The Duran Podcast - Dumpster Fire. 28-point Ukraine peace plan

Episode Date: November 21, 2025

Dumpster Fire. 28-point Ukraine peace plan

All right, Alexander, let's talk about the Trump 28-point peace plan, which has been published. Ukraine media, Ukraine parliament members, they published the 28-point peace plan. At least they claim this is the 28-point peace plan. The New York Post confirmed that this is the peace plan, according to their sources. Russia has not said anything yet. Maybe they will by the day's end. Your thoughts on the 28-point peace plan, it is quite different than what information we were getting just two days ago as far as the details of these talks between Wickev and Dimitriev were about. It actually is very different what we're reading in this document.

Anyway, what are your initial thoughts on it? Well, it is so different, in fact, that it reinforces a view that I have, that there are multiple versions of this plan floating around. I mean, it's possible that we have a spinning operation and a deception plan going on at the same time that the Americans are telling things to the Russians and are spreading stories of the media, which are not true. But overall, I think it is much, much more likely that the Americans are doing what I'm afraid has. happened on previous occasions, which is that they're telling different parties, different things, trying to get everybody to agree in a hurry and a haste before the end of the year to something that, in fact, everybody is getting different versions of. So this is different. I mean, there are points here in what the Ukrainians have published, which are very.

consistent with what we've been hearing. I mean, are Ukraine not going to join NATO, for example, that Ukraine is going to have to change its constitution back to neutral status. That is what the Russians were. Ukraine has to withdraw from Dombas. There is massive confusion in this document about all kinds of provisions. So, I mean, Russia is to have de facto sovereignty. over Donbass and Crimea, what does that even mean?

And then we're told that the document is legally binding. So if it is legally binding, how can it be the factor? I mean, there's already absurdities there. There are other absurdities as well, Russia to join the G8. The Russians have repeatedly said they don't want to join the G8. So why bring that up? I mean, that is absolutely irrelevant to this whole topic. the board that Trump is going to head to supervise this, which is obviously lifted straight from

the Gaza plan. Again, very difficult to see why the Russians would want anything of that kind. And then we have complete muddle about security guarantees. So security guarantees, which are not being explained properly, then there's talk about NATO having fighter jets in Poland. And then we hear this morning from Axios, something which, by the way, is not present in this version that the Ukrainians are publishing, which is that the security provisions are only for 10 years. So what's supposed to happen after 10 years? But, you know, again, you can also see that there's other things there that would please the Russians.

like no troops from NATO in Ukraine, no Western troops in Ukraine. There are other things, though, some of them which the Russians would not have been happy with, like the idea that the Russians rent from the Ukrainians, Eastern Donbass. I mean, that doesn't appear there. But then this plan, this latest version that the Ukrainians have, does not say, say, importantly, that Russian is going to become a state language, and it makes no reference at all to the status of the Orthodox Church. So you can see that there's different things being said in different places. The media, somebody is briefing parts of the media to give

the impression that some things are being agreed. And the one document that we have seen, as I said, isn't consistent with all of that. Now, I'm going to suggest what's happening. here, and I think it's particularly difficult to work it out. The Financial Times is saying that Witkoff started on this process three weeks ago. Three weeks ago puts us exactly at the time when Putin met with Gerasimov and the generals, and the Russians announced the fact that the Ukrainians had been trapped, Ukrainian forces had been trapped in Pachrosk and Kupians. And I think at that moment, somebody understood finally in Washington. I'm where I say somebody.

I mean, Trump finally understood in Washington that the story has been spun for the last couple of months that the Ukrainians were holding their own was absolute nonsense. And the one thing that it seems to me that Trump is obviously frightened of, terrified of, is that there's going to be a fall of Saigon moment. we saw that when Kabul fell in Afghanistan, Biden's reputation never recovered. Trump wants to avoid that at all costs. So he told Wittgolf, for heaven's sake, get something sorted out with the Russians and the Ukrainians, fast before the end of the year.

So I'm not faced with something like that. So that Whitkoff since then has been working away. He's been talking to Demetriyev. Clearly, these have been conversations which have been conducted mostly with Demetriyev in Moscow. So these are phone conversations. There is some reports that Dimitriev came to the US and met Wickgolf in Florida or something of that. And who knows? But anyway, there's been some input from the Russians. So you can see that some of the things are tilted a little bit to the Russians. There's also, however, attempts to, as I so satisfied the Ukrainians, or at least get the Ukrainians on board by making various concessions of various kinds to them. So the Russians have been told one thing.

