in August 2025:
In any case, obsession about supposed territorial gains ignores how tenuous Russia's hold on that (usually ruined) territory is and how much of it is PR - suicide dashes by small squads to plant flags on prominent public buildings etc. for a photo op then try desperately to run away, for instance.
As for how it changes, it's changing right now as Ukraine systematically strips Russia of its oil and gas processing and conveying facilities, severely hampering its transport and trade, and consequently its national income.
maxsolomon
(37,944 posts)but I note that 2022 is >2 summers ago. The regains of territory are more limited the last 2 years.
Emrys
(8,815 posts)as of 25 September 2023 Russia held 18% of Ukrainian territory (0.1% more than in December 2022), as of 31 December 2024 it held 19%, and as of 28 October 2025 again it held 19%, having made only marginal gains, and those at great cost in materiel and casualties.
The bare figures and maps don't reflect the strategic consequence of any gains, but currently Russia seems to be looking more for positive publicity to convince Trump et al. that it's doing OK than pursuing any coherent war plan. If it had devoted more of its firepower on strategic targets in Ukraine rather than incessant bombing of civilians and non-military facilities, it might be in a more favourable position.
None of this takes into account Ukraine's demolition of the Black Sea fleet, erosion of Russian air defences, and deep strikes on arms production and oil and gas facilities, which don't show up on those sorts of simplistic maps above. Meanwhile, Ukraine is far better armed than it was two summers ago, with many more supplies in the pipeline, and has progressively softened up Crimea for future action.
As before, it there's a Russian collapse and withdrawal in any oblast in the face of personnel challenges and/or lack of fuel or weaponry, it could happen quite suddenly, and no doubt again be presented as a magnanimous withdrawal.
maxsolomon
(37,944 posts)It's a long uphill climb for Ukraine IMO, and MFer is trying to pull the rug from under them. He still harbors a grudge for Impeachment 1.0, even though Zelenskyy did nothing.
SamuelTheThird
(502 posts)maxsolomon
(37,944 posts)And comments 21 & 22 pointed that out as well.
I still think they'd want one another one - if they can't get a path to NATO membership.
blue-wave
(4,787 posts)the Budapest Memorandum. Ukraine had a security guarantee from the U.S., Great Briton and Russia. We all know now that Russia spat upon that agreement. Signatures on paper will not deter Russia in the future. Ukraine must be allowed to maintain its' sovereign borders as well as a strong military.
maxsolomon
(37,944 posts)And 3 previous replies noted the same thing.
Are you saying Ukraine would NOT want security guarantees from the US this time?
blue-wave
(4,787 posts)Ukraine must be allowed to maintain their pre-2014 invasion borders as well as the right to build and maintain a strong military. Security guarantees are great, but as the terrorist state of Russia has proven, they are only signatures on paper and not a deterrent to Russia.
karynnj
(60,704 posts)I think this was is close to what Ukraine rejected several months ago. Note it again gives Russia some land they don't control after YEARS of war.
Polybius
(21,229 posts)While none of us want them to get anything, they won't agree to end the war for nothing.
blue-wave
(4,787 posts)Russia will get the hard lesson of their nation bankrupt, over one million souls killed or wounded and status as a pariah state for years to come. They will learn to not invade their neighbors, if that's possible in the Russian mindset.
Polybius
(21,229 posts)lapfog_1
(31,467 posts)a change of Russia leadership and Russians tired of a crap economy and bodies of their young soldiers coming back in body bags.
Polybius
(21,229 posts)It will likely end in negotiations, and hopefully soon.
lapfog_1
(31,467 posts)I don't think that many more. The economic issues are finally taking a toll. And at something like 1000 dead soldiers a day plus the huge losses in drone strikes on expensive military targets and oil refineries... there is gas rationing in Crimea now... this will soon drive what were lower middle class Russians ( that aspired in resource rich Russia to enter the middle class in Europe ) into the poor house and their anger will eventually cause the Putin nationalist empire / oligarchy to fall. What replaces it will be interesting. But they will withdraw from Ukraine.
