U.S. push for a Russia–Ukraine deal shows progress as Thanksgiving deadline nears: the latest on Trump’s ‘peace plan’

In the days since the Trump administration’s controversial “peace plan” for Russia and Ukraine surfaced last week, the proposal has undergone revisions, stirred debate over who wrote it, and prompted a counterproposal from several European allies. According to the Financial Times, negotiators have most recently reduced the plan to 19 points, though the updated document has not been published. Meduza reviews how the plan has changed — and why some journalists question the extent of Russia’s input.

Europe’s counterproposal

The Trump administration’s push for a “peace plan” for Russia and Ukraine has accelerated in recent days as the American president aims to secure an agreement before the American Thanksgiving holiday on Thursday. A leaked version of the proposal, first released by Axios on November 20, contained 28 points and drew criticism from Ukraine and its supporters for requiring Kyiv to concede too much to Russia.

Over the weekend, the U.K., France, and Germany prepared a counterproposal that differs from Trump’s initial plan in several key areas. While Trump’s proposal would limit Ukraine’s army to 600,000 troops, the European plan would cap it at 800,000 in peacetime. The European draft also begins negotiations on territorial swaps from the contact line, whereas Trump’s plan proposes dividing only the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions along the current line and recognizing Crimea, Luhansk, and Donetsk as de facto Russian territories.

Another key difference concerns Ukraine’s potential NATO membership. The European plan would not restrict Ukraine from deciding to join the alliance in the future, while the original U.S. plan would bar it from doing so. With regard to frozen Russian assets, Trump’s proposal envisions using some of them for joint U.S.-Russian projects. The European plan keeps the assets frozen until Russia compensates Ukraine for war damages.

The proposed timing of future Ukrainian elections also diverges: the European draft calls for elections “as soon as possible” after a peace agreement, while Trump’s plan sets a 100-day deadline. Additionally, the European proposal omits an amnesty clause for actions committed during the war, which was included in the initial American version.

Who wrote this thing?

Ukraine and its European partners strongly criticized Trump’s initial plan, describing it as closely aligned with Russia’s demands. Commentators noted that the document’s language contained awkward phrases that appeared to be translated directly from Russian.

Investigative journalist Christo Grozev wrote on X that he had seen an “early version” of the plan six months ago, which he described as “a purely Russian concept.” He said the version he saw was “nearly identical” to the 28-point text except for two items that have now been removed: a proposal for U.S. investors to help Russia recover from a post-war recession, and a suggested Russia–U.S. alliance against China framed with “a lot of ‘Christian alliance’” rhetoric. He suggested that one or both ideas might still exist in a nonpublic version of the plan, stating: “I am absolutely certain that this is a Russian, not a jointly developed, proposal.”

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.

Comments from a group of U.S. lawmakers at the Halifax International Security Forum over the weekend added further confusion. Some senators said Secretary of State Marco Rubio had described the plan as a Russian “wish list” rather than a reflection of U.S. policy. Republican Senator Mike Rounds stated, “This administration was not responsible for this release in its current form,” while independent Senator Angus King said Rubio had indicated the text was “not the administration’s plan.” Both senators said they had spoken with Rubio before his trip to Geneva to meet with Ukrainian representatives.

Rubio later denied these claims on X, stating that the plan “was authored by the U.S.” He added that it was intended as “a strong framework for ongoing negotiations,” based on input from both Russia and Ukraine.

‘Meaningful progress’

Delegations from the U.S. and Ukraine met in Geneva on Sunday to work toward a mutually acceptable revision of the peace plan. In a joint statement afterward, officials said they had made “meaningful progress toward aligning positions and identifying clear next steps.”

According to the outlet RBC-Ukraine, the delegations managed to agree on most points of the U.S. peace plan and to “adjust a significant share of the contentious ones,” including the size of Ukraine’s army, control of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, and the format for exchanging prisoners and detainees. Territorial issues and Ukraine’s future NATO aspirations were reportedly left for discussion between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

RBC-Ukraine also reported that U.S. negotiators told Kyiv at the start of the talks that failure to support the plan by November 27 would result in the U.S. halting “everything, including arms supplies and intelligence.” One source said the initial tone from the American side was “very tough,” though it later “softened somewhat.”

The Financial Times reported on Monday that the proposal had been reduced from 28 to 19 points following the Geneva meeting, though the paper did not specify what items had been removed or changed.

Oleksandr Bevz, an adviser to the head of the Ukrainian President’s Office, also said the plan had undergone major revisions. “The 28-point plan, in the form everyone saw it, no longer exists. Some points were removed, others were revised. None of Ukraine’s comments went unanswered. Final decisions on the most contentious issues will be made by the presidents,” he wrote on Telegram.

What’s Russia saying?

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Monday that Russia has not received any further details about the revised peace proposal. “We haven’t received any information yet,” he told journalists. “Of course, we are closely monitoring the multitude of media reports in recent days, including those from Geneva. But we haven’t received anything officially yet.”

According to Reuters, senior Kremlin adviser Yuri Ushakov told reporters in Moscow on Monday that the European counterproposal “is completely unconstructive” and “does not work” for Russia. However, he added that many provisions of Trump’s plan were “quite acceptable” to the Kremlin.

The Kremlin also said in a statement on Monday that Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan had “exchanged opinions” on the U.S. peace proposal during a phone call. “Putin said that the version of these proposals that we have seen are in line with the discussions at the Russian–U.S. summit in Alaska and can generally form the basis for a final peace settlement,” the readout said, as quoted by Interfax.