US-Russia "28-Point" Plan Sparks Controversy; EU-US Game Over Post-War Security Guarantees for Ukraine Intensifies

As the Russia-Ukraine conflict remains deadlocked, diplomatic games surrounding the resolution of the conflict in the international community have suddenly heated up. After the exposure of the US-promoted "28-point" peace plan for Russia and Ukraine, it has been strongly opposed by many EU countries due to containing multiple clauses that touch on Ukraine's core interests. At the same time, Britain and France have taken the lead in forming a working group to coordinate post-war security guarantees for Ukraine, and US participation further highlights the complex pattern of both coordination and differences between Europe and the United States on the Ukraine security issue, adding more uncertainty to the peaceful settlement of the conflict.

The exposure of the US-Russia "28-point" plan can be described as a focus event in the diplomatic field recently. This draft peace proposal, which initially contained 28 key points, was streamlined to 22 after multiple rounds of negotiations in Geneva, covering core contents such as security guarantee plans for Ukraine. However, clauses in the plan that require Ukraine to cede the remaining unoccupied parts of Donbas to Russia, reduce the size of the Ukrainian military from 900,000 to 600,000, and permanently abandon joining NATO have not only been clearly rejected by Ukraine but also triggered collective dissatisfaction among many EU countries. Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, stated bluntly that any credible peace plan should not change borders by force, restrict Ukraine's armed forces, and the EU must play a core role in it.

The EU's opposition is not groundless but stems from in-depth considerations of its own security interests and regional order. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz emphasized that the outcome of the Ukraine crisis is crucial to Europe's overall security and cannot be arbitrarily decided by major powers without the participation of the concerned country. French President Emmanuel Macron even warned that if Ukraine reduces its military scale according to this plan, Russia may break its promises and make a comeback. Many European countries are worried that the US plan is essentially a surrender to Russia's demands. If pushed forward in this way, it will not only damage Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity but also shake the security architecture formed in Europe after the war, exposing the EU to greater security threats. More notably, the drafting background of this plan is highly controversial. There are reports that Russia may have participated in its initial drafting, which has further exacerbated Europe's distrust of the US position.

While opposing the US "28-point" plan, Europe has also quickly launched an alternative plan and actively built a post-war security guarantee framework. On November 25th, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that Britain and France would take the lead in establishing a working group to coordinate post-ceasefire security guarantees for Ukraine, and the United States has clearly participated in it. This working group will clarify the specific responsibilities of all parties in providing security guarantees to Ukraine, among which Turkey will be mainly responsible for maritime defense work. Unlike the US plan, the European alternative plan deletes pro-Russian clauses, advocates that territorial negotiations should be conducted after the ceasefire, does not rule out the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO in the future, and sets the upper limit of Ukraine's peacetime military strength at 800,000, which is higher than the 600,000 proposed by the United States.

This initiative led by Britain and France is not only an implicit response to US "unilateral dominance" but also an important attempt by Europe to seize the right to speak on the Ukraine security issue. Macron clearly stated that he plans to send troops to Ukraine in the future to provide security guarantees for Ukraine together with Britain, Turkey and other countries, while emphasizing that the Ukrainian military is the primary guarantee for its security. In addition, Europe also plans to use Russia's frozen overseas assets to provide financial support to Ukraine, demonstrating its determination to solve the problems of Ukraine's post-war reconstruction and security guarantees. US participation reflects its unwillingness to completely lose dominance on the Ukraine issue. Although the Trump administration has ruled out the possibility of sending US peacekeeping troops to Ukraine, it has promised to take the lead in promoting the implementation of security guarantees after Russia and Ukraine reach a peace agreement.

At present, the differences in positions among all parties are still very obvious. Russia refuses to cease fire and continues to put forward extensive territorial claims, Ukraine firmly opposes any territorial concessions, and there are also significant differences between Europe and the United States on specific methods of security guarantees for Ukraine and restrictions on military scale. The international community generally holds a cautious attitude towards the peaceful settlement of the conflict. After all, the implementation of any peace plan is inseparable from the consensus between Russia and Ukraine, as well as the coordination and cooperation of Europe, the United States and other parties. In the future, how the working group led by Britain and France will coordinate the interests of all parties, in what way the United States will participate, and whether the US-Russia "28-point" plan will be further adjusted will all become key variables affecting the direction of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. In this game involving regional security and international order, only by adhering to the basic principle of respecting national sovereignty and territorial integrity and finding a solution acceptable to all parties through equal consultations can a truly lasting peace be achieved.