Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
A bipartisan group of U.S. senators sharply condemned President Donald Trump’s Russia-Ukraine peace proposal on Saturday, arguing that the administration crafted a plan that mirrors the Kremlin’s demands and risks legitimizing Moscow’s territorial aggression. Their attacks came as Secretary of State Marco Rubio scrambled to refute allegations that he privately dismissed the document as a “Russian wish list.”
Senators attending the Halifax International Security Forum said they were alarmed by the Trump administration’s 28-point framework — drafted with the Kremlin and without Ukraine’s participation — which would force Kyiv to accept major territorial losses. Trump has publicly urged Ukraine to agree to the plan by next week.
“It rewards aggression. This is pure and simple,” said Sen. Angus King, an Independent from Maine. “There’s no justification for Russia claiming eastern Ukraine.” King likened the proposal to the appeasement strategy of the 1938 Munich Pact, long considered a cautionary tale in Western diplomacy.
King and Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said Rubio told them privately that the proposal “was not the administration’s plan” but instead reflected Russian preferences. But Rubio, facing immediate political blowback, denied the account Saturday evening, insisting the United States authored the plan.
“This is blatantly false,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said on social media, calling the senators’ description “misleading at best.” Rubio also posted that the proposal was “based on input from the Russian side” but also on U.S. and Ukrainian discussions.
Still, the senators said nothing they heard from Rubio or the administration changed their view that the proposal bends dangerously toward Moscow. “This is a Russian proposal,” Shaheen said. “There is so much in that plan that is totally unacceptable.”
Republican Sen. Mike Rounds, who is retiring next year, echoed those concerns: “It looked more like it was written in Russian to begin with,” he said, adding that administration officials only hoped to use it as a “starting point.”
Other Republicans voiced sharper alarm. Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina criticized former GOP leader Mitch McConnell’s tepid response, arguing that the plan signals unacceptable U.S. concessions to Vladimir Putin. “We should not do anything that makes [Putin] feel like he has a win here,” Tillis said. “What Mitch said was short of what should be said.”
Putin, for his part, praised the proposal, saying it “could form the basis” of a final settlement if Washington persuades Ukraine and its European allies to accept it — a reaction that further fueled criticism from U.S. lawmakers.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy did not reject the plan outright but stressed that Ukraine must be treated fairly during negotiations, calling this “one of the most difficult moments in our history.”
The clash over the plan unfolded at the Halifax forum, where a large delegation of U.S. senators attended amid strained U.S.-Canada relations. Trump’s trade war and his assertion that Canada should be the “51st state” have sparked widespread frustration north of the border.
“There’s real concern about that strain,” Shaheen said. “The president’s tariffs and comments are not only detrimental to Canada, but globally. They show a lack of respect for sovereign nations.”
In a joint statement, five members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee warned that Trump’s plan would “fatally degrade Ukraine’s ability to defend itself” and send a dangerous signal to autocratic governments around the world.
“No one wants a just and lasting peace more than the Ukrainian people,” the senators wrote. “However, we will not achieve that lasting peace by offering Putin concession after concession.”
