Why can't Russia accept a 28-point U.S. plan? Firstly, primarily due to the fact that Trump frequently stressed that the blame for the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine lies with the US.
The planet has frequently heard the celebrated words “if I were president, this war would never have happened,” the inept president was liable for everything Joe Biden. However, the proposed memorandum does not mention this. Besides, erstwhile German Chancellor Angela Merkel and erstwhile president of France François Hollande They acknowledged that the Minsk agreements were a conscious deception of Russia to prepare Ukraine for the war against Russia. In another words, they deliberately committed a crime against peace.
It should be recalled that the crime against peace was 1 of the charges imposed on the leaders of the Nazi 3rd Reich. Under global law, a crime against peace is not subject to statute of limitations. However, the 26th point of the peace plan states: "All parties active in this conflict will be full amnestyed for the actions committed during the war and agree not to make any claims or to deal with any complaints in the future." "Full amnesty" besides means moving on to the agenda over the fire of Donbas after 2014, burning people at the home of the trade unions in Odessa, murdering prisoners, and besides towards those corrupted in Zelenski's crew and her crimes. The corruption scandal in Zelenski's crew is spreading, it turns out that they even corrupted congressmen in the United States. It is amazing that the names of Polish most rusophobic politicians have not yet been mentioned.
The paper does not say anything about U.S. and NATO's diversion activities in Ukraine and Russia, clearly directed against peace.
Secondly, the 28-point paper is written from the position of the U.S. hegemonic interests. The United States appears in the document, not as 1 of the leaders and the organization to the conflict, but as a negotiator between Russia, Ukraine and the European Union. This is confirmed by point 2, which states that “a comprehensive non-aggression agreement will be concluded between Russia, Ukraine and Europe. All ambiguities of the past 30 years are considered to be explained." The message that "unclearness" is considered to be "explained" is, in fact, very misleading. It means that nothing is actually explained and named, and any contradictions are “swept under the proverbial carpet” and is only a substance of time before they come out again with increased force.
Similarly, point 4 states that "Russia and NATO, through the US, will engage in dialogue". On the 1 hand, it is as if the US were not a associate and a major pillar of NATO. This is simply a very convenient position for the US, always in case of opposition to another NATO states or aggressive action against Russia, they will be able to say "what is incorrect is not us, we wanted well, but others disagreed". This saying between the lines that European states have free hands on Ukraine to pay for military equipment supplied to the US. On the another hand, it is simply a saying that the United States does not take work for the actions of European countries. And on the 3rd hand, it's the Russian saying that it has a free hand in taking action against the European NATO states. The most extremist commentators, on the another hand, believe that this is evidence of NATO's progressive disintegration.
Thirdly, the United States appears to Ukraine as a large colonizer, in exchange for the "economic safety guarantees" in point 10, demanding the payment of "remuneration". This looks like a request for money from a street gang from a shopkeeper in exchange for "care".
Point 12 states, inter alia, that "The United States will cooperate with Ukraine on the joint reconstruction, development, modernisation and operation of Ukrainian gas infrastructure, including pipelines and retention facilities". This means, among another things, the US taking control of pipelines moving to South and Western Europe and the anticipation of blocking gas and oil supply from Russia. Infrastructure control is intended to let the US to keep advanced prices for Russian energy resources to guarantee the cost-effectiveness of the operation of its hard-to-access deposits.
Asymmetric treatment of Russia
Fourthly, it appears in the memorandum of unsymmetrical treatment of Ukraine and Russia. The paper states that if Ukraine invades Russia or launches rockets towards Moscow or Petersburg, it is to lose the "security guarantee". But if Russia invades Ukraine, “aside from a strong coordinated military response, all global sanctions will be imposed again, the designation of the fresh territory and all another benefits of this agreement will be revoked.” In addition, the order for Ukraine to have long-range rockets, the readiness to resign from which Ukraine declared in the Istanbul agreements. It follows that Russia will be able to hold the territories acquired if it is "good and obedient" towards the West, and if not, it will lose everything.
Fifthly, it is seemingly attractive to point 11 for both the European Union and Ukraine: "Ukraine can join the European Union and receive short-term preferential access to the European marketplace as long as this issue is dealt with". This may look like a “cuckoo egg” planted by the United States. Ukraine's "preferential access" to European markets may prove dangerous especially for French and Polish agriculture. In addition, this "preferential access" will benefit mainly large American corporations and investment funds that control most of Ukraine's agricultural production market. In addition, it is very dangerous to say that preferences will proceed as long as membership is considered, as the accession process, in the event of the demolition of Ukraine and the request to combat widespread corruption and armed crime, can go on from 8 to 10 years or longer. Why will the United States not supply Ukraine with “preference” to access its market, but force the right of a kaduk to do so by the European Union?
