Donald Trump will let Vladimir Puitin keep almost all the territory he has seized from Ukraine under the terms of a proposed peace deal.
The condition is part of a seven-point plan to end the war that leaves Ukraine with no clear US security guarantee. It will be discussed in London on Wednesday, when US officials will hear Kyiv’s reaction.
The proposal involves the US offering formal recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea and implies de facto recognition of other occupied territories.
This would mean freezing the current front line, allowing Putin to keep almost all the territory Russia has gained.
The plan does include some changes in Ukraine’s favour. Russia would give up two small areas currently occupied by its troops.
Ukraine would regain unhindered access to the mouth of the Dnieper river and Russia would withdraw from a second area of Kherson province.
General Keith Kellogg, the US envoy, hopes to gain Ukraine’s agreement to the plan on Wednesday. His colleague Steve Witkoff would then travel to Moscow and present it to Vladimir Putin.
However, the plan would be a bitter pill for Ukraine to swallow since it would lose territory without gaining any clear US security guarantee. Officials in Kyiv told The Telegraph they were sceptical about progress on a peace deal.
Putin may also be unwilling to relinquish even the limited Ukrainian territory the US proposes. Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state was expected to attend the talks, but on Tuesday night pulled out.
A source with knowledge of the plan’s contents said that its points one and two cover an immediate ceasefire and direct talks between Ukraine and Russia, which Mr Zelensky has already accepted in principle.
Point three requires Ukraine to refrain from seeking membership of Nato, though the country would still be free to join the EU.
European countries could deploy an assurance force to deter Putin from invading again, but The Telegraph understands that the plan does not commit the US to guarantee the security of any such deployment.
Sir Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, has previously said that no European force could be sent to Ukraine without an American “backstop”.
Point four covers territory, with America offering de jure recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, the region of Ukraine which Putin illegally annexed in 2014.
Recognising Russian control of Crimea would violate a central principle of international law – and of the post-1945 world order – that no country can annex the territory of another. If land is seized then no nation is supposed to recognise this change.
Soon after starting its full-scale invasion in February 2022, Russia captured large areas of four more provinces of Ukraine: Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.
This proposal would freeze the front line, allowing Putin to keep almost all of those gains. It would not formally recognise those occupied areas as being part of Russia, but The Telegraph understands that the proposal implies de facto US recognition.
As well as some territory switching hands to Ukraine, the nuclear power station at Zaporizhzhia, the largest in Ukraine and currently held by Russian forces, would be transferred to American control.
Under point six, Ukraine would sign the minerals deal allowing US companies access to the country’s natural resources.
Point seven raises the possibility of a new relationship between America and Russia, saying that all US sanctions would be lifted and the two countries could begin to co-operate on energy.
The plan contradicts several of Britain’s stated policy objectives. As recently as Feb 14, the Prime Minister told Mr Zelensky that Britain was committed to “Ukraine being on an irreversible path to Nato” membership. This proposal would block that path indefinitely.
On Feb 17, Sir Keir said he would deploy British forces to support any “lasting” peace agreement in Ukraine, adding: “But there must be a US backstop because a US security guarantee is the only way to effectively deter Russia from attacking Ukraine again.”
This proposal falls short of the Prime Minister’s demand, raising questions over whether any British or other European troops could be deployed in Ukraine after any peace deal.
Putin said he was open to meeting for direct talks with Ukraine, and said he was “satisfied” with the proposal to block Ukraine from Nato.
But the plan also contradicts some of Putin’s objectives, requiring him to give up territory he currently holds – though not much – and effectively abandon his goal of a “demilitarised” Ukraine.
Nothing in the proposal would stop Ukraine from building up its armed forces or prevent European countries from continuing to supply weapons.
Russia sounded a note of caution on Tuesday, pouring cold water on Mr Trump’s demand for an agreement this week.
Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, said on state television: “Probably it is not worth setting any rigid time frames and trying to get a settlement, a viable settlement, in a short-time frame.”
However, the Financial Times reported that Putin had agreed to freeze the conflict along the current front lines in Ukraine, giving up his demands to occupy all of the four annexed regions in the east of the country.
Ukrainian officials said they did not expect a final “take it or leave it” offer in London.
Under Ukraine’s constitution, neither its government nor parliament can relinquish territory. This can only be done by the people in a referendum. As a country fighting foreign invasion, Ukraine has martial law which forbids referendums.
Foreign Office sources do not believe that a deal will be struck in London and are presenting the meeting as a chance for the Ukrainians to put across their own vision for achieving peace.
Credit: Yahoo News