Last week’s edition of Trumpsteria involved the leak of a 28 point peace plan hashed out between Russia and the US. The plan represented something of a retreat from Russia’s maximalist position, but still imposed major concessions-specifically territorial ones-on Ukraine.

The provenance of the plan is murky. It first emerged on Telegram, in Russian. Trump said it was The Plan. Later, according to statements from some senators briefed by Marco Rubio, it wasn’t The Plan. But then it was.

In any event, at the outset Trump sure made it sound like The Plan when he demanded that Ukraine accept it, in toto, within a week or lose all US support.

This all of course led to a rush to the fainting couches. All around knob and former Putin punching bag Michael McFaul’s take was typical: “Trump is once again acting as Putin’s agent.”

Zelensky’s reaction was subdued, rather than defiant. He said Ukraine faced a choice between humiliation and loss of an essential ally. But he didn’t say no.

And then, just like that, a Ukrainian delegation met in Geneva with Rubio. The Secretary of State waxed optimistically about the talks, calling them the most constructive ever.

And what emerged was another plan, this one consisting of a mere 19 points.

So what to make of all this? I, like everyone else, is akin to the denizens of Plato’s cave, just viewing shadows on the wall. (One difference between me and McFaul and his ilk is that I admit it). So everything is speculative and conjectural.

But one way to reconcile these seemingly contradictory developments is as follows. The US is basically engaged in shuttle diplomacy. Since the parties won’t meet directly, the US is negotiating with each and securing proposals that move the parties closer together.

As for Trump’s apparent ultimatum to Ukraine, my guess is that when presented with the Russian plan in private Zelensky balked and vowed to make no concessions. In response, Trump made his public demand. This got Zelensky’s mind right, which led to the talks in Geneva, where Ukraine budged off its previous positions. Which led Rubio to praise the talks and Ukraine.

In other words, classic bad cop (Trump), good cop (Rubio).

Throughout, Trump has been putting pressure on both sides. On Russia mainly via sanctions; on Ukraine mainly via threats of withdrawing US support. Said threats causing the McFauls of the world to damn Trump as a Putin puppet.

It’s a painfully slow process. Will it work? Perhaps not, but I see nothing better on offer. And when it comes down to it, something along the lines of the plan first mooted is the only thing that is feasible. Ukraine will have to give up territory, and won’t be in Nato. The only question really is how much territory, and what non-Nato security will Ukraine obtain.

Yes, that will be deemed capitulation to Putin by McFaul et al. In fact, it is capitulation to the reality of the battlefield. Ukraine can’t roll back Russia’s gains, and would almost certainly lose the land sacrificed in The Plan in time. The only difference being the cost that Russia has to pay to get it–and the cost that Ukraine has to pay to defer the inevitable loss.

As Zelensky’s former spokesperson said, Ukraine is bleeding out.

Every subsequent deal for Ukraine will only be worse — because we are losing. We are losing people, territory, and the economy.
The EU (which by the way has paid Russia more than €311 billion for energy and goods since February 2022) has no real strategy, no way to stop fueling… pic.twitter.com/zx8lBKQn7X

— Iuliia Mendel (@IuliiaMendel) November 22, 2025

Continuing the bleeding is not only futile (because it will not change the ultimate outcome), it is counterproductive (because it will make Ukraine more vulnerable in the future).

So Mendel is right. Maybe this deal is bad–but it is the least bad of any feasible alternative. If Trump’s shuttle diplomacy can secure Ukraine a few concessions, Zelensky should be grateful. And the Ukrainian people even more so.