Donald Trump's approach to ending the war in Ukraine appears to consist of three competing peace plans, none of which involve Ukraine's accession to NATO, according to sources cited by Reuters. The proposals originate from different advisers within Trump’s circle: retired Army Lieutenant-General Keith Kellogg, Vice President-elect J.D. Vance, and Richard Grenell, the former acting intelligence chief. While differing in specifics, all plans suggest freezing the conflict along the current front lines and explicitly exclude NATO membership for Ukraine.

Kellogg's proposal advocates maintaining the current territorial lines as a basis for negotiation, while Vance’s plan suggests creating a fortified demilitarized zone along the front. Grenell’s approach goes further, recommending the establishment of autonomous zones in eastern Ukraine to address governance in contested areas. All the plans emphasize a strategy of using both incentives and threats to bring Moscow and Kyiv to the negotiating table. These include the potential reduction of U.S. military aid to Ukraine if it refuses to engage in talks, contrasted with promises to increase support should Russia decline to negotiate.

Despite these initial ideas, Trump has yet to convene a formal working group to consolidate the plans, leaving advisers to discuss and refine them publicly and, at times, directly with him. Observers speculate that any eventual agreement would likely depend on direct negotiations involving Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. However, experts suggest Putin might delay talks to strengthen his leverage, anticipating potential concessions from Trump.

The proposals face skepticism from analysts and officials. Many believe some elements—such as permanently barring Ukraine from NATO—are likely to be rejected by Zelensky, who has included NATO membership as a central aspect of his vision for Ukraine’s long-term security. European allies and certain U.S. lawmakers may also resist aspects of the plans, particularly as current U.S. President Joe Biden continues to supply arms to Ukraine, bolstering Kyiv’s position. European nations, in some cases, have indicated their willingness to increase support, further complicating Trump’s ability to pressure Ukraine into concessions.

In November, Zelensky indicated he might consider a peace deal without reclaiming Russian-occupied territories, provided Ukraine is granted immediate NATO membership to deter future Russian aggression. Meanwhile, Latvian Foreign Minister Baiba Braže commented that Western allies are waiting for Trump’s inauguration before taking steps toward any NATO-related commitments for Ukraine.

Analysts like Eugene Rumer of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace remain doubtful about the feasibility of these proposals, noting that Putin might see more benefit in prolonging the conflict rather than negotiating. Rumer highlighted the lack of a realistic plan to achieve peace under the current circumstances, underscoring the complexities of the situation.

Sources:

• Reuters
• Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
• Meduza