The Ukrainians have been told something else. But there's a huge rush to try and get something cobbled together as quickly as possible before the military situation collapses on the front lines. and it's less, even less coherent than it appeared when we discussed it in the live stream that we did with Daniel McAdams, because clearly, as I said, it's not really thought through. Yeah, there's a lot of question marks with just about every single bullet point, to be quite honest, on this piece plan. And there are no details or any specifics clarifications on certain points. For example, it talks about Ukraine not getting into NATO and Ukraine not getting into NATO being enshrined in the NATO articles or NATO or NATO guarantees promises. Trust me, bro, Ukraine is not going to get it to NATO. And it also says no NATO expansion.

NATO is going to promise no more. expansion. Once again, trust me, bro. We're not going to expand. But I mean, how are these mechanisms going to work? You said this is going to become internationally binding under international law. It's going to be binding. But how? I mean, you don't have any of the mechanisms as to how this is going to be guaranteed what NATO is just going to promise. We're not going to expand. Okay. Russia is supposed to believe this. Sure. I mean, it's three then. That's what we're talking about, right? So, I mean, there's no, there's nothing really to grab onto to here. As you read this document, it says that Ukraine's going to enter the EU.

Yes. Okay, what's the difference between the EU and NATO? Well, exactly. Right? I mean, if it enters the EU, does it also become part of the EU army, which is going to just be an offshoot of the NATO army? Right? I mean, we've been talking about this at length, right?

The whole Ukraine entering the EU as the EU is talking about entering into a conflict with Russia in three years. Trump is going to be the leader of this entire peace plan. He's going to be the chairman of the board once again. So Ukraine is now Trump's? The frozen assets. Yeah. Russia's going to give 50 billion to the United States and Ukraine's going to give 50 billion

or 100 billion the EU is going to pitch in. I mean, I read that part. And this looked like the United States, coming in and saying, we're going to get money from you, Russia, and we're going to get money from you, Ukraine, and we're going to get money from you, Europe, because we're the neutral mediator, right? Yeah. This is how they position themselves.

We're the neutral mediator. Yes. And so we're going to get money from all sides. Yes. An incredible part of the, a condition in the peace plan. Donetsk. Russia, Ukraine pulls out of Donetsk, it says, but Russia, when you read the sentence, that's what we have is a sentence.

Once again, there's no detail to it. But when you read it, it basically says that, yes, de facto recognition of Donbasa Donetsk, but this is the important part, it's a demilitarized zone. Yes. So Russia does it, it, it's a freeze. Russia doesn't really have. Donetsk. It becomes more of a freeze because it's a demilitarized zone that we de facto recognize

as Russia, not de jorde de facto, but it's demilitarized. And of course, Zaporozre and headfels. So anyway, I said a lot, but you know, I put a post on X and I just want your thoughts on it. I basically said that in summary, what I see this plan as is Ukraine capitulating to Russia. Russia capitulating to the United States. Effectively. I mean, exactly.

How do you see it? Well, or perhaps more even more precisely, Russia capitulating to Donald Trump. He is going to be the chairman of the board, and he's going to presumably be managing all the contracts and all of that. And can I just say, I mean, a few things. Firstly, the provisions about the frozen assets are frankly completely absurd. They are ludicrous.

The idea that the Russians whose assets have been frozen and have been threatened with confiscation of them are going to now happily agree to give away a large chunk of them to rebuild Ukraine. I mean, that looks like reparations, which, of course, the Russians have absolutely adamantly set their face against. They've already said that they're not going to agree to that. To me, actually, that looks like trying to help the Europeans, in fact, because as we've discussed in many programs, as you've pointed out many times, it is highly likely, in fact, virtually certain that some of the frozen assets have already been used up. The capital from them has already gone. And this looks to me like some kind of mechanism to cover the Europeans for that. Why would the Russians agree? I cannot imagine that they would agree.

