Unclear strategies: How those close to Trump perceive the end of the war in Ukraine.
The future President of the United States, Donald Trump, has been somewhat reticent about his plans to end the Russian-Ukrainian war. However, his inner circle is discussing various ideas for a peaceful resolution.
What is known about Trump’s team plans for Ukraine and what factors may influence them is covered by RBK-Ukraine.
CONTENT
The inauguration of the new U.S. President Donald Trump is set for January 20 next year. As this date approaches, there are increasing "leaks" in American media regarding the details of plans to end the Russian war against Ukraine. Meanwhile, Trump himself has remained largely silent on the matter until recently.
The only significant statement from Trump in a long time came on December 8 following a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris. Trump called for an "immediate ceasefire" and negotiations between Ukraine and Russia.
"Too many lives have been lost in vain, too many families have been destroyed, and if this continues, it could lead to something much greater and much worse. I know Vladimir well. This is his time to act. China can help," the politician wrote on the social network Truth Social.
However, even in this statement, there are virtually no details about how Trump envisions the end of the war. Thus, in the absence of specifics, the global information space is filled with absurd "insights" about possible options for ending the war – such as "sending Volodymyr Zelensky into exile in London." Nevertheless, amidst the informational chaos, it makes sense to consider the concepts that at least come from people in the future U.S. leader's circle.
"Plans" and their differences
According to Reuters, three main options for ending the war have been prepared for Trump, based on sources within his circle. These include the plan of the newly appointed special representative for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, the plan of the elected U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance, and the plan of former acting intelligence chief Richard Grenell.
Kellogg's plan was first presented back in April in an article for the "America First Institute" think tank. The plan, outlined in several paragraphs, calls for a freeze on hostilities along the current line of confrontation. Trump would also need to provide Kyiv with more American weapons, but only if they agree to peace talks. At the same time, the U.S. should warn Moscow that it would increase assistance to Ukraine if Russia refuses to negotiate.
J.D. Vance first articulated his thoughts on ending the war in September during an interview on The Shawn Ryan Show. His plan suggests creating a "demilitarized zone" along the existing front lines. According to this plan, Russia would retain the territories it has seized, while Ukraine would be "strongly fortified" to prevent further Russian incursions.
Grenell shared his vision for ending the war in July during a roundtable organized by Bloomberg. His plan suggests the creation of "autonomous zones" in the territories of Ukraine occupied by Russia. However, Grenell did not specify which territories he was referring to.
All three "plans" lack specificity and are more akin to concepts than actual peace plans.
"These are rather parts of a general idea that need to be formalized at some point. Once it is formalized, it will indeed be a position that has substance and some form. It won't just be an abstract phenomenon that everyone talks about," said Oleg Prelovsky, an associated expert at the "Institute of American Studies," to RBK-Ukraine.
Moreover, at least regarding territorial issues, all concepts coming from Trump’s circle poorly align with Ukraine’s position, which will continue to fight for the return of its territories.
The struggle for Ukraine's NATO membership
One of the few unifying elements among the three options is the postponement of Ukraine’s NATO membership for some time.
Vance stated that the part of Ukraine controlled by Kyiv would remain an independent sovereign state, but Russia would receive guarantees of neutrality from Ukraine.
"It is not joining NATO; it is not joining any kind of allied institutions," Vance said.
According to Kellogg’s plan, NATO leaders would need to propose delaying Ukraine's membership in the alliance for a long period in exchange for a comprehensive peace agreement with verifiable security guarantees. Grenell did not express any specific details regarding Ukraine and NATO.
Such "uniformity" from Trump’s circle, as well as from some European leaders, is based on several considerations.
Firstly, Ukraine's non-membership in NATO is viewed as an acceptable concession to Russia in the forthcoming negotiations. For the Kremlin, this was initially one of the declared goals of the war. For the U.S., it is not as crucial of a point.
Secondly, leaders in several NATO countries fear that the alliance might soon be drawn into a war with Russia after Ukraine’s accession. A key aspect of NATO is Article 5 of its charter, which states that an attack on one member is an attack on all.
However, for Ukraine, NATO membership is fundamental. Understanding the challenges, Kyiv is responding. On December 3, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that Ukraine does not agree to any alternatives, surrogates, or substitutes for full NATO membership. The statement emphasized that the only real security guarantee for Ukraine, as well as a deterrent against further Russian aggression towards Ukraine and other states, is full NATO membership.
On December 1, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky spoke about the possibility of the non-application of Article 5 of NATO's charter to the entire territory of Ukraine – but only to the controlled part.
Here, curiously, an additional advantage for Ukraine lies in Trump's pragmatism, who has long stated that Europe should contribute more to NATO's security. There are many ways Kyiv could assist the alliance. It is also crucial to garner support from other NATO members.
"NATO is not an organization governed from a single center. Every word matters. When it came to the official accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO, Hungary and Turkey opposed it, and concessions were made to them. In this sense, it will be at least easier to negotiate with the United States," Prelovsky said.
Incidentally, one of these ideas is included in the victory plan for Ukraine presented by Zelensky. It involves stationing Ukrainian military forces in Europe after the withdrawal of American troops from NATO bases.
How Ukraine is trying to influence Trump's plans
The final plan will depend on the internal balances within Trump's circle. J.D. Vance is just weeks away from becoming the second in command in the U.S. Keith Kellogg has also taken on the official position of special representative for Ukraine and Russia. Richard Grenell currently holds no position, and it remains uncertain whether he will receive one in the near future.
Another factor that could influence Trump's position is the lobbying of other interested parties within the U.S. – from arms manufacturing companies, which have received new significant contracts since the war began, to oil companies and even Christian Protestant groups, with whom parts of Trump’s circle have connections.
Ultimately, Ukraine is trying to convey its vision for ending the war to the new U.S. leadership. To this end, last week, the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, Andriy Yermak, visited the U.S. According to the Wall Street Journal, he met with Keith Kellogg and Trump’s new national security advisor Mike Waltz. Newly elected Vice President J.D. Vance also joined the discussions. Yermak also met in Florida with the new White House Chief of Staff, Susan Wiles.
According to American media, Trump's team has not shown much interest in the proposal for Ukraine's NATO membership. However, Kellogg supported providing Ukraine with weapons, which the Biden team had ramped up towards the end of his term.
But the final decision will rest with Trump. Prelovsky did not rule out that the theses of individual plans could be compiled into a unified vision.
"Trump often acts unilaterally, and he may listen and then combine several of these theses into his idea. I believe there will not be one single thesis that will form the basis of the idea for ending the war or, say, freezing it," the expert said.
In any case, the development of a plan to end the war is still far from complete. There are plenty of opportunities to advocate for Ukrainian interests, although time is not on their side.
This material was written using publications from Reuters, CNN, Sky News, Wall Street Journal, statements from Ukrainian and American politicians, and comments from Oleg Prelov