As winter looms over war-torn Ukraine, the push for peace between Kyiv and Moscow has taken a dramatic turn. President Donald Trump’s administration is racing to finalize a deal, but sharp public rebukes from the White House have clashed with cautious optimism from diplomats in Geneva. On Sunday, Trump accused Ukrainian leaders of showing “zero gratitude” for U.S. aid, just hours before U.S. and Ukrainian officials announced significant breakthroughs in negotiations. With a self-imposed Thanksgiving deadline hanging over the talks, questions swirl about the 28-point peace proposal’s fairness, its origins, and whether Russia will ever buy in.
Trump’s Outburst and the Geneva Breakthrough
The drama unfolded on a crisp Sunday in Geneva, Switzerland, where U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, special envoy Steve Witkoff, and Army Secretary Dan Driscoll huddled with a Ukrainian delegation led by Andriy Yermak, chief of staff to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. After hours of intense discussions at the U.S. Mission, Rubio emerged beaming, calling the session “the most productive and meaningful meeting so far in this entire process.”
“We’ve made a tremendous amount of progress,” Rubio told reporters, emphasizing that the talks had gone “point by point” through the proposal. “There’s still some work to be done, but we are much further ahead today than we were a week ago.” A joint White House statement echoed this positivity, noting that both sides had “agreed the consultations were highly productive” and had drafted an “updated and refined peace framework” that upholds Ukraine’s sovereignty and aims for a “sustainable and just peace.”
Yet, Trump’s morning post on Truth Social cast a shadow over the day’s achievements. “Ukraine has expressed zero gratitude for the massive help we’ve given them—billions in weapons, intel, and support,” he wrote, adding that without U.S. backing, “they’d be speaking Russian by now.” The remarks stunned observers, especially since Zelenskyy had repeatedly thanked the U.S. publicly. In a Telegram post later that day, Zelenskyy wrote, “Ukraine is grateful to the United States, to every American heart, and personally to President Trump for the help that, starting with the Javelins, is saving the lives of Ukrainians.” He extended thanks to European allies in the G7 and G20 as well.
Rubio downplayed the tension, telling reporters that Trump was “pleased” with the progress and that any friction had been “smoothed over.” The White House later highlighted Ukraine’s affirmations of gratitude in a joint statement, underscoring the U.S. commitment to ending the war and saving lives.
The 28-Point Plan: A “Living Document” Under Fire
At the heart of the talks is a 28-point peace proposal that Trump has pushed Ukraine to accept by Thanksgiving. The plan, which Trump described Saturday as “not my final offer,” has sparked fierce debate. If rejected, he warned, Zelenskyy could “continue to fight his little heart out.” In a video response, Zelenskyy acknowledged the mounting pressure: “Ukraine may now face a very difficult choice, either losing its dignity or the risk of losing a key partner, either the difficult 28 points, or a very difficult winter.”
Critics, including Ukrainian Ambassador to the U.S. Olha Stefanishyna, have called the initial draft a “wish list” rather than a binding agreement. Speaking on Fox News, she framed it as “only the first proposal, unattainable,” but stressed it as a starting point for “constructive reconciling.” Rubio reinforced this, insisting the document is a “living, breathing” framework “built on input from all relevant parties,” including Ukraine, Europe, and even Russia. He noted that key Ukrainian concerns—like security guarantees, economic development, infrastructure protection, freedom of navigation, and political sovereignty—had been “thoroughly addressed” in revisions.
Still, the proposal’s early version drew widespread alarm for appearing overly favorable to Moscow. Republican Senators Lindsey Graham and Roger Wicker, both Trump allies, voiced skepticism. “While there are many good ideas… several areas are very problematic,” Graham posted on X Saturday. Wicker called it “highly skeptical” of achieving true peace. On the Democratic side, Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York slammed it outright as a “surrender plan” that gives “Russia more than Russia would’ve asked for” while offering Moscow “absolutely nothing.” He warned it could undermine NATO’s credibility, signaling to allies that the U.S. might not have their backs against Russian aggression.
Confusion over the plan’s origins added fuel to the fire. Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., revealed after a call with Rubio that the administration had clarified it wasn’t a U.S. creation but a document “presented to Mr. Witkoff” as an intermediary tool. Rubio quickly countered on X: “The peace proposal was authored by the U.S. It is offered as a strong framework… based on input from the Russian side [and] previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”
European leaders, meanwhile, have pushed back with a counter-proposal that “differs significantly” from the U.S. draft, according to Reuters. Their concerns mirror those in Washington: Does this deal truly end the war honorably, or does it risk igniting new conflicts?
A Fluid Deadline and Uncertain Russian Buy-In
Trump’s Thanksgiving deadline—aimed at wrapping up the deal before the holiday—appears flexible. Rubio stressed urgency without rigidity: “Whether it’s Thursday, whether it’s Friday… we want it to be soon, because people are going to die.” Technical teams will keep working post-Geneva, with Rubio departing for Washington while expressing hope for a resolution “in a very reasonable period of time, very soon.”
The biggest wildcard remains Russia. While U.S. and Ukrainian officials tout alignment on a draft that “reflects [Ukraine’s] national security interests,” Moscow’s stance is unclear. The original plan conceded several Kremlin demands, and it’s uncertain if the revisions will sway Putin. Zelenskyy, in his Telegram address, noted “signs that President Trump’s team is listening,” but added, “Much is changing: We are working very carefully on the steps needed to end the war.”
As delegations wrap up in Geneva, the path forward hinges on balancing U.S. pressure, Ukrainian resolve, and European input— all while Trump’s blunt rhetoric tests alliances forged in the fires of conflict. With lives on the line and a harsh winter approaching, the world watches to see if diplomacy can deliver peace before the deadline slips away.