The United States will receive 50% of the profits from this undertaking. So they're going to profit off of this, Alexander. Exactly. Then there's the Dombas thing. So Dombas is de facto, except of course, what does that even mean de facto? And then there's a set of already legally binding, legally binding in what way, but it is legally binding, then how can something that's legally binding? legally binding, not be de jure as well as the factor.

But anyway, the Russians are not allowed to deploy troops inside their own country. Are you kidding me? Why would the Russians agree to something like that either? And who is going to be administering Dombas, eastern Dombas? The Russians, the Ukrainians, obviously, presumably the Russians, but what form is that even going to take? So there's there is that. And there's Aporozio, Herzl.

regions, that there is going to be a stop. Then we're told that this is going to be the conflict line border. Then there's a provision which sort of seems to imply that this can be renegotiated. The Russians have made clear. I discussed this with you privately, and I mentioned this in other places, that the Russians, that Lavrov has made it absolutely clear that the Russians do expect the entirety of Zaporosia and her son to be transferred to them. They're prepared to agree to a transitional arrangement to have these territories transferred to them peacefully, but they do still nonetheless expect them. There's some kind of very strange wording that seems to imply that that might be the case

or not. It's difficult to say because it's all over. the place. I mean, it's going to create, if this is the wording that's eventually used, then one can just see how, you know, how there is going to be arguments and disagreements about this and how very quickly this whole thing could fall apart. Now, to repeat again, this does actually make a departure from what we've seen previously. I mean, it's clearly a significant shift towards the Russian position. I mean, we have to say that. It doesn't go anywhere close to fulfilling what the Russians say they want. And Putin, and we need to speak about Putin, and we should do in a moment, but Putin again reiterated just after this document was published that all of the

provisions of the special military operation must be fully. fulfilled. So it doesn't look as if he's in any kind of mood of give and take here. But anyway, what this can serve as is a discussion document. It could be used as a basis for a negotiation. But this would be a long complicated process. It's absolutely not going to be resolved by the end of the year as Trump appears to want. And given that, given that, I mean, I can't help but think that it's going to not be able to keep pace with the very rapid developments in the military situation. If something like this had been proposed by Trump and his team after he was inaugurated in January, it would have marked a major breakthrough. We could have had had

a serious negotiation between the Americans and the Russians at that point, and something might have come of it. But now, at this point, with the Ukrainian forces collapsing in Dombas, it's too little too late. So it seems to me, from a Russian point of view. Right. Discussion document. I agree. Maybe this could be a document that Russia and the United States can discuss over the next year or two? Yeah. I think that's a realistic timeline, right? I mean, 28 points is a lot to discuss.

I mean, they even talk about, the document even mentions the New Stark Treaty as well. So I mean, yeah. What does that have to do with this? I mean, you're absolutely right to bring that up. I mean, that makes, I mean, that's, that's absurd. I mean, you want to discuss strategic arms limitation in. in a completely different, you know, that's a completely different set of negotiations. But it's in there.

You can't just throw everything together in this kind of way. Exactly. I mean, it has, I have to say this, this has a very amateur look about it. I mean, it's, one gets the sense of, you know, people like Kushner, who's apparently also involved in this, and Wick off and Trump himself, none of the, you know, none of the way, of them have been in the world of diplomacy before. And they're just rushing to throw everything together as quickly as they can to try to get something to stick so that they can end the fighting before Kia falls.

I mean, this is what it looks like to me. Yeah, no doubt about it. The sentence about the G8, Russia is going to be invited back to the G8. Why would they want to be part of the group of losers of the G7? I mean, you know, he have bricks and now what, Russia's just going to ditch bricks to be part of the G8 again? I mean, it's nonsense, but it's in there. And this takes me to my point. Okay, discussion document, fine.

