What does Trump’s peace plan mean for Putin? It’s ‘a reward to a dictator,’ says Free Russia Foundation’s Natalia Arno.

Members of the Trump administration are sending mixed messages about the new, 28-point peace plan drafted by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev. On Friday, President Donald Trump himself deemed this upcoming Thursday an “appropriate” deadline for Ukraine to sign off on the proposal or lose U.S. support. But on Saturday evening, senators at the Halifax International Security Forum relayed comments from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who allegedly called the document Russia’s “wish list” and claimed that he “was not aware” of any threats to withhold American weapons or intelligence from Kyiv. Rubio later contradicted the senators, saying that the peace proposal was authored by the U.S. based on input from both Russia and Ukraine. Earlier that day in Halifax, The Beet editor Eilish Hart sat down with pro-democracy activist Natalia Arno, the head of the Free Russia Foundation, to discuss what the Kremlin stands to gain from the proposal on the table. Here’s their conversation, edited for length and clarity.

— What do you make of the peace plan drawn up by Trump envoy Steve Witkoff and Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev?

— Well, I cannot call it a peace plan. It’s a reward to an aggressor, a reward to a dictator. There is nothing that brings Russia to accountability, and there are a lot of requirements for Ukraine and Europe. There are no [real] security guarantees — only guarantees about how the U.S. can revoke its security guarantees. So it doesn’t make any sense. Why reward the country that launched the war, is not winning, and is not making gains on the front lines? 

Maybe they will capture Pokrovsk by the end of the year, but it will cost a huge [number of] human lives, and a lot of money, equipment, and so on — and the [distance] between Avdiivka and Pokrovsk is what, 45 kilometers [less than 30 miles]? Russia is not gaining anything or winning — and Ukraine is not losing. [On the contrary,] Ukraine is not just a recipient of assistance. It’s actually becoming an expert in warfare, and it can offer expertise to counter [Russia’s] hybrid war with Europe and NATO.

[The proposal] also sets a very bad global precedent. Every dictator will think that they can attack anybody, hold on long enough, and then the world will reward them. This is not a peace plan. It’s not “neutral” or “good” — it’s something that should be condemned. Of course, it’s up to Ukraine to decide, but I was outraged when I looked through it. 

— Why do you think the Russian side in particular is putting forward this proposal now?

— They’re still trying to appease and persuade the new U.S. administration. [Kremlin envoy] Kirill Dmitriev still goes [to Russia] a lot, and there are still a lot of Trump representatives talking to the Russian government. So they’re trying to maintain this line of communication and find weaknesses.

Russia is [also] having huge problems with its economy, society, and the elites. It’s a bad situation generally. We recently released a report, “Russia’s Budget Crisis, Explained” by [Russian opposition politician] Vladimir Milov. It gives an overview of how sanctions are finally working and how the Russian government itself realizes that it has huge problems in all these spheres, including with oil and tax [revenues]. They can still [afford to launch] missile and drone attacks on Ukraine, but they cannot [carry out large-scale offensives] like in 2022. They don’t have the resources. 

And of course, Putin is very opportunistic, and he may be using the crisis in Ukraine over this corruption scandal. This is what Putin always does: he either creates [a crisis] himself or immediately uses it to his advantage. This is the biggest internal political crisis in Ukraine since the start of the full-scale invasion — of course, Putin would use this opportunity.

— Putin said last Friday that this proposal “could serve as the basis for a final peace settlement. But it has not been discussed with us in any substantive way.” What do you think he means by this?

— This is the Kremlin’s typical playbook. They used to have Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the leader of the [far-right] Liberal Democratic Party, who was like a trial balloon. He would say all this complete nonsense, and everybody would be so shocked, but they’d also laugh at him because he was like a clown. It was [the Kremlin’s way of] testing what would stick. What will be the backlash? What will be accepted or ignored? This is like that: they put [forward] whatever they want, and something will stick. 

It’s obviously a very Russian plan. Even granular things, like imposing on NATO’s internal decisions, navigation in the Dnipro River, or the export of grain — these don’t have anything to do with a peace settlement, but whatever sticks will stick. They know everybody will be upset about something, and [hope] they’ll discuss that and neglect whatever might be the biggest thing [for Russia] — like removing Ukraine from Donbas, the most fortified defensive line that Ukraine [has built] since 2014, or cutting Ukraine’s army down to 600,000 people.

Of course, all the points are very important. But for the Kremlin, [something like prohibiting “Nazi ideology”] will just be a talking point, something to distract the whole world. And then the real peace deal will have all the points they really need; they’ll delete this Nazi thing, but everything else will stay. 

— The Trump administration is reportedly pressuring Ukraine to sign the peace proposal by Thanksgiving or lose U.S. support in the war with Russia. Do you get the sense that they are putting pressure on Putin, too? 

— No, not at all. Any normal peace plan would hold Russia accountable and discuss the situation inside Russia, political prisoners, and repressions, and there’s nothing [about any of that]. What is there about Russia? Some promises? We know what such promises cost. What are Russian promises [worth] when they’ve violated absolutely all international agreements, deals, and treaties? So of course, it’s not serious, and there is no pressure on Russia.

You’re currently reading Meduza, the world’s largest independent Russian news outlet. Every day, we bring you essential coverage from Russia and beyond. Explore our reporting here and follow us wherever you get your news.

And what can they do? Say, we’ll put sanctions on you? They already live under a sanctions regime. If the world stands firm, understanding that Russia is not winning and Ukraine is not losing, and continues to support Ukraine, then I don’t think this war can last long. Especially if the U.S., Canada, and the European Union are very consistent and disciplined and better coordinate all sanctions measures. Of course, it’s in all of our interests to stop [the war] as soon as possible because people are dying, children are dying. But at the same time, it’s obvious that the Kremlin is not in a winning position [where it can] dictate terms. 

— If Russia and Ukraine were to agree to this peace plan and the war were to end on these terms, what would it mean for Putin?

— Right now, Putin can sell anything as a victory. With whatever territories, he can say, “Yes, we made gains and de-Nazified.” It’s easy to lie, and they can say anything [they want]. They can even say [Russia] defeated NATO.

Before the full-scale invasion, everything on Russian television was about Ukraine [being] the biggest enemy. All the commentators were talking about Ukraine. Now, they’re not talking about Ukraine that much. They’re talking about Finland, or Romania, or Poland being part of the Russian Empire. If NATO thinks that Russia doesn’t have a war with them, for Russia [it’s the other way around] — this is a war with NATO, first and foremost. 

[If this peace plan is accepted] it will mean that the real aggressor won’t be punished. There will be impunity, and [Russia will be able to] recuperate and prepare [future] attacks. They will continue cooperation with the CRINKs alliance. So it will be a really bad situation. Of course, these four years have been a nightmare, and [the war] should be stopped. If Ukraine accepts, then of course we will all respect Ukraine’s position. It’s important to think about people and not about territories in all of this.