Date first published: 25/11/2025
Key sectors: all
Key risks: war-on-land
Risk development
On 18 November reports emerged that the United States (US) had drafted a 28-point plan in secret October talks with Russia to end the war in Ukraine. US officials claimed the proposal – requiring Ukraine to cede parts of Donetsk Oblast it still controls, renounce NATO aspirations, adopt neutrality and cap its army at 600,000 soldiers – was prepared with input from both Kyiv and Moscow. The leak came amid Russian battlefield gains and a major corruption scandal in Ukraine, with Washington giving Kyiv until 27 November to accept. On 23 November US, Ukrainian and European leaders met in Geneva, where European officials presented a counter-proposal that excluded territorial concessions, left NATO accession open and raised the army size limits. US President Donald Trump signalled frustration with the pushback, while Russia rejected the European counter-proposal.
Ukrainian officials meanwhile stated they drafted a revised 19-point plan with US officials during the Geneva talks to amend provisions viewed as overly favourable to Moscow. The most sensitive issues – territorial concessions and NATO-Russia-Ukraine relations – were left for Trump and Zelensky to address, with US officials suggesting the Thanksgiving deadline could be softened. On 25 November US Army Secretary Dan Driscoll travelled to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for further discussions with Russian delegates. A Ukrainian delegation headed by military intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov was also reportedly in the UAE holding talks with both the US and Russian sides, signalling intensified efforts to reach a compromise.
Why it matters
Revelations surrounding the peace plan have underscored Western disunity, with European pushback exposing fractures in the alliance and creating openings for Russia. Both Kyiv and Moscow have been lobbying Washington to portray the other as obstructing Trump’s initiative, raising the risk that US policymakers may interpret Ukrainian hesitation as stalling. Any resulting US disengagement would further tilt battlefield dynamics toward Russia, which has signalled its determination to seize the remainder of Donetsk Oblast and continues to build momentum.
Background
Pressure on Zelensky increased after the 10 November anti-corruption probe uncovered a US$100m kickback scheme in the energy sector involving several close allies. The revelations fuelled public anger amid Zelensky’s declining popularity, particularly given links to procurement for energy-infrastructure defences during Russia’s intensified strikes. The probe had been active since July, when Zelensky’s attempt to limit anti-corruption bodies’ powers triggered major protests and Western pushback that forced him to abandon the effort.
Heavy fighting continues on Ukraine’s eastern front as Russia intensifies its offensive on Pokrovsk, Donetsk Oblast. The city, long viewed as the gateway to Donetsk, has been a key Russian objective for over a year. Its fall would be Russia’s most significant gain since Avdiivka in February 2025, opening routes toward the last strongholds of Kramatorsk and Slovyansk. On 20 November Russia claimed to have captured Kupyansk and large parts of Pokrovsk and Vovchyansk, though Kyiv denied the claims. Footage showed Russian troops moving through deserted areas of southern Pokrovsk.
Risk outlook
If Kyiv rejects the offer, the familiar cycle of blame and pressure will resume, with Russia waiting for Ukraine’s position to deteriorate amid unprecedented strikes on its energy grid, deepening economic strain and worsening manpower shortages. Ukraine faces a choice between costly continued resistance and accepting terms it views as near-surrender, while Zelensky’s political constraints leave little room for compromise. Trump is likely to intensify pressure and previously threatened to cut weapons and aid to Kyiv if it does not accept the proposal. However, Russia’s acceptance of the evolving proposals also remains uncertain, heightening the risk of a prolonged and increasingly asymmetric conflict.