An explosion of a ballistic missile lights up the sky over the city during a Russian missile and drone strike, amid Russia’s attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine April 24, 2025. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich/File Photo
U.S. Peace Plan for Ukraine War Meets Resistance from Kyiv and European Allies
April 25, 2025 — Paris / London / Washington
Shuttle Diplomacy Intensifies as U.S. Pushes for Quick Resolution
Ukrainian and European officials have raised objections to several U.S. proposals aimed at ending the war in Ukraine, submitting counteroffers during recent rounds of diplomatic talks. The discussions, held in Paris on April 17 and London on April 23, have revealed significant differences between the positions of the United States, Ukraine, and its European partners, according to documents reviewed by Reuters.
The negotiations are part of U.S. President Donald Trump’s broader diplomatic initiative to secure a swift end to the conflict, with the Trump administration describing its latest peace framework as a “final offer” to both parties. The proposals were delivered by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and have since prompted further diplomatic engagement in Moscow, Kyiv, and European capitals.
Major Disagreements on Territorial Status and Sanctions
Key areas of divergence include the legal status of occupied territories, the timing and terms of sanctions relief, security guarantees for Ukraine, and restrictions on its military capacity.
The U.S. draft—described by Secretary of State Marco Rubio as a “broad framework”—proposes legal recognition of Russia’s control over Crimea, annexed in 2014, and de facto recognition of Russian-held territories in southern and eastern Ukraine. By contrast, the Ukrainian and European counter-document defers territorial negotiations until after a ceasefire is reached and includes no recognition of Russian sovereignty over any Ukrainian land.
President Trump reinforced his position in an interview with TIME, stating that “Crimea will stay with Russia” and expressing skepticism about Ukraine’s future NATO membership.
Divergent Security Arrangements Proposed
Security guarantees also form a central point of contention. The U.S. plan offers unspecified “robust security guarantees” from European and allied nations but stipulates that Ukraine will forgo NATO membership.
The counterproposal from Ukraine and its European allies outlines more specific terms: no restrictions on Ukraine’s military size or the presence of allied troops on its territory. It also calls for U.S. participation in an “Article 5-like” defense guarantee, echoing NATO’s mutual defense clause—language likely to provoke strong opposition from Moscow.
Sanctions Relief and War Reparations Under Debate
On economic issues, the U.S. proposal suggests removing sanctions on Russia imposed since the 2014 annexation of Crimea as part of the final settlement. The European-Ukrainian document proposes a more cautious approach, with sanctions lifted only gradually after a verified and sustainable peace is achieved. The same document includes provisions for re-imposing sanctions if Russia breaches any future agreement.
Compensation for war damages is another area of disagreement. The U.S. plan vaguely promises financial redress for Ukraine, while the counterproposal specifically seeks compensation sourced from frozen Russian state assets abroad.
Diplomatic Pressure Builds on All Sides
Diplomatic sources suggest that both Kyiv and Moscow are working to demonstrate progress in response to Washington’s push for a rapid agreement. U.S. Vice President JD Vance warned earlier this week that if neither side accepts the terms soon, the United States may withdraw from its mediating role.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy acknowledged on Thursday that the latest set of proposals—drafted during the London talks—had been forwarded to Trump and described the negotiations as “constructive,” though difficult.
Three European diplomats expressed concern to Reuters that U.S. negotiators appeared increasingly pressured to secure a breakthrough, potentially putting Kyiv and its allies at a disadvantage. The April 23 meeting in London was reportedly used to consolidate a unified European-Ukrainian response for U.S. representative Keith Kellogg to deliver to Washington.
COMMENTS