Russia has learned some hard lessons on asymmetric warfare and are now starting to deploy their own drone attacks on Ukraine infrastructure. But Ukraine is made of some very tough people. I don't think Russia can defeat them... and even if Ukraine surrenders, Russia will constantly be fighting a nationalist resistance campaign in Ukraine for decades if not centuries.
Polybius
(21,229 posts)[snip]
The original 28-point US-Russian plan was drawn up last month by Kirill Dmitriev, Vladimir Putin’s special envoy, and Trump’s representative Steve Witkoff. It calls on Ukraine to withdraw from cities it controls in the eastern Donbas region, limit the size of its army, and not join Nato.
During negotiations on Sunday in Switzerland – led by the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, and Zelenskyy’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak – the plan was substantially revised. It now includes only 19 points. Kyiv and its European partners say the existing frontline has to be the starting point for territorial discussions.
They say there can be no recognition of land seized by Russia militarily, and add that Kyiv should make its own decisions on whether to join the EU and Nato – something the Kremlin wants to veto or impose conditions on.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143571134
blue-wave
(4,787 posts)the European and Ukraine revisions. Russia is repeating the same plays that they pulled earlier this year. Putin and the kremlin don't want to stop the war. The Russian economy, even though it's presently collapsing, will collapse more quickly if the war stops. Russia's economy is on a war footing. Every industry and business that is needed for the war effort is being used and funded at the expense of everyone else. If the war stops, many war footing businesses will go belly up. Whenever the Russian economic crash occurs, it will likely mean the end of the present regime.
Moscow’s response on Monday threw prospects for a breakthrough into deeper doubt, amid indications that key elements of the European initiative had been incorporated in a revised peace plan drawn up at Sunday’s talks in Geneva between officials from the US, Ukraine and Europe.
https://www.irishtimes.com/world/europe/2025/11/24/russia-rejects-european-input-into-peace-proposals-as-us-and-ukraine-praise-progress/
BTW, Ukraine has given Russia nothing. What they did was take away many of the absurd maximalist demands from the Russian authored surrender plan.
WarGamer
(18,151 posts)It received Security Assurances which have DIFFERENT LEGAL MEANING.
A Security Guarantee requires material assistance... assurances do not.
Start here:
https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/news/budapest-memorandum-myths
Ukraine wasn't in a strong bargaining position at the time and felt it had to take what was offered, and cast-iron guarantees weren't part of that. The geopolitical situation in Europe and Russia looked rather different then than it does now.
The lask of observance of even the meagre assurances in the Budapest Memorandum should inform atttudes towards any future agreement. Either Ukraine is a sovereign nation or it isn't. If Russia can dictate how it organizes its defence, it won't be sovereign.
WarGamer
(18,151 posts)But I don't think NATO is possible.
Emrys
(8,815 posts)Whether they'll be worth more than the paper they're written on in practice remains to be seen, but at least collaborations on military hardware are proceeding apace and countries other than the US have continued to step up their support.
I think most of the European NATO countries feel the need for Ukraine to be in NATO as keenly as Ukraine feels the need to join it. It will be de facto a buffer on Russia's southwestern front for the foreseeable future anyway, never mind what Trump meddingly blethers about. Once Putin's gone, the geopolitical situation may change - hopefully for the better - but I doubt it before then.
Putin has done himself no favours by making his attacks on the likes of Poland more blatant. The Poles were feeling pretty belligerent with Russia and Belarus anyway.
blue-wave
(4,787 posts)be worth anything is Ukraine in NATO. Anything short of that and Russia will re-invade. Just give it a few years.
blue-wave
(4,787 posts)meaning of assurances or guarantees, be my guest. But in the Budapest Memorandum, the U.S., Great Briton AND Russia agreed not to threaten or use military force against Ukraine, except in self-defense or as permitted by the United Nations Charter.
Russia was not attacked by Ukraine. Ukraine was attacked by Russia. Russia broke this agreement.
The signatories also pledged to respect the independence and sovereignty of Ukraine within existing (existing as of December 5, 1994) borders. Russia broke this "pledge."