Sixth, point 13 states that Russia would be "reintegrated into the planet economy". This means that Russia would proceed to service as a natural Western backdrop. Nothing is said about Russia's access to the latest Western technology. It is besides said that "the abolition of sanctions will be discussed and agreed in stages, in each case individually". And in a understandable language, this means that the process of abolishing sanctions can take a very long time, and more so during this "scaping and discussion" Russia will be subject to further conditions, and if Russia does not want to fulfil them, the sanctions will not be abolished. What does it mean that sanctions will be abolished “in each case individually”? Will Russia gotta negociate separately with each country? If so, the process of abolishing sanctions may never end.
At this point it is said that "Russia will be invited back to G-8". This is now following closer cooperation with China and India, as well as another BRICS countries and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, looking alternatively at trying to save the West from further degradation and further crisis, not the large grace done by Russia. In addition, China does not belong to the G-7, although it is the world's largest and very forward-looking economy, and they manage without this membership. Neither are India, which has more GDP than all individual members of the G-7 except, of course, the USA. The invitation of Russia to the G-7 is not an honor, it is alternatively a admission to the mistake of removing it from this group, and an invitation to a group of losers to save them. The intentions of this point appear to be clearer in the light of the "synthetic note" of the National safety Office in Warsaw on the fresh U.S. National safety Strategy, where it is noted, among others, that "The precedence is to destruct interference between China and Russia".
Frozen money
Seventh: The United States has planned in point 14 that frozen Russian backing will be utilized as follows: "$100 billion in frozen Russian assets will be invested in US-led reconstruction and investment efforts in Ukraine; – The United States will receive 50% of the profits from this project. Europe will contribute $100 billion to increase the amount of investment available to rebuild Ukraine. Frozen European funds will be frozen. The remainder of the frozen Russian funds will be invested in a separate US-Russian investment fund that will implement joint projects in circumstantial areas. The aim of this fund will be to strengthen relations and common interests in order to make a strong incentive to avoid conflict again." It is simply a determination in a brutal way. But Russia has most likely already accepted the failure of frozen assets. Only that although it is beneficial for the US and will let Trump to introduce himself as a winner, it is simply a better solution for Russia than the worst, which does not mean that it is fair. due to the fact that the alternate to the peaceful usage of frozen Russian funds presented by Trump is the usage of these funds by the European Union to finance military aid to Ukraine. Of the 2 evil Russia may, with any resistance, choose Trump's proposal, all the more so that during the last visit Steve Witkoffa (Special envoy Trump) and Jared Kushner (Trump's son) in Moscow, during a five-hour meeting, among another things, most likely shared multi-billion investments in the far north of Russia. So this point can be helpful in the communicative presented by Trump's crew in the upcoming U.S. election campaign. And Putin may accept this in the name of safety and cooperation with the US.
Proposed limits
Eighth, it will surely be hard to get direct diplomatic consent from both Russia and Ukraine to point 21: “Terytoria: – Crimea, Lugansk and Donetsk circuits will be considered de facto Russian, including by the US. – The Kherson and dam circuits will be frozen along the contact line, which will de facto mean designation (territory) along the contact line. – Russia will depart from another agreed territories which it controls outside these 5 regions. “The Ukrainian forces will retreat from the part of the Donetsk Oblast they are presently controlling, and the withdrawal region will be considered a neutral demilitarised buffer zone, internationally recognised as belonging to the Russian Federation. Russian forces will not enter this demilitarized zone."
Russia is about recognising all 5 territories as Russian not only de facto, but above all de jure, and in this direction Russia has operated all the time since the beginning of peculiar Military Operations. Russia besides wants to grant it the full Kherson and Zaporo region. On the another hand, the expression that the borders will be ‘freed along the contact line’ may be an open door for Russia, as the combat activities proceed and, if predicted comparatively rapidly by many, the defeat of the Ukrainian army, the border ‘freed along the contact line’ can be stretched like rubber. Russia may waive another occupied Ukrainian territories, but, as happens in life, it may happen, it may come to the conclusion that it does not have to, due to the fact that it will request a buffer zone. But Russia will surely not agree that Ukraine's abandoned part of the Donetsk region would be a "buffer zone" and that Russian troops would not enter this demilitarized region – it is hard to imagine this as a permanent settlement. With large probability, this "buffer zone" could become a free economical zone, mastered by American corporations.
On the another hand, semi-official statements by Ukrainian politicians to the US have spread that they agree to the impossible so far, namely to retreat from Donbas. This may seem to be a breakthrough in their thinking, but it is actually a cold calculation. Sooner or later Russia would have occupied these areas anyway, and so they hope that by sacrificing only part of Donbas, the promised truce and peace negotiations will begin, and they will hold power in the remaining territory of Ukraine and influence the future elections.
