Global & US Headlines
Rubio, State Dept Counter Senators, Assert U.S. Authored 28-Point Ukraine Peace Plan
On 23 Nov 2025 Washington’s top diplomat Marco Rubio and the State Department publicly rejected senators’ claims that a leaked 28-point pact was a Russian draft, insisting the United States wrote the proposal with input from Kyiv and Moscow.
Focusing Facts
- Sens. Mike Rounds, Angus King and Jeanne Shaheen told reporters at the Halifax Security Forum on 22 Nov that Rubio had said the document was merely "received" from a Russian envoy and was not U.S. policy.
- Hours later, Rubio posted on X: “The peace proposal was authored by the U.S… based on input from the Russian side… and ongoing input from Ukraine,” echoing a near-identical statement by State Dept spokesman Tommy Pigott.
- Leaked text shows the plan would bar Ukraine from NATO membership and freeze battle lines in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia while recognising Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk as de facto Russian territory.
Context
Big-power attempts to impose a map on smaller states echo the 1938 Munich Agreement that traded Czech borders for “peace,” and the 1973 Paris Accords that let the U.S. exit Vietnam but failed to secure lasting stability. This episode fits a century-long pattern in which Washington alternates between crusading for principles and bargaining over spheres of influence; the internal dispute—senators vs. executive—also recalls the 1919 Senate revolt against Wilson’s Versailles Treaty. Whether the plan sticks or collapses will signal how far the post-1991 order of NATO expansion and U.S. dominance has eroded: a lasting settlement that freezes Russian gains would mark a historic rollback of the West’s open-door promise, whereas its rejection could entrench a protracted, Korea-style armistice line. In either case, the uproar shows that, fifty years after détente and thirty after unipolarity, U.S. foreign policy is again contested at home—an early indicator of a multi-polar security architecture likely to define the next century.
Perspectives
US administration and supportive outlets
e.g., NTD, Al Arabiya — They insist the 28-point peace plan was drafted by Washington, incorporating feedback from both Moscow and Kyiv, and serves as a sturdy framework for further negotiations. By stressing U.S. authorship and bilateral input they blunt domestic criticism that the deal caters to Russia, shielding the Trump administration from charges of capitulation.
Bipartisan U.S. senators and skeptical Western media
e.g., Washington Examiner, The Hindu, BBC — They portray the draft as a Russian 'wish list' passed through U.S. channels, warning it rewards Kremlin aggression and does not represent official U.S. policy. Highlighting alleged Russian fingerprints lets critics attack Trump’s diplomacy and rally support for a tougher line, but relies heavily on leaks and could overstate Moscow’s role.
Russian state-owned and allied outlets
e.g., TASS, Azeri-Press Agency — Their coverage amplifies Rubio’s claim that the plan, shaped with Russian and Ukrainian input, is a ‘sound basis’ for talks to end the war. Framing the U.S. proposal as balanced and rooted in Russian suggestions helps Moscow claim diplomatic legitimacy while glossing over Ukrainian objections and territorial concessions.