I can accept that. Let's talk about this over the next couple of years. We got a bunch of points here. Some are connected to Ukraine. Some are not. But let's sit down over the next year or two and hash, these things out as the United States and Russia. That makes sense. But that's not how this was positioned. No. This has been positioned as a peace agreement. Yes. Exactly. So I mean, and allegedly,

according to the Financial Times, Alensky is going to sign this, or he's expected to sign this by Thanksgiving, and then it's going to be presented to Russia. Yes. And so if Alensky signs it, or even if he doesn't sign it, all the blames. going to fall on Putin and Russia on this. And we're going to get back to the same narrative of Russia. Russia does not want peace. You see, I presented, Trump is going to say, I presented a beautiful, a beautiful 28-point peace plan. It was beautiful. There's never been a peace plan like it in the history of the world. Yes. And Putin didn't want to sign it or Putin wanted to talk about it or Putin wanted to delay it. Yes. And then we're going to enter a cycle of more

escalation. Yes. Because Lindsay Graham's going to jump on that and all the neocons are going to jump on that. The media is going to jump on that. Yes. So I guess my question is twofold then, or maybe I've got three questions to throw at you. Is this document for real? Or is this, is this a fakeout? I mean, is there a real document that's floating around and this is the joke document? That's question number one. Off of that question. How would, how does Putin allow himself to get dragged into this? Because the Russians are very, if there's one thing Russia is, when it comes to diplomacy and documents and legal contracts and agreements, very, very professional, right?

Yes, yes. How did they allow themselves to be dragged into this? I mean, this document is, I mean, if a professor was going to grade this document, they would give it an F, right? And it has Russia's. And allegedly, or somehow, through Trump's marketing, through his messaging, through the media saying this is connected to Russian officials, Russia's been dragged into this as being part of these talks.

So how did Putin allow this? How did the Kremlin allow this? And my final question is, this was part of, was this part of the talks in Alaska? I mean, were they at, was this actually part of what Lavrov was talking about when he said that in Alaska we had an understanding? Well, right, there's a lot to say here. The first thing to say is that I think that this document is for real. I think there are other documents that are also floating around, which are also for real. And as I said, I come back to what I said at the beginning, different people have been shown different versions of this plan.

And apparently, and the media are saying that the Ukrainians have already tweaked part of this plan. So, there were apparently in one version of this plan, all kinds of provisions about investigating corruption in Ukraine, which the document that we are now being presented with doesn't show. So there are different versions of this. Of which, Rumsdorf negotiated this, by the way, according to sources, which is interesting in and of itself. Exactly. Exactly. So there are different versions of this floating around. As I said, the Russians are presumably, or at least Dmitrieff, remember, is also not a diplomat, by the way.

Well, I've been shown one version. Others have been shown other versions. The Russians officially are saying that they know nothing about this, that they've heard that there is some kind of discussion on the way, that it is a discussion between the Americans and the Ukrainians. Obviously, Dmitriov is up to something because we know that he has been, but the Russians are saying that as of this time, they have been presented formally speaking with nothing. And as we're making this program, the Russians are also saying that they They don't even know whether or not it's true that Zelensky has said that he really is prepared

to negotiate and discuss this document with Trump. Now, this is the point to say, by the way, because absolutely, from a Russian point of view, I think this document as it stands, I mean, cannot work. I mean, they would say that. There's lots of very interesting ideas here. It's moving, it's moving things forward. well, it's taking us in the right direction, but this is going to need an awful lot of work at least a year, at least a year, to get this together. And of course, in the meantime, the military

situation is evolving all the time, and we're not going to slow that down. So I think that, by the way, the Russians are going to stick with that. But of course, there's the other side, which is what the Ukrainians are going to say, because I cannot imagine Zelensky and the the Ukrainians agreeing to many parts of this document either, changing their constitution so that they become a neutral state again, giving up completely on NATO, withdrawing from Dombas, these kind of things, again, even the provisions about protecting minorities and things of this kind, going to be very, very difficult for the Ukrainians. So I suspect you're quite right.

I think what happened is that there was an earlier version of this document. It was then worked over with Umerov. I suspect Umarov took out more things than just the anti-corruption elements of it. In other words, he've tilted it further towards the Ukrainian side. And what we have, the Russians are going to say isn't going to work. and they're going to push back on all sorts of provisions, and they're going to say the frozen assets thing is nonsense. The demilitarized zone in Dombas is nonsense. We have to have much greater clarity about what's going to happen in Zaporogia and Herson region.

We're not interested in the G8, and this whole business about the START treaty is important, too important, to be thrown in, There's one talking point in a document like this. So we will be in this, they will say that and they will say, you know, this is something that you've come up with. We've had some input in it. But as it stands, we're not going to accept it. And we're not going to be embarrassed by it either. Now, Putin made some very interesting points because he went and met the military people. And he said things about the Ukrainian government.

