Advisers to Donald Trump are proposing strategies, both publicly and privately, to resolve the Ukraine conflict, which would involve conceding significant portions of the country to Russia for the foreseeable future, as revealed by a Reuters analysis based on their statements and interviews with individuals close to the U.S. president-elect.
The proposals, put forth by three prominent advisers, including Trump’s designated Russia-Ukraine envoy, retired Army Lieutenant-General Keith Kellogg, share common elements, notably the removal of NATO membership for Ukraine from consideration.
Trump’s team aims to compel both Moscow and Kyiv to engage in negotiations through a combination of incentives and pressures, such as suspending military aid to Kyiv unless it agrees to discussions, while increasing support if Russian President Vladimir Putin remains uncooperative.
Throughout his election campaign, Trump consistently promised to resolve the nearly three-year conflict within 24 hours of his inauguration on January 20, yet he has not detailed how he intends to achieve this.
Experts and former national security officials express significant skepticism regarding Trump’s ability to deliver on such a promise due to the intricate nature of the conflict.
Nonetheless, the collective statements from his advisers hint at the possible framework of a peace plan under Trump. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, grappling with manpower shortages and increasing territorial losses, has suggested a willingness to consider negotiations. While he remains committed to NATO membership, he acknowledged this week that Ukraine must seek diplomatic avenues to reclaim some of its occupied territories.
Analysts and former U.S. officials suggest that Trump may encounter reluctance from Putin to engage in discussions, as the Russian leader currently has the upper hand against Ukraine and may prefer to continue his territorial ambitions. Eugene Rumer, a former senior U.S. intelligence analyst on Russia now affiliated with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, noted that Putin is not in a rush. He indicated that the Russian president shows no inclination to relax his demands for a ceasefire and negotiations, which include Ukraine’s abandonment of its NATO aspirations and the surrender of four provinces that Putin claims as Russian territory but does not fully control—conditions that Kyiv has firmly rejected. Rumer believes that Putin is likely to wait, potentially seizing more territory while assessing any concessions Trump might offer to entice him into negotiations.
In May, Reuters reported that Putin was open to a ceasefire that would acknowledge the current front lines but was prepared to continue fighting if Kyiv and its Western allies did not respond favorably. Russia has already taken full control of Crimea, which it annexed from Ukraine in 2014, and has captured approximately 80% of the Donbas region, which includes Donetsk and Luhansk, along with over 70% of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, as well as portions of Mykolaiv and Kharkiv.
MULTIPLE STRATEGIES
As of last week, Trump had not yet assembled a central working group to develop a comprehensive peace plan, according to four advisers who spoke on the condition of anonymity regarding internal discussions. Instead, various advisers have been sharing ideas among themselves in public settings and, in some instances, directly with Trump. Ultimately, the success of any peace agreement will likely hinge on direct personal interactions among Trump, Putin, and Zelenskiy, according to the advisers. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov remarked that it is “not possible to comment on individual statements without having an understanding of the overall plan.”
Karoline Leavitt, a spokesperson for Trump, emphasized that the former president has expressed his commitment to “do what is necessary to restore peace and rebuild American strength and deterrence on the world stage.” A representative for Trump did not provide an immediate response regarding whether the president-elect still intends to address the conflict within his first day in office. The Ukrainian government also did not respond promptly to a request for comment.
A former national security official from the Trump administration, who participated in the transition, mentioned three primary proposals: one from Kellogg, another from Vice President-elect JD Vance, and a third from Richard Grenell, the former acting director of national intelligence. Kellogg’s proposal, co-authored with Fred Fleitz, a former National Security Council member, advocates for freezing the current front lines and was presented to Trump earlier this year. Neither Kellogg nor Fleitz responded to requests for comment, and their plan was initially reported by Reuters.
According to this proposal, Trump would increase U.S. military support to Kyiv contingent upon the latter’s agreement to engage in peace negotiations. Concurrently, he would caution Moscow that U.S. assistance to Ukraine would escalate if Russia declined to negotiate. Additionally, NATO membership for Ukraine would be deferred. The proposal also includes offering U.S. security guarantees to Ukraine, which might involve enhancing weapon supplies following a peace agreement.
In a June interview with Times Radio, a British digital station, Sebastian Gorka, one of Trump’s prospective deputy national security advisers, stated that Trump had indicated he would compel Putin to enter negotiations by threatening unprecedented levels of military aid to Ukraine if Putin refused. When contacted by phone, Gorka dismissed Reuters as “fake news garbage” and chose not to provide further details.
Vance, a U.S. senator known for his opposition to aid for Ukraine, proposed a different approach in September. In a conversation with U.S. podcaster Shawn Ryan, he suggested that any agreement might involve a demilitarized zone along the current front lines, which would be “heavily fortified” to deter further Russian advances. His plan also includes denying NATO membership to Kyiv.
Vance’s representatives did not provide him for comment, and he has not shared further details on his proposal. Meanwhile, Grenell, who previously served as Trump’s ambassador to Germany, proposed the establishment of “autonomous zones” in eastern Ukraine during a Bloomberg roundtable in July, though he did not provide specifics. He also indicated that NATO membership for Ukraine may not align with U.S. interests.
Grenell has not responded to requests for comment and has yet to obtain a role in the new administration, although he remains influential with Trump on European matters, according to a senior Trump foreign policy adviser. This adviser noted that Grenell was among the few individuals present at a September meeting in New York with Trump and Zelenskiy.
POTENTIAL RESISTANCE
As analysts and former national security officials suggest, aspects of these proposals are likely to encounter resistance from Zelenskiy, who has incorporated a NATO invitation into his “Victory Plan,” as well as from European allies and certain U.S. lawmakers.
Last week, Ukraine’s foreign minister reached out to his NATO counterparts with a request for a membership invitation to be extended during the upcoming foreign ministers’ meeting on Tuesday. Several European allies have shown readiness to enhance their support for Ukraine, while U.S. President Joe Biden continues to supply arms.
This situation may diminish Trump’s ability to influence Kyiv’s negotiations. The Kellogg plan, which proposes increasing assistance to Ukraine contingent upon Putin’s willingness to negotiate, may encounter resistance in Congress, particularly from some of Trump’s staunch supporters who are against further military aid to the Eastern European country.
“I don’t think anyone has a viable strategy for resolution,” remarked Rumer, a former U.S. intelligence officer.
Discover more from Defence Talks | Defense News Hub, Military Updates, Security Insights
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
