[Urgent Analysis] Trump's 28-Point Peace Plan: Will the War in Ukraine Really End? (Europe's Backlash vs. Putin's Silence)
High-ranking officials from the United States, Ukraine, and Europe recently gathered in Geneva, Switzerland. However, the atmosphere in the conference room was heavier and more somber than ever before. Lying on the negotiation table was none other than the controversial '28-Point Peace Plan', reportedly drafted and presented by former President Donald Trump's camp.
This moment marks the materialization of Trump's bold campaign promise to "end the war within 24 hours of taking office" into a concrete, tangible document. The reaction was immediate and volatile. Major media outlets in Germany and France raised serious doubts, reacting fiercely to the contents, while Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky maintained a heavy silence. Is this document truly a dove bringing peace, or is it essentially a surrender document forced upon a sovereign nation?
Today, Versus Lab provides an urgent, in-depth analysis of this 28-point plan that has captured the world's attention, dissecting its core clauses and predicting the massive geopolitical shockwaves it may cause.
1. The Core of the 28 Points: Genuine 'Peace' or a Dangerous 'Freeze'?
The details of the peace plan, which have been leaked through various foreign media outlets, can be summarized into two critical pillars: 'Freezing the current front lines' and 'Indefinitely deferring NATO membership'.
First, the establishment of a Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). The plan envisions recognizing the Ukrainian territory currently occupied by Russia—which amounts to approximately 20% of the country's total landmass—as a de facto reality. It proposes creating a buffer zone along this current battle line. This model bears a striking resemblance to the 38th parallel on the Korean Peninsula. For Ukraine, this is tantamount to immense pressure to give up territory that has been defended with the blood of its people.
Second, a long-term deferral of NATO accession. Reports indicate that the plan includes a clause postponing Ukraine's NATO membership for at least 20 years. This is a significant concession, appearing as if the United States is accepting Vladimir Putin's primary justification for the invasion: 'preventing NATO's eastward expansion'. Effectively, it closes the door on Ukraine's security guarantee for a generation.
European reactions are scathing. Leading publications such as Germany's Handelsblatt and France's Le Monde have strongly criticized the proposal, labeling it "not a peace treaty, but a gift to Putin." The prevailing view in Europe is that a peace achieved by rewarding an aggressor sets a dangerous precedent and can never be sustainable.
2. Putin's Silence: Is He Smiling Behind Closed Doors?
The Kremlin has officially shown a cautious reaction to the leaked plan. However, geopolitical experts analyze that Putin is likely cheering inwardly. From Russia's strategic perspective, this peace plan is an effortless victory.
It achieves Russia's two core strategic goals without further military cost: securing the occupied territories in the Donbas region and neutralizing Ukraine politically and militarily. What makes this even sweeter for Moscow is that these goals would be achieved through the hands of the United States, not Russian force.
However, from Versus Lab's analytical perspective, this represents an extremely dangerous 'Incomplete Peace.' The Russian military machine remains intact. A ceasefire would merely provide Russia with the golden opportunity to regroup, rearm, and reorganize its forces for a potential future invasion. History offers a grim warning: just as the Munich Agreement of 1938 failed to appease a dictator, an ill-conceived compromise today could sow the seeds of a much larger and more devastating war tomorrow.
3. The Butterfly Effect on Global Security and US Allies
If this peace plan becomes reality, its impact will extend far beyond the borders of Ukraine. It would serve as the official signal flare for a return to 'America First' and 'Isolationism' in US foreign policy.
For US allies around the globe, including South Korea and Japan, this is not just a story about a distant war. It demonstrates that a Trump administration may prioritize 'transactional deals' over the shared values of alliances. This could lead to increased pressure on defense cost-sharing and growing uncertainty regarding US security commitments.
When the international order reverts to the 'logic of power' rather than rules and alliances, geopolitical risks will skyrocket in flashpoints around the world, from the Taiwan Strait to the Korean Peninsula.
Conclusion: Not the End of War, But the Start of a New Cold War
Trump's 28-point peace plan may have the power to stop the gunfire in Ukraine immediately. But it raises a fundamental question: Is this true Peace, or is it merely a Ceasefire to catch one's breath before the next conflict?
Europe's security landscape is set to fluctuate wildly, and Ukraine faces the tragic destiny of becoming a divided nation. We may not be entering a stable 'Post-War' era, but rather walking precariously into an unstable era of 'Pause'—a new, frozen conflict that could thaw at any moment.