Anyway you look at this, the present day Russian state has no honor. They lie and break agreements, then play the victim. It's all smoke and mirrors meant to confuse the world.
BTW, their are many legal scholars who argue that the Budapest Memorandum DOES guarantee legally, security for Ukraine as well as its sovereignty.
Fourth, the Budapest Memorandum’s Ukrainian version provides that it “enters into force upon signature.” The International Court of Justice found this specific wording to be an “indicator” of a legally binding memorandum without the need for ratification. However, English and Russian versions provide an iterated softer language that the memorandum “will become applicable upon signature,” which contributes to its ambiguity.
Link to the above excerpts and more: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/constructive-ambiguity-of-the-budapest-memorandum-at-28-making-sense-of-the-controversial-agreement
The memorandum is indeed controversial and there are arguments on BOTH sides.
gab13by13
(30,779 posts)linking this right wing talking point is just fine.
muriel_volestrangler
(105,279 posts)Yes, it is just fine - because it's fucking news.
gab13by13
(30,779 posts)Give me a break., plus the article makes it sound like Russia is winning the war.
I have a named source, me, who says Ukraine is going to win the war without giving up any of its sovereign land.
muriel_volestrangler
(105,279 posts)Reuters is one of the most respected news organizations in the world (along with AP and the BBC), and may well be the oldest. Whining that they didn't name their source indicates you haven't attempted to understand how news has worked in the past century or so.
Reuters has reporters. You're just an unnamed source on the internet.
Fiendish Thingy
(21,655 posts)And Europe will step up and provide the arms the US won’t.
mitch96
(15,564 posts)electric_blue68
(25,130 posts)It's up to The Ukrainians if they want to continue to fight.
Damn you again, Putin, ravenous dictator! 😬
bluestarone
(20,879 posts)I know it's Ukraines decision, but I support what ever they decide, but i hope they say FUCK OFF!!
CanonRay
(15,847 posts)Trump's the only one who can save Putin from himself
FakeNoose
(39,662 posts)This is total bullshit! This is rewarding the original unprovoked attack on Ukraine.
Ukraine has done nothing but defend itself and its right to exist against one of the most powerful nations in the world. Tell me why the war criminal Putin deserves to steal land from Ukraine!? He should be made to pay reparations to Ukraine just to walk away and call it quits.
William Seger
(12,083 posts)
sinkingfeeling
(56,851 posts)LudwigPastorius
(13,867 posts)President Z would have to be out of his mind to accept a deal like that.
Ukraine would be part of the Russian Empire within three years if he did.
republianmushroom
(22,122 posts)
Vinca
(53,072 posts)Dave Bowman
(6,347 posts)Skittles
(168,761 posts)can't help himself
republianmushroom
(22,122 posts)Russian spy ship breaches allied waters, fires lasers at military planes
British Defense Secretary John Healey said a Russian spy ship had entered the NATO ally’s northern waters and directed lasers at military planes sent to monitor it. He warned the Kremlin that “we are ready” if the vessel tries to travel further south.
Newsweek has contacted the Russian embassy in the U.K. for comment.
Why It Matters
It comes as NATO says Russia has been repeatedly testing the reaction and resolve of the Western alliance in a string of serious provocations as Moscow rapidly rearms in preparation for a potential major war in Europe. The Kremlin denies seeking war with NATO, which is aiding Ukraine’s defense against an ongoing Russian invasion, and says the reverse is true.
What To Know
“As I speak, a Russian spy ship, the Yantar, is on the edge of U.K. waters north of Scotland, having entered the U.K.’s wider waters over the last few weeks,” Healey said in a speech at Downing Street in London on Wednesday morning.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russian-spy-ship-breaches-allied-waters-fires-lasers-at-military-planes/ar-AA1QJtHM
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220817497
Nictuku
(4,487 posts)blue-wave
(4,787 posts)Appeasement of an aggressor state is not the answer to lasting peace. Total defeat for the aggressor bully is the only way. Neville Chamberlain and the Munich Agreement are the most often cited example of this.
