Image Source abcnewsfe
KYIV/WASHINGTON D.C. — In a dramatic signal of intent, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has confirmed Kyiv’s readiness to move forward with the latest US-backed peace framework, but insists the most “sensitive issues”— the likely red lines concerning territory and sovereignty— must be resolved through direct, high-stakes talks with US President Donald Trump.
The development comes as the US has doubled down on its diplomatic push, announcing that a key envoy is slated to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow to iron out the remaining differences in a proposal that has already undergone significant revision.
The Revised Framework: Fewer Points, Same Pressure
The original 28-point US-drafted plan, which was reportedly heavily influenced by Moscow and included controversial demands for Ukraine to cede territory and permanently restrict its NATO aspirations, has been “significantly amended.” Following talks in Geneva, the document has been pared down to approximately 19 points, incorporating elements Zelenskyy described as “correct.”
However, the core, intractable disputes remain, leading the Ukrainian leader to reserve the final, most painful concessions for the presidential level.
“The sensitive issues, the most delicate points, I will discuss with President Trump,” Zelenskyy stated on Tuesday, adding that any talks must also involve European partners, a clear sign Kyiv is seeking to multilateralize the process and prevent a bilateral pressure play.
Kyiv’s message suggests that while it supports the essence of the refined framework, the specifics of territorial control—particularly the status of areas currently held by Russia and potential limitations on Ukraine’s armed forces—are too critical to entrust to lower-level negotiators.
Trump Dispatches Envoys to Both Sides
In a parallel move highlighting the “final stages” of the diplomatic blitz, President Trump announced he is dispatching two high-ranking officials to both capitals:
- US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff has been directed to meet with President Putin in Moscow.
- US Army Secretary Dan Driscoll will, at the same time, meet with Ukrainian officials in a separate location.
Trump wrote on his social media platform that only “a few remaining points of disagreement” were left, but emphasized he would “ONLY” meet with Zelenskyy and Putin when the deal is “FINAL or, in its final stages.”
This dual-track diplomacy underscores the accelerated timeline the White House is pushing, even as Russia continues its strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure, illustrating the stark contrast between the diplomatic optimism and the ongoing brutality on the ground.
The coming days are expected to be decisive, with a potential Zelenskyy visit to the US before the end of November being floated by Ukrainian officials to complete the final steps of what is being called a “dignified and truly effective” path to peace.
The original 28-point US-drafted plan caused an immediate uproar precisely because several of its key provisions were seen as overwhelmingly favoring Moscow, crossing Ukraine’s and Europe’s fundamental “red lines.”
The European Reaction: Blind-Sided and Scathing
The revelation of the original 28-point US-Russian draft peace plan led to surprise, alarm, and a rapid mobilization among key European capitals.
- Blind-Sided and Excluded
European allies, especially France, Germany, and the UK, were reportedly “blind-sided” and “scathing” in private about the plan’s existence and content, as they were excluded from the drafting process. European security is fundamentally tied to the conflict, and excluding them was seen as a major diplomatic breach. - The “Pro-Russian” Critique
European officials publicly and privately echoed Kyiv’s concerns, arguing the original plan was too favorable to Moscow and “undermines Ukraine’s sovereignty.” They warned that accepting the terms would set a dangerous precedent by rewarding the aggressor. - The European Counter-Proposal
In response, Europe immediately drafted and circulated its own 28-point counter-proposal and engaged with the US in Geneva to push for revisions. Key differences in the European version included:
Territory: Negotiations over territory should only take place after a ceasefire and should start from the existing frontline, not require the surrender of additional Ukrainian-controlled land.
NATO: The provision banning Ukraine from joining NATO was deleted.
Frozen Assets: Insisting that all frozen Russian sovereign assets should be used for Ukrainian reconstruction, not partly for US economic deals.
- Warning Against a “Munich Agreement”
Czech President Petr Pavel warned against a settlement that excludes Kyiv from key decisions, drawing parallels to the 1938 Munich Agreement, where European powers negotiated the fate of Czechoslovakia without its participation. The sentiment was that “it is their territory, it is their country, their people, their lives,” and they must be fully heard.
The pressure from both Kyiv and Europe is what forced the US to revise the framework, reducing it to the current 19-point “refined peace framework” that Zelenskyy is now willing to discuss further.
Peace framework
- Sensitive issues / Red lines
- Territory / Sovereignty
- Original 28-point plan
- Revised 19-point framework
- Territorial control
- NATO aspirations (Controversial issue)
