The United States and Ukraine present a “refined” peace plan following negotiations in Geneva

“The discussions made it possible to achieve significant progress towards a rapprochement of positions and the identification of clearly defined next steps,” reported Washington and kyiv in a joint press releasewhich specifies that Ukraine “reaffirmed its gratitude” to the United States and Donald Trump personally. “Both sides reaffirmed that any future agreement must fully respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and ensure a lasting and just peace.”

“Tense” discussions

Despite the optimism displayed, “the negotiations were tense,” describes a person familiar with Sunday’s talks, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the negotiations. “The American side did not want to deviate from the text of the plan approved by the Russians,” she continues. “However, the Ukrainians kept pointing out unacceptable parts of the plan and, in the end, there were some changes.”

Although Donald Trump’s team claimed that all of the initial proposals had been developed with the participation of Ukraine and Russia, the plan was not presented to kyiv until its initial framework had been defined. The American president also set a deadline of this Thursday for Ukraine to agree, threatening to cut off aid and intelligence to kyiv.

The EU was also kept out of the initial development of the peace plan, which called for Europe to give $100 billion of Russia’s frozen assets for the reconstruction of Ukraine, with the territories most in need remaining under the authority. in fact of Russia. The plan also calls for the United States to receive 50% of the profits from the reconstruction efforts.

Neither side provided details on how the framework was changed following Sunday’s discussions. “Certain points were part of the initial 28 points, or it evolved,” said Marco Rubio, who described the plan as “a living document, constantly evolving.”

“It evolves every day based on contributions,” he further specified. “You get a pretty good idea of ​​the priorities, the lines not to cross and the issues that are important to both parties.”