The war might be paused if Ukraine is pressured into a weak position through an agreement, but it WILL be only paused. Russia and Putin will not honor this "agreement." Russia has proven that a Russian signature on a treaty is not worth the paper it's written on. Russia is a mafia/terrorist state and by invading Ukraine more than once now, Russia has spat upon the Budapest Memorandum, which had Ukraine give up it's nuclear arsenal for a guarantee of Ukraine's sovereign borders. You can bet Russia wants Ukraine to give up the Flamingo cruise missiles and any other advanced weaponry and likely as well, it's most advanced and best trained military units. If such an "agreement" is signed, Ukraine's death knell will begin (with Ukraine weakened through this "agreement," Russia WILL invade again) and the high probability of WWIII will be on the horizon.
This "deal" is strangely timed though. Ukraine is winning at the moment. Russia's economy will collapse and the present power structure in the Kremlin is scrambling for survival. Forcing Ukraine to acquiesce at this moment only gifts to Russia the time to prepare for waging more war.
cstanleytech
(28,073 posts)
RedWhiteBlueIsRacist
(1,571 posts)
Nasruddin
(1,149 posts)As good as a Spirit Airlines guarantee!
twodogsbarking
(16,967 posts)WestMichRad
(2,825 posts)Yeah, nothing, just as I thought. This is not a serious proposal.
A security guarantee from Trump’s America?
Bayard
(27,959 posts)Putin should have never been allowed to keep Crimea. It just encouraged him to broaden his horizons.
Why should Ukraine give up now when they are winning? Russia is running out of everything, especially money. President Zelenskiy doesn't have to follow trump's demands, especially when he did so well with that Israel/Gaza plan. Terms should be delivered to Russia that include reparations, and get off Ukraine's damn land.
womanofthehills
(10,656 posts)Since the annexation, a million new Russians have moved to Crimea. So the population is basically Russian with a lot of Ukrainians leaving. I doubt Crimea will ever be in play again.
Bayard
(27,959 posts)Ukrainians would move back there. Russians can stay or not, but they'd have to become Ukrainian citizens.
slightlv
(7,128 posts)I mean... what the hell is Russia "giving up?".... and why would a country under constant attack deplete their military ranks like this? Ceding land to Russia is what Russia demanded from the very start of this illegal war.
I don't believe anything that comes out of the current U.S. administration is geared towards peace or Ukraine's benefit. trump wants the "war" over with, and he doesn't care who pays the price, or what that price ultimately costs. This situation demands patience, a deep understanding of not only current events but also past events that led into and are still part of the current situation, and a deep desire for equity and inclusion - words that are curses for this administration. And true National Security has to be given top priority with a democratic vs non-democratic scenario, such as this. You just don't cede land... or anything else... from a democracy to communism and/or fascism... no matter what our country, itself, is doing. Frack trump!
paulrevere2018
(81 posts)Because Russia so honored the first agreement. This is Sudetenland all over again.
Evolve Dammit
(21,351 posts)
AllyCat
(18,397 posts)
mdbl
(7,871 posts)Putin deserves nothing, except maybe prison - along with Mr Dump.
Playingmantis
(505 posts)What a brilliant idea! 
Simply surrender and the war is over! We should have tried that in WW2..Imagine if Roosevelt had simply surrendered to the Nazis...
Why did nobody think of that!!
And asshole can add yet an 180th war to the ones he has ended!
Give that man the Lenin Useful Idiot Peace Prize!!
ananda
(34,096 posts)All that's happened is that Trump made
a proposal because Putin pulled that
puppet string.
bronxiteforever
(10,989 posts)
3825-87867
(1,744 posts)Putin has the goods on trump and is telling him to get this done or he exposes trump's secrets.
Trump is fretting Epstein and this is another delay.
Trump will hold back any military aid unless Z agrees to this piece of shit.
Ukraine won't agree and may have to decide it's time to stop hitting just military and industrial targets.
Force Putin to use "stupidity" and make trump look like a total ass to the world.
