Institute for the Study of War: latest U.S. peace plan calls for Ukraine’s ‘complete capitulation’

All available reporting continues to indicate that the stipulations of the reported 28-point Russia-US peace plan amount to Ukraine’s full capitulation to Russia’s original war demands. Western media outlets and Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada Deputy Oleksiy Honcharenko published on November 20 all 28 points of the reported peace plan.[1] The reported provisions include that:

• Ukraine will withdraw from the remainder of unoccupied Donbas (Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts) and this area will become a “neutral demilitarized buffer zone” internationally recognized as Russian territory;
• All of Crimea, Donetsk Oblast, and Luhansk Oblast will be recognized as de facto Russian territory, including by the United States;
• The conflict will freeze along the current frontline in Kherson and Zaporizhia oblasts;
• Russia will relinquish the territory it controls outside of occupied Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhia oblasts;
• Ukraine’s military will be capped at a maximum of 600,000 personnel;
• Ukraine must enshrine in its constitution that it will not seek NATO membership, and NATO agrees to include statute provisions that it will not admit Ukraine any time in the future;
• It is “expected” that NATO will not further expand;
• NATO will not deploy troops to Ukraine;
• Ukraine will receive “reliable” security guarantees, including from the United States, for which the United States will receive unspecified compensation;
• The US guarantee holds that a renewed Russian invasion of Ukraine would provoke a coordinated military response, reimpose all international sanctions against Russia, and revoke all other benefits to Russia listed in the proposal;
• The US security guarantee will be revoked if Ukraine invades Russia or launches missiles at Moscow or St. Petersburg;
• Ukraine must reject and prohibit “all Nazi ideologies” and hold elections within 100 days of codifying the agreement;
• Ukraine will receive funds and assistance from the United States, proceeds from frozen Russian assets, and the international community for reconstruction and energy infrastructure modernization.

ISW is unable to confirm the exact provisions of the reported peace plan at the time of this writing. A US official told PBS Newshour and Axios that the White House views the plan as a “live” or “working” document that can change based on further discussions.[2] Many of the points from the reported peace plan text cohere with prior Western reporting of the peace plan from November 19 and 20.[3] White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed on November 20 that US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio have been working to develop a plan since roughly mid-October 2025 and that they have engaged both Russia and Ukraine “equally.”[4] Key Russian officials continue to deny the reported peace plan.[5]

There are no provisions in the reported peace plan in which Russia makes any concessions, and ISW continues to assess that accepting Russian demands would set conditions for renewed Russian aggression against Ukraine. Many of the provisions in the full text of the reported plan align with the Kremlin’s original 2022 Istanbul demands, which amount to Ukraine’s full capitulation, even though the battlefield situation has changed markedly in the years since and has forced Russia to resort to grinding, foot-pace offensives to make marginal tactical advances.[6] The Kremlin has continuously reiterated that it intends to achieve all of its war goals either diplomatically or militarily, setting informational conditions to justify renewed aggression against Ukraine at a later date.[7] Russian officials have also set informational conditions to justify the aggression for the occupation of Ukraine beyond the five regions it has illegally annexed.[8] This reported plan would capitulate to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s theory of victory, which is predicated on the assumption that Russia’s military and economy can outlast Western support to Ukraine, and would reinforce the Kremlin’s belief that the Kremlin can achieve its maximalist objectives against Ukraine and elsewhere with minimal international consequences.[9] Russia would therefore be likely to launch renewed aggression against Ukraine with a blooded, rested, and reconstituted military at a time of its choosing on battle lines in Ukraine that would heavily favor Russia.[10] A Ukrainian withdrawal from Donetsk Oblast would force Ukraine to withdraw to lines that would largely be indefensible against renewed Russian aggression from positions in the oblast, and would also provide Russia with easy access to seize Ukraine’s Fortress Belt – Ukraine’s key defensive line in Donetsk Oblast that is a critical logistics and defense industrial hub – if left undefended in a demilitarized buffer zone.[11] Russian forces would likely be able to launch renewed pushes into southern Kharkiv Oblast and eastern Zaporizhia and Dnipropetrovsk oblasts from the proposed ”frozen” frontline. ISW continues to assess that timely and sufficient Western military assistance and weapon sales to Ukraine, in concert with strong US and other Western economic measures against Russia, can enable Ukraine to inflict more severe battlefield losses on Russia and therefore challenge Putin’s theory of victory.[12] The reported peace plan, by contrast, cedes all Western and Ukrainian leverage to Russia.

