Live from Geneva – An Evaluation of the 28-Point Plan from a Negotiation Strategy Perspective

Monday, 24.11.25, 10:00

‍

The good news first: there is finally a foundation on which negotiations can be built.

However, the foundation was drafted by individuals who are not at home in the world of peace negotiations. There are many inconsistencies, contradictions, and simply no structure. The plan bears the handwriting of Kirill Dmitriev and Steve Witkoff—both highly experienced in finance and business, but not in diplomacy.

From a negotiation perspective, this complex process requires a clear structure.

‍

1. Structure

Western countries are pushing for negotiations on a ceasefire. From the Western point of view, ending active combat is necessary; “talking while fighting” is not seen as promising. The Russian perspective is that peace negotiations aimed at a long-term solution must come first, followed only then by a cessation of hostilities.

From our point of view, both negotiation tracks should begin in parallel.

One team should negotiate a ceasefire with short-term goals. It is essential to clarify concrete measures—terms like “withdrawal” in the plan are far too vague. Another team should focus on the long-term solution. It would quickly become clear which strategy is more promising, and at a later stage the two teams could be merged.

‍

2. Guarantees

In our view, this point is very difficult, as the mistrust of all parties must be managed positively. On the other hand, it is central to conflict resolution for both sides. At the conclusion of yesterday's negotiations, US Secretary of State Rubio said: ‘A security guarantee for Ukraine needs to be discussed further.’

‍

3. Parties

Ukraine was not involved in the drafting of the plan and the EU is standing on the sidlines as a silent observer. The U.S. position is difficult: are they neutral mediators, or part of NATO—and therefore by definition not neutral?

‍

4. Military Issues

A limitation on the Ukrainian army is only acceptable if Russia agrees to reciprocal measures. One option could be an agreement not to concentrate troops within a defined distance of the Ukrainian border. Ukraine may not fire missiles at Moscow or St. Petersburg—but does that also mean Russia may not fire missiles at Kyiv and Kharkiv?

‍

5. Full Amnesty

Amnesty is regulated by international law and, in our understanding, cannot simply be agreed upon in a 28-point plan. International law is binding, and war crimes must be prosecuted.

‍

6. EU Membership

A particularly interesting point is point 11: Ukraine may become a member of the EU, and during the review process it already receives preferential access. This is a clear signal that Ukraine will no longer move politically toward Russia. Russia has implicitly accepted that Ukraine is leaving the Russian sphere of influence.

‍

7. Peace Council

We consider this point completely unrealistic:

“Implementation will be monitored and guaranteed by a Peace Council led by President Donald Trump. Sanctions will be imposed in the event of violations.”

In the Gaza conflict, President Trump effectively took control of the Gaza Strip through the Peace Council, sidelining Israel in the decision-making process. It is unimaginable that Russia would hand over control to the Trump administration.

Equally important is the composition of the working groups responsible for monitoring the agreement. The U.S., Russia, Ukraine, and the Europeans must all be represented.

‍

Next Steps

The concrete development of the 28-point plan now needs to begin. Discussions have started in Geneva, and professional negotiators with diplomatic experience are required. According to those involved, the talks were ‘concentrated, focused and respectful’. Rubio said that the delegates in Geneva would continue working on a peace plan today.

This analysis is based on a conversation with Swiss diplomat Thomas Greminger, who heads the Geneva Centre for Security Policy (www.gcsp.ch) and is involved in behind-the-scenes mediation in the Ukraine war. He strongly advocates for Ukraine’s active participation in the peace process.

We highly value our collaboration with Thomas Greminger and the Geneva Centre for Security Policy and will continue to accompany the negotiation process with further assessments.