Then see what happens when the rest of the world stops providing goods to the US and closes air space to Americans.
He really does want to start WWIII.
Emrys
(8,815 posts)Last edited Wed Nov 19, 2025, 09:36 PM - Edit history (2)
Its coverage is only as good as its stringers, and the fact this latest bid of blatant kite-flying is filtered via Axios is not encouraging. Let's just say Axios has form, and not good form, when it comes to anonymous sourcing and Ukraine-US relations.
This was in early 2022:
...
The White House spent much of Friday frustrated by an Axios report that it believes was based on a fabricated letter purportedly written by Ukraine’s top national security official.
The Axios story, written by reporter Zachary Basu, said that Oleksiy Danilov had asked the US earlier this month “to go beyond traditional military aid and provide the country with the funding, training and weaponry to support a long-term resistance movement.” But Ukrainian Ambassador Oksana Markarova later told Axios that she believed the letter was “falsified.” And officials at the National Security Council also told Axios they have no record of receiving such a letter from Danilov.
...
“We were appalled that Axios apparently did not have time to verify with Ukrainian officials whether or not this letter was a fake, but made sure to reach out to a former Trump official with no knowledge of the situation for a ‘gotcha’ quote,” the senior admin official told me. “And then we were even more appalled it stayed up all day despite our repeated asks to take the story down when became obvious the letter was a fake — which Axios should have dug up before publishing in the first place.”
...
Shortly after I contacted Axios for comment Friday evening, the outlet updated its story. Axios changed the headline — which initially read “Scoop: Ukraine sought long-term resistance funding” — to “Ukraine’s ambassador disputes letter asking U.S. for resistance support.” The new story, which included Markarova saying the document appeared “falsified,” cited a “former senior Ukrainian official close to Danilov” who told Axios “that they had received the letter from Danilov’s office, and that it was also distributed to Ukrainian American groups and think tank experts in Washington.” But crucially, the source also told Axios that he or she could not confirm the letter was officially transmitted to the US government — essentially the crux of the initial story.
Notably, at that point, the article didn’t include a correction or retraction, despite it seemingly having no real legs to stand on. Later in the evening, a proper correction was ultimately appended to the top of the story. It read, in part, “This corrects an original version of this story that stated the Ukrainian government ‘asked’ for additional assistance from the U.S. government, when Axios was unable to confirm the letter was actually sent.” Still, given that Axios is now conceding it was “unable to confirm” the main point of its initial story, it is surprising that a more forceful correction or full retraction wasn’t issued.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/18/media/axios-ukraine-article
Apart from the nebulous references to "security guarantees", what's supposedly proposed now is little different to the "deal" the Ukrainians rejected out of hand during the Alaska summit debacle and its backwash. The fact that the discussions have reportedly included Witkoff on the US side gives even less cause for confidence given his obsession with landholding, as befits a property developer, his ignorance of the basics of Ukrainian geography, the clear evidence of his being a poodle in past dealings with Putin, and his inability to even convey accurately to NATO allies the results of his meetings with Putin and what scant concessions Russia has indicated it might be prepared to make.
Vault over the paywall at the Axios article, and way below its snazzy headline, you'll come across a few snags (my bold):
* The source claimed many understandings were reached in the talks with Umerov.
* A Ukrainian official confirmed Zelensky sent Umerov to be briefed about the U.S. plan. but said it was an oral briefing and Umerov didn't receive a written proposal from Witkoff.
* The Ukrainian official denied that Zelensky's adviser accepted the terms of the plan during the meeting and claimed Ukraine objects to many of the points.
* Prior to meeting Umerov, Witkoff held extensive discussions on the plan with Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev.
https://www.axios.com/2025/11/19/trump-ukraine-peace-plan-russia-donbas
Witkoff was supposed to meet Zelensky yesterday during Zelensky's visit to Turkey for talks with Erdogan, but that was called off. Apart from those discussions, Zelensky has a few pressing domestic problems on his plate at the moment, and any hints at capitulation seem unlikely to be considered wise while the aftermath of the recent corruption problems plays out. In terms of Ukraine's non-US allies, such a scheme to placate Russia looks like a non-starter since Poland is incensed by what is believed to have been a Russian attack on some of it rail lines and other countries are being subjected to mounting military and non-military attacks. Some of the territory Ukraine is supposedly being expected to concede includes essential defensive lines Ukraine has spent a lot of time and resources installing because those areas are strategically vital for any further Russian incursions.