He said, this isn't a government at all. This is a criminal gang. That they have no legitimacy and no legal authority, that they are, that they have usurped power. And that they're using that power in order to enrich themselves. And he brought up the topic of the golden toilet. and did so, by the way, using extraordinarily crude language, as Putin sometimes does. So, as we've discussed privately between us, and as the Russians are quite openly saying, what they're now looking for is regime change in Kiev.

For the Russians, this is an indispensable part of any negotiation process. It cannot end with Zelensky. They've already said Zelensky has no legitimacy. no authority. So one of the things the Russians are going to come back to the Americans with, and they're going to say, look, you come up with all these interesting plans, some of them we can work with, some of them we can develop. But the core of the problem now is Kiev and this criminal operation that is in control there. And that has to be changed. And that is an absolute precondition of moving forward with any negotiation.

Now, given the incredible language that Putin used, I don't think that he's going to retreat from that. And of course, Trump has made it an awful lot easier for Putin to talk in this way, because of course Trump has also talked about another government, the one in Venezuela, as a criminal operation. So why not? Why can't Putin do the same about Ukraine?

Good point. Very good point. Yeah. Ukraine will adopt EU rules on religious tolerance and protection of linguistic minorities. Okay, yeah. Let's adopt the EU rules on human rights, okay. Which would have been completely not enforced. Exactly. And again, this is, by the way, very, very sore point with the Russians, because the Russians have repeatedly brought up the fact that the position, the status of Russian speakers in the Baltic states has been terrible and that there been attempts to try to get the Europeans to take action to protect the position of Russian speakers in the Baltic states. And notwithstanding that the Baltic states are members of the EU, the Europeans have refused,

not just the European Commission, but also the European Court. Just saying. Yeah. The document does mention the Nazi ideology. It does mention that. But it mentions it in the context of all Nazi ideology and activity must be rejected and prohibited. So, I mean, that could be taken to me, all, all, every, everything, okay? It doesn't specifically focus in zero in on Gandera or anything like that.

Well, what does that, exactly, what does that even mean? I mean, we're all in agreement about that. We can all agree about that. But as you rightly said, if the Ukrainians were to come back and say that Bandera was not follow that ideology, which is, of course, what they do say. I mean, some of us who know the history would argue otherwise, but the Ukrainian version of history is that he was not that at all, that he was a Ukrainian patriot. So again, saying something in this vague way doesn't take us very far. By the way, you mentioned that it's a vague document. I saw that the Russian, official

Russian news agency, TAS, made exactly that same point about it. And remember, that is a official Russian news agency. And I can't help but think again that that must have been discussed with people in the Kremlin and the foreign ministry as well. And they say it will be rejected, all Nazi ideology will be rejected when the United States and Ukraine and other collective West countries have voted in the UN in resolutions, not condemning the ideology over multiple years. Yes, yes, yes. So, I mean, it completely contradicts the voting pattern of the collective West, the United States and Ukraine. Exactly. Yeah.

It also does say that there's going to be elections in 100 days after the agreement decide. say that. Yes. Okay. Which is, which is, there are elements that you can see the Russians want. There are elements which are intended to please the Europeans, the thing about the frozen acids and all of that. There are other elements which are intended to satisfy the Ukrainians. As a suggest, as Demetriov has had some input into this, so has Umarov. Yeah, the peace council headed by President Trump. All parties involved in the conflict, will receive full amnesty fractions committed during the war, and will undertake not to file claims or pursue complaints in the future.

That provision in the peace plan, my understanding of it from reading the reports from the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times was actually talking about corruption and having a proper audit of everything that was given to Ukraine. and Umerov changed it around. And he basically said, no, you have to, because of the scandal that we have going on, everyone's going to get full amnesty. Myself, Yermak, Zelensky. So they're spinning this. It's interesting. The media is spinning this as if this is a Russian

benefit. The media is very deceptive. And they're spinning this as if, oh, well, Putin's going to be left off the hook. But they're wrong about this. This is Umarov who changed this in order to get them off the hook. Exactly. From having any legal consequences from the corruption that took place. And I imagine not only them, I imagine a lot of other more important people outside Ukraine as well. Basically, all the theft that has taken place will be forgiven. Exactly.

