Ukraine Peace Plan Was Authored By US, Rubio Says — After Claims It Was Merely A Leaked Russian ‘Wishlist’
Secretary of State Marco Rubio pushed back hard this weekend against mounting skepticism surrounding the contentious 28-point peace outline for the Ukraine War, asserting that the document originated in Washington and reflects a balance of perspectives from both Kyiv and Moscow. “The peace proposal was authored by the U.S. It is offered as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations,” Rubio said. “It is based on input from the Russian side. But it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”
The doubts that erupted after the plan surfaced last week only intensified when analysts pointed out that the text appeared to have been translated from Russian, prompting questions about who actually drafted it. That backdrop made Saturday’s developments especially jarring, as members of a bipartisan Senate delegation — including Sen. Mike Rounds — told reporters after meeting Rubio at the Halifax International Security Forum that the Secretary of State had indicated the document resembled a Russian wish list.
Those claims triggered a swift rebuttal from the State Department. Spokesperson Tommy Pigott rejected any suggestion that Moscow had produced the proposal, stressing that such allegations were “blatantly false,” though he offered no clarification for the contradictions coming from Capitol Hill.
The plan itself continues to stir unease. Under its terms, Ukraine would be required to relinquish the Donbas region entirely — territory Russia has been unable to conquer outright despite more than ten years of conflict. The framework also calls for Ukraine to commit to staying out of NATO, reduce its armed forces by roughly one-third, and grant sweeping amnesty to all wartime participants, which would effectively shield Russian personnel from war-crimes charges. Meanwhile, the proposal asks little from Moscow in return.
Reports have indicated that special envoy Steve Witkoff helped spearhead the initiative, working with both Ukrainian and Russian interlocutors. Once the details became public, major European powers quickly voiced misgivings. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen emphasized that any legitimate accord must meet core principles. “Any credible and sustainable peace plan should first and foremost stop the killing and end the war, while not sowing the seeds for a future conflict,” she stated. She continued by laying out the fundamental conditions: “First, borders cannot be changed by force. Second, as a sovereign nation, there cannot be limitations on Ukraine’s armed forces that would leave the country vulnerable to future attack and thereby also undermining European security.” Her final point underscored Europe’s role in the region: “Third, the centrality of the European Union in securing peace for Ukraine must be fully reflected. Ukraine must have the freedom and sovereign right to choose its own destiny. They have chosen a European destiny.”
Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk added another layer of uncertainty by openly demanding clarity about authorship. “Together with the leaders of Europe, Canada and Japan, we have declared our readiness to work on the 28-point plan despite some reservations,” he wrote on X. “However, before we start our work, it would be good to know for sure who is the author of the plan and where was it created.”
The debate unfolded against the backdrop of President Trump’s recent sit-down with Volodymyr Zelensky, after which Trump suggested that ending the war along the existing battle lines could be the most realistic path forward. The White House has since defended the 28-point framework as a plausible route to cease-fire negotiations. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated that stance last week. “President Trump has made it very clear since day one, and even on the campaign trail, that he wants to see this war come to an end. He has grown increasingly frustrated with both sides of this war, Russia and Ukraine alike, for their refusal to commit to a peace agreement,” she said. She added, “It’s a good plan for both Russia and Ukraine, and we believe that it should be acceptable to both sides, and we’re working very hard to get it done.”
Kyiv, however, has publicly bristled at the steep concessions demanded of Ukraine. Zelensky, speaking through a translated statement, framed the choice as existential. “We are facing one of the most dangerous periods in Ukrainian history, a choice between losing our dignity and freedom and losing US support,” he said. “We choose dignity. My answer is my oath of office. I did not betray Ukraine in Feb 2022 and we won’t betray in now.”
{Matzav.com}