In some of the Ukrainian media, the focus seems to be more on, yet again, negotiations about Ukraine being held without due consideration of Ukraine's views, needs and interests, seemingly seen as inconvenient afterthoughts. Here's The Moscow Times (more reliable than its name might suggest):
Ukraine has received a new peace proposal from the United States that requires Kyiv to cede land controlled by Russia and more than halve its army's size, a senior official briefed on the proposal told AFP on Wednesday.
The plan appears to repeat Russia's maximalist terms — demands consistently rejected by Ukraine as tantamount to capitulation.
The draft provides for "recognition of Crimea and other regions that the Russians have taken" and "reduction of the army to 400,000 personnel," the source, who did not wish to be identified, told AFP. The plan would also see Ukraine giving up all long-range weapons.
"An important nuance is that we don't understand whether this is really Trump's story" or "his entourage's," the official added.
It was "unclear" what Russia was supposed to do in return, the source said.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/11/19/us-peace-proposal-requires-ukraine-to-cede-land-cut-army-size-reports-a91168
And here's the The Kyiv Independent:
The White House and Moscow have been secretly working on a proposal to end Russia's war against Ukraine, Axios reported on Nov. 18, citing U.S. and Russian officials.
U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Russian Envoy Kirill Dmitriev have extensively discussed the 28-point peace plan, an unnamed U.S. official said.
Dmitriev described the secretive peace deal optimistically, saying that, unlike in the past, "we feel the Russian position is really being heard."
Russia has repeatedly issued maximalist demands to Kyiv in previous direct peace talks, including that Ukraine give up its NATO aspirations, demilitarize, and cede territory that Kyiv controls.
https://kyivindependent.com/us-holding-secret-talks-with-moscow-to-end-russias-war-against-ukraine-axios-reports/
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(131,411 posts)Both Trump and Piggy Poot
JPK
(900 posts)They will be gone soon. Ukraine needs to hold on until then. Europe seems to be pretty solid with Ukraine because the Russian terror will be on their doorsteps and until Trump is gone they can't rely on the US to be a reliable partner.
ChicagoTeamster
(256 posts)The whole Trump administration is a bunch of Russia compromised traitors. Every veteran intelligence agent and service member should speak out against this. This asshole sold out the Kurds and negotiated the disasterous pullout from Afghanistan and neglected to inform Biden’s team. Biden found out once he got in. All the people who died serving our country because of the Russians ( Korea, Vietnam, skirmishes in Latin America and the Middle East before 911), the traitor just threw their service away. Now he’s selling out all of our NATO allies and they came to our aid in Iraq and Afghanistan. They spent blood and treasure for the US. Fuck him.
Sam I Yam
(33 posts)I hope Zelensky tells him to go fuck himself with a rusty pipe!
SaydiTom
(39 posts)
Martin68
(26,711 posts)IcyPeas
(24,654 posts)Efilroft Sul
(4,250 posts)
Bread and Circuses
(1,440 posts)
no_hypocrisy
(53,874 posts)
Miles Archer
(21,098 posts)OUTSIDE OF my circle of politically educated and aware friends, I've never met anyone who cared about whether Trump was fully owned by Putin or not.
I'd like to be able to explain that. But since I don't understand it, I won't make the attempt.
And, Trump is probably sitting back, stuffing his face with Big Macs, waiting for that call from the Nobel Committee.
Botany
(75,990 posts)No
That is Ukrainian land, those are Ukrainian people, and Crimea should go back
to the Crimean Tatars.
nuxvomica
(13,804 posts)The Reuters headline is ambiguous. Without the "would be", it makes it sound like Ukraine is planning on doing this and I doubt they are.