From everybody. Just coming back to the point that you made, the Russians getting blamed when this all falls apart. I think that they're by now this point, by this point, I think the Russians So I come back to my question, how did this happen? I mean, because I understand what you're saying, but how did Russia just not get on top of the messaging? Did they just allow the Trump White House to run with this? I mean, how did they let it get to the point where this thing is published? Well, I think that's a fair question.

It's a very fair question. I mean, I think, again, there are going to be questions about this in Moscow. but to say to say it straightforwardly, the Russians are very good at some things. Negotiations for hard work, the professional part of negotiations, they're very good at. Public relations, they're awful at. And the way the Americans are able to spin things, the Russians have never got on top of that. And Putin is absolutely not interested in this. It's a major blind spot that he has.

But there it is. I mean, that is the reality. I think the Russians just don't care. And I think it's a major mistake they make not to care. But I mean, that's the problem. Well, the Axios article is published on Wednesday, I believe. Yeah. Wouldn't it have been best.

for Russia, the foreign ministry. The foreign ministry did issue a statement. Yeah. But maybe they should have issued a stronger statement, or maybe Peskov himself should have said something along the lines of, we have no idea what Axios is talking about. Yes. Yes. And we reject any of these claims that we were involved in any kind of negotiations. Yes. Because the result of these negotiations, at least what we're being led to believe, is that the result of these talks between the United States and Russia is this dumpster fire of a document. I mean, Russia's names attached to it. Yes.

Well, and it's interesting, Alexander, because it's being promoted as the U.S. and Russia negotiating this document and the EU and Ukraine were kept out of the loop. Yes. So wouldn't it have not been better for Russia to say, no, we're not. involved in a peace plan. We are involved in talking, but not a peace plan. At least not this thing. They absolutely should have done that. And I'm going to say something here about this, because clearly the Russians were aware that something was going on. I mean, Axi or speech spoke to Dmitriov, Dmitriev, who is not a diplomat, by the way, and who should not have been allowed

anywhere close to this, was clearly having some discussions with Witgolf and in his usual excited and over-optimistic way, was talking it up, all sorts of ways, that we can never be sure that Axios is reporting him fully and, you know, correctly. But for that very reason, Dimitio should never have spoken, gritty to Axios at all. But I'm going to say something here. I am, I'm, the Russians were caught by surprise by the Axios League and I think they were very angry about it. They knew that this was going on. They did not expect this all to come out in Axios in the way they did. They obviously complained about this to Whitgolf. Dmitriuk obviously complained about this to Wickhoff. Whitkoff then rushed out a message on X in which he, he,

obviously blamed Kellogg. He said that it had been leaked by K. Well, there's no mystery as to who K is. K is obviously Kellogg. Quite possibly was Kellogg, by the way, who leaked this. And the Russians, as always happens at these situations, were caught flat-footed and they didn't respond rapidly in the way that you said that they should have done. The Russia is a very professional operation in everything except media relations. They simply don't get it. Yeah. And why did Kellogg leak it? If it was Kellogg, let's assume K is K. Let's assume we don't know, but let's assume why did this K person leak it in order to do exactly what you just said in order to catch the Russians flat-footed, to embarrass them, and to eventually get to a

point where Russia's once again blamed for not wanting peace, which will then result in more escalation. Correct. Correct. Absolutely. The one good thing about this is that it does seem, though, that Kellogg has lost Trump's confidence. He's announced that, well, he hasn't announced, there's been no formal announcement of any kind. But the reports say that he's leaving in January, which I believe to be true, by the way. He's been telling Trump for months that all is well on the battlefront, so that Ukraine is winning, that the Russians are useless, and that the Americans could easily whip them and all that. And I think that what's started this whole process is precisely the fact that Trump has realized now that none of that was

true. So it does look as if Trump, uh, Kellogg is leaving, but like, as they say, a dying wasp, he has a steam, his tail and he's stung, uh, he's stung the Russians by leaking this document with the effect that we've seen. Yeah. All right. We will end the video there, the durand.com. We're on X, we're on Rumble, we're on Telegram. We are also on Substack. So check us out there. And the Durand Shop link is in the description box down below. Take care.