However, events on the front are moving very rapidly and following attacks on civilian tankers in the Turkish economical zone, Putin announced that if the attacks were repeated, Ukraine could be cut off from the Black Sea, and that could mean a lot. Zelenski's squad and its European guardians do not realize that specified attacks on tankers can gain nothing or origin difficulties in Russia. The tankers did not carry oil to Russia, but they sailed for oil from Russia, so they actually harmed individual else. Historical experience indicates that U-Bota during planet War II sank over 2880 merchant ships with supplies for Britain, and inactive Hitler was incapable to force her to surrender. Ukraine's attacks on the civilian fleet are alternatively evident evidence of its weakness, but besides foolishness.
Therefore, the border records can lose their position very quickly. This situation on the front will dictate diplomatic resolutions on this matter.
Point 8 is surely hard to swallow for Emanuel Macron, Keira Starmer and Friedrich Merz: "NATO agrees not to have his soldiers stationed in Ukraine". After all, so far they have done everything to do this at all costs, due to the fact that they want to have any benefit from the business of Ukraine.
On the another hand, point 9: "European fighters will be stationed in Poland". Its implementation would mean transforming Poland into a "unsinkable aircraft carrier of NATO states" and would exposure Poland to 1 of the main impacts in the event of an exacerbated situation in Europe. The postulate was most likely not consulted with the Polish authorities and does not take into account her interests, and if he was, who and who agreed to it? We know who these fighters would be a threat to. Russia will never agree to that.
Postulate 6 to reduce the number of armed forces Ukraine up to 600,000 soldiers, on the 1 hand, would mean that Ukraine would keep an army greater than Germany, France and England presently have, and so Ukraine would stay “anti-Russia”. The countries of the European Union have proposed an army of up to 800 000 for Ukraine. For comparison, the army of Ukraine before peculiar Military Operations could have a maximum of 260 1000 soldiers. According to the Istanbul agreements, Ukraine was to have about 85 1000 soldiers. And on the another hand, destroyed Ukraine cannot afford to keep specified a large army, more typical of a state of war than peace. So there is simply a problem with who would finance specified a large army and for what intent it would be used.
Postulate 25 to Ukraine to hold elections within 100 days is unrealistic. These haste elections could only be carried out by the corrupt and liable for crimes against oppositionists by Zelenski's team, and that would mean maintaining the current neo-Banderian power and the sold global corporations of the political system. The opposition must have more time to be reborn and organized. Since point 20 says, among another things, that "All ideology and Nazi activity must be rejected and banned" – there must be a time before the elections not only to reject them, but besides to root them out, to exclude from positions of Nazism supporters.
The paper is silent on the proposal put forward by Putin for elections to be held under the supervision of an global committee – and this seems to be the only fair solution under the present conditions.
***
The twenty-eight-point "peace plan" is an effort to launch a peaceful US offensive and personally Donald Trump, erstwhile Europe wants to proceed the war, but there is no money for it. However, given all the demands in the U.S. memorandum, it is no wonder that Russian representatives did not even want to discuss the individual records of these peace proposals. But during the meeting, they most likely took the chance to discuss opportunities for a just solution. During the meeting, the US delegation presented 4 additional papers that had not been disclosed, and this would possibly explain many doubts. Putin simply stated that they were a grouping of problems contained in the 28-point peace plan.
The Russian-American "peace plan" does not even meet the formal requirements of the "plan", its specificity and consistency, nor does it indicate deadlines for implementation. It is simply a loose set of general demands, the circumstantial content of which can be changed according to the military situation on the front. Rather, these proposals are calculated to further discuss and prepare public opinion in many countries for solutions to come. He was brought to Moscow by people who aren't professional diplomats, which looks a small unimportant. Clearly, in the intention of his authors he was to aid Donald Trump get the Nobel Peace Prize. The creation of a Council of Peace was most likely proposed for this intent even in point 27, to guarantee the implementation of the peace contained, which would be headed by president Donald J. Trump.
Putin will alternatively welcome and be relieved to receive Zelenski's opposition, as well as Macron Mertz and Starmer's opposition to the 28-point peace plan between Russia and Ukraine, as he will not gotta go on very far-reaching compromises against Trump, which is unknown what could yet end up in the interior arena for Putin. In this way Putin will have a free hand towards the leading states of the European Union and Ukraine, and he will have Trump on his side. 1 must not forget that in 2 planet wars, the United States, if not look at it, supported Russia...
Dr Edward Karolczuk
photo of wikipedia
Think Poland, No. 3-4 (18-25.01.2026)