Russian officials continue to react to the reported 28-point peace plan by reiterating their commitment to Russia’s original war aims and blaming Ukraine for Russia’s own unwillingness to compromise.[13] Senior Russian officials reiterated on November 19 and 20 the Kremlin’s demand that an end to the war address its alleged “root causes” of the war, which the Kremlin has long used as shorthand for its original war justifications, and amplified the false narrative that a Russian victory in Ukraine is inevitable.[14] Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov claimed that Russia is committed to negotiations but deflected blame onto Ukraine and the West for the stall in peace negotiations as a result of Russia’s unwillingness to make concessions to end the war.[15] Some Russian officials expressed doubt about or rejected components of the reported peace deal despite the significant benefits it would afford Russia. Some Western media outlets reported that the plan holds that Russia would make lend-lease payments to Ukraine for its occupation of Donbas, a provision that Russian State Duma Committee on Economic Policy Deputy Chairperson Artem Kiryanov explicitly rejected as “completely unacceptable” and “unworthy” of serious discussion.[16] State Duma International Affairs Committee First Deputy Head Alexei Chepa claimed that discussions on the reported 28-point plan may “take some time” and deflected blame from Russia’s continued intransigence in negotiations to discredit the Ukrainian government and Europe.[17]

The Kremlin continues to use a combination of economic incentives and nuclear saber-rattling to extract concessions from the United States to normalize US-Russian relations without making reciprocal concessions to end the war. The reported peace proposal also stipulates that the United States and Russia will agree to extend nuclear non-proliferation treaties including the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), that Russia will be reintegrated into the global economy including multi-staged sanction relief and a bilateral US-Russian long-term economic cooperation agreements, and that about 50 percent of the profits from frozen Russian assets will be invested in a joint US-Russian investment vehicle.[18] The Kremlin has repeatedly used economic incentives unrelated to the war in Ukraine and the prospect of US-Russian arms control talks to extract concessions from the United States about the war in Ukraine.[19] These concessions would give away leverage that is crucial to US President Donald Trump’s stated objective of achieving an enduring, just, and mutually beneficial peace in Ukraine.

Russian forces operating in the Hulyaipole direction continue to employ their new offensive template that relies on a combination of a prolonged battlefield air interdiction (BAI) campaign, tactical interdiction efforts, infiltration missions, and mass small group assaults to advance.[20] The situation in the Hulyaipole direction remains serious as Russian forces continue efforts to isolate Hulyaipole from the north and advance on the town from the northeast and east.[21] Geolocated footage published on November 20 indicates that Russian forces likely recently seized Vesele (east of Hulyaipole).[22] Russian milbloggers and the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) credited elements of the Russian 114th Motorized Rifle Regiment (127th Motorized Rifle Division, 5th Combined Arms Army [CAA], Eastern Military District [EMD]) with the seizure of Vesele.[23] A Ukrainian servicemember operating in the Velykomykhailivka direction (north of Hulyaipole) reported on November 20 that Russian forces exploit foliage, terrain features such as ravines and lowlands, and fog to avoid Ukrainian drone detection.[24] A servicemember of the Russian 36th Motorized Rifle Brigade (29th CAA, EMD) acknowledged on November 20 that Russian forces exploited fog during the claimed seizure of Hai (southwest of Velykomykhailivka), which the Russian MoD claimed to have seized as of November 17.[25] ISW continues to assess that Russian forces are exploiting the cover of fog that inhibits Ukrainian drone operations to launch attacks.[26]

Key Takeaways

1. All available reporting continues to indicate that the stipulations of the reported 28-point Russia-US peace plan amount to Ukraine’s full capitulation to Russia’s original war demands.
2. There are no provisions in the reported peace plan in which Russia makes any concessions, and ISW continues to assess that accepting Russian demands would set conditions for renewed Russian aggression against Ukraine.
3. Russian officials continue to react to the reported 28-point peace plan by reiterating their commitment to Russia’s original war aims and blaming Ukraine for Russia’s own unwillingness to compromise.
4. The Kremlin continues to use a combination of economic incentives and nuclear saber-rattling to extract concessions from the United States to normalize US-Russian relations without making reciprocal concessions to end the war.
5. Russian forces operating in the Hulyaipole direction continue to employ their new offensive template that relies on a combination of a prolonged battlefield air interdiction (BAI) campaign, tactical interdiction efforts, infiltration missions, and mass small group assaults to advance.
6. Ukrainian forces recently advanced in the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area. Russian forces recently advanced near Hulyaipole.