A leaked draft of a proposed US-Russia peace plan aimed at resolving the ongoing conflict in Ukraine has revealed significant and controversial terms that could reshape the future territorial, military, and political landscape of the region. The plan, consisting of 28 key points, has sparked widespread debate over its feasibility, fairness, and potential beneficiaries. At its core, the draft suggests handing over control of parts of Ukraine’s industrial eastern Donbas region—still under Ukrainian administration—to Russia’s de facto authority, a move that has raised profound concerns about Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
One of the most contentious aspects of the draft is the proposal that Ukraine withdraw its forces from the portion of Donetsk Oblast it currently controls. This territory, including strategic cities like Slovyansk, Kramatorsk, and Druzhkivka—home to at least a quarter of a million Ukrainians—would be designated a neutral, demilitarized buffer zone and internationally recognized as belonging to the Russian Federation. The plan specifies that Russian forces would not enter this demilitarized zone, yet the formal recognition of this territory as Russian represents a significant concession to Moscow’s territorial claims. Given that Russia has fought for over a year to capture nearby towns such as Pokrovsk, it is highly unlikely that Kyiv or the Ukrainian population would accept relinquishing such vital hubs without resistance.
The draft also calls for a reduction in the size of Ukraine’s armed forces to 600,000 personnel. This is a substantial decrease from the estimated 880,000 active personnel Ukraine had as of January, which itself marked an increase from 250,000 at the time of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. While such a limit might be considered acceptable during peacetime by some standards, it carries implications for Ukraine's sovereignty and self-defense capabilities. Ukrainian officials have clearly rejected this limitation, with representative Khrystyna Hayovyshyn emphasizing at the United Nations Security Council that Ukraine will never formally or informally recognize Russian claims to occupied Ukrainian territories, nor accept restrictions on its right to self-defense or the size of its military.
The draft further proposes that Crimea, as well as the Luhansk and Donetsk regions, be recognized as de facto Russian territories, including by the United States. However, this recognition would not necessarily be legal or formal, allowing Ukraine to retain its constitutional claim that its borders are indivisible and inviolable. This phrasing appears designed to offer Kyiv a diplomatic compromise whereby it can acknowledge the realities on the ground without legally conceding sovereignty. In contrast, in the southern regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, the front lines would be frozen, with Russia expected to relinquish some of the areas it occupies elsewhere in Ukraine. This presents a complex challenge, especially as Russia has formally annexed parts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia into its own constitution, making any territorial rollback politically sensitive for Moscow.
On the political front, the draft contains significant provisions relating to Ukraine’s international alignments. It calls for Ukraine to enshrine in its constitution a commitment to never join NATO, while NATO would reciprocate by including a statute preventing Ukraine’s future admission. At the same time, the plan acknowledges Ukraine’s eligibility for European Union membership and promises short-term preferential access to the European market while Ukraine’s application is evaluated. This dual approach reflects shifting Russian attitudes, which have softened somewhat toward Ukraine’s EU aspirations, while remaining adamantly opposed to its NATO integration. However, Ukraine strongly opposes any limitations on its sovereign right to choose its alliances, viewing this as a red line. The draft also stipulates that NATO would agree not to station troops on Ukrainian soil, although European fighter jets would be based in Poland. Moreover, Kyiv would be required to commit to remaining a non-nuclear state, rejecting any future ambitions to develop nuclear weapons.
Security guarantees are a critical component of the plan but remain vague and insufficient by Ukraine’s standards. The draft promises a “total and complete comprehensive non-aggression agreement” between Russia, Ukraine, and Europe, alongside unspecified “robust or reliable” guarantees for Kyiv’s security. In the event of a renewed Russian invasion, the plan calls for a coordinated military response, reinstatement of sanctions, and termination of the deal. However, these guarantees fall far short of the NATO Article Five commitment, which treats an attack on one member as an attack on all. Kyiv’s demand for clear, enforceable guarantees remains unmet, and