28-point plan controversy: US Envoy Steve Witkoff’s role in Ukraine peace – Is US intervention helping Ukraine?

On 14 October, Witkoff phoned Yuri Ushakov, a top Kremlin adviser, and suggested that Russian President Vladimir Putin raise the idea with US President Donald Trump.

Post Published By: Sona Saini

Updated : 26 November 2025, 12:03 PM IST

Russian President Vladimir Putin greets U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff at the Kremlin in Moscow

Washington / Kyiv / Moscow:  Behind the scenes of the emerging 28‑point peace plan between Russia and Ukraine lies a largely hidden actor: Steve Witkoff, a private envoy of the US, and not a traditional diplomat. Following the success of the Gaza ceasefire, Witkoff reportedly contacted senior Russian officials last month and proposed using the Gaza deal as a template for a comparable peace framework in Ukraine.

On 14 October, Witkoff phoned Yuri Ushakov, a top Kremlin adviser, and suggested that Russian President Vladimir Putin raise the idea with US President Donald Trump. He proposed a Trump‑Putin call before Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the White House, using the Gaza agreement as a bridge for diplomacy.

Within weeks, a roughly 28‑point draft peace plan emerged, a plan many describe as heavily tilted toward Russian interests, asking Ukraine for large territorial concessions, restrictions on its military and NATO aspirations, and granting Russia de facto recognition over regions such as Crimea, Luhansk, and Donetsk. 

Why is the US intervening-  a strategic step or just normal diplomacy?

The re‑emergence of US-led peace proposals reflects multiple strategic calculations, not purely humanitarian or idealistic motives:

• Limiting long-term burden on the US & Europe: A prolonged Ukraine war threatens to drain Western resources, destabilize energy markets, and undercut economic interests. Ending the war (even on Russia’s terms) could help avoid those costs.
• Reining in Russian expansion under Western terms: By leading the deal and defining terms, the US retains leverage over post‑war arrangements (e.g. reconstruction, sanctions, economic cooperation). The draft plan reportedly hints at joint US-Russia economic projects if the peace holds.
• Avoiding endless military aid and political backlash at home: With public fatigue over foreign engagements, a negotiated settlement helps the US avoid ongoing arms expenditure and domestic criticism.

But does the US really want war to end - or a Controlled Settlement?

The way the plan was crafted raises serious doubts about whether the goal is a just and lasting peace or a controlled ceasefire that preserves some of Russia’s gains:

• The 28‑point plan was reportedly drafted without Ukraine’s involvement, with Kyiv only receiving a “signal”, a poor basis for genuine consent.
• The terms demand major Ukrainian concessions: ceding territories, limiting military strength, renouncing NATO ambitions, many of which Ukraine and European allies reject.
  
• European leaders warn the plan grants Russia excessive leverage, undermines Ukraine’s sovereignty, and jeopardizes regional security.
  
• The push for a fast deal, reportedly with pressure on Ukraine to accept by a deadline (e.g. Thanksgiving) or risk loss of US support, suggests coercive diplomacy rather than voluntary consensus.
  

What this means for Ukraine, Europe, and the idea of peace

• For Ukraine: Accepting the plan may end immediate hostilities, but at the cost of territorial, and strategic, losses. Even under revisions (now a 19‑point plan), Kyiv remains wary, calling the decision “one of the hardest moments” in national history.
• For Europe and the West: A Russia‑favoured settlement could shift regional power balance, embolden Moscow, and undermine long-term European security architecture.
• For the concept of foreign mediation: This case raises a fundamental question, when a powerful state leads peace efforts, is the result fair mediation or pressure-driven compromise? The heavy involvement of private envoys and lack of inclusive negotiation suggests more the latter.
  

It’s clear the US is actively shaping the diplomacy process, but not necessarily for a fair or lasting peace. The 28‑point plan, while framed as a peace roadmap, may represent a diplomatic endgame shaped to safeguard US and Russian interests, with Ukraine and its allies sidelined.