How Trump conceived his November 2025 "peace plan"

From UNIAN:

"Where "new" ideas about peace come from 

Igar Tyshkevich, November 19, 2025 

Amid the corruption scandal in Ukraine, several Western media outlets have once again begun to talk about the possible definition of a freeze on the war. The US is allegedly preparing an updated concept. Meanwhile, the day before, another piece of news was about talks between Moscow and Washington, which have allegedly intensified, but are not being publicly announced. After all, a meeting between Yermak and Wittkoff was scheduled for Turkey, but it was cancelled. President Zelenskyy, however, flew there with the announcement of a discussion on a just peace. With whom? It's not yet clear. 

At the same time, General Driscoll, the commander of the US Army and a friend of D'Vence, arrived in Kyiv... If we take these events into account, we can conclude that a new thaw in the negotiations is likely. This would be a worst-case scenario for Ukraine – similar to February-March 2025, when Trump demanded concessions to Russia. There are at least four reasons for this. 

 

1. Trump is nevertheless rushing ahead amid negotiations with China. The US President intended to freeze the war in Ukraine within the framework he had set and initiate joint projects with Russia. Thus, amid competition with China, he would attempt to "play Moscow" as a factor restraining Beijing's appetites in Europe and Asia. He would also, without unnecessary expense, confirm that Eastern Europe is within the sphere of dominant US influence. And, finally, he would profit from this through economic cooperation with Russia.

 

This concept didn't work, and the Ukrainian issue was already raised during the Trump-Xi meeting. It will be discussed during the American president's visit to China. And if the parties agree to outline the contours of a peace process, the US will be forced to move forward on this track. And that's hardly MAGA. Therefore, the opportunity to resolve the issue at a convenient opportunity before the trip to Beijing looks extremely attractive to Trump. 

 

But just a month ago, the situation was stalemate: Moscow was demanding too much, without the ability to achieve it by force. Ukraine, in turn, was unable to change the balance of power. The US's European allies were extremely afraid of a repeat of Munich 1938. That's why Trump declared "let them fight" and waited for the right opportunity. 

2. Moscow has approached the US in two ways. The key is shifting the war issue from the primary to the secondary one. Why is this? Look at their rhetoric and Dmitriev's themes. The Kremlin is trying to bribe Trump with the benefits of resource trade, gaining control of the Northern Sea Route, and political positioning. And the issue of the Russian-Ukrainian war is being presented as an "annoying obstacle" standing in the way of the hoped-for bright and profitable future.

 

That is, the main topic for the agreements is not ending the war, but agreeing on how and where to profit. Then it will become clear how and when to enter into peace negotiations. 

 

Just in case the opportunity arises, I'd like to recall Dmitriev's last public visit to the United States. Our media actively, even joyfully, commented on the fact that Putin's envoy did not meet with political heavyweights in Washington. But they missed one thing: Dmitriev actively met with businesses. Those who would profit from a deal on the war. That was his goal. And he wanted these people, American citizens, business owners and Trump supporters who saw the benefits, to speak with their president.

The second negotiating thread is the assertion that Moscow will be able to exert pressure on the situation at the front and that Ukraine, in any case, will be forced to surrender territory.

 

Now let's look at the current situation. Dmitriev's track is underway. The situation at the front is quite complex. Putin may have deployed additional reserves, but he's trying to create the illusion that the front is collapsing. And Washington is starting to think about it. After all, if that's the case, then a freeze is necessary—a defeat for Ukraine isn't advantageous to the US. And official Kyiv might be more accommodating. Therefore, the purpose of Driscoll's visit is precisely to find out what's really going on and whether Trump should rush.

 

3. Mindichgate. Ukraine's largest political crisis, currently in its early stages. The very fact of a scandal involving Zelenskyy's inner circle is already weakening Ukraine. The solution is a radical change in domestic policy, which would not only sacrifice part of his inner circle but also deprive the president of some leverage. But if Zelenskyy is unwilling to take such decisive steps and tries to retain his old team, the US has wonderful tools to influence him personally. So, let's look at point 2: if, following his visit, Driscoll recommends "freezing the war," the decision is made quickly and communicated to the Ukrainian president's inner circle with a fair amount of political coercion.

 

4. Epstein-gate in the US. This is already a scandal that could cost Trump the presidency and is destroying his "mono-majority" format in Congress (and it's also in its early stages). In this situation, the US president needs a "foreign policy victory." And the Russian-Ukrainian war option is quite suitable because it hits three targets: ending the war itself, ending the war on Trump's terms before negotiations with Xi (a show of US power), and doing business with Russia. In short, MAGA in all its glory. Therefore, given favorable starting conditions, Trump will not hesitate.

 

So, does this mean "all is lost"? I wouldn't jump to such conclusions. 

 

Ukraine has the opportunity to play its own game, albeit from a weak starting position. Firstly, what's critical today isn't Zelenskyy's trip to Turkey, but Driscoll's trip to Ukraine. And perhaps it's a good thing that key political players have gone abroad. After all, the general will be able to communicate more with the military and perhaps develop his own vision of the situation. While it's certainly difficult for Ukraine today, it's certainly not the disaster Moscow is trying to portray...

 

Then, the foreign policy. In the spring, the stance of European states and Turkey helped contain US pressure. Today (provided the crisis in Ukraine is managed effectively), this is also possible..."