If Trump Wants Peace He must Bring Down NATO and Its Puppet Zelenskyy

Nov. 21—Sources close to the White House report that it did not want the public disclosure of sensitive negotiations on a Ukrainian peace plan with the Russians and that these were leaked to the NATO‑friendly media by President Donald Trump's chief Ukrainian peace negotiator Gen. Keith Kellogg to sabotage the efforts. These sources report that despite these leaks to the NATO‑leak sheet Axios, the Economist and the Financial Times, the discussions on the plan continue to proceed around a frame established verbally between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin at last summer's Alaska summit. 

Meanwhile, an angry Trump has reportedly called Kellogg to the carpet, and it has been announced that he will leave the government when his term expires early next year.

Shift in Trump’s Thinking on NATO and Ukraine

The sources stressed that what is most important about the peace process being steered by Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and his Russian counterpart Kirill Dimitriev is that it is intended to produce a written document jointly supported by the United States and Russia, and marks a shift in President Trump's thinking about NATO's losing war in Ukraine. Trump no longer believes faked intelligence coming from NATO and its Ukrainian dictator Volodymyr Zelenskyy that Ukraine is holding its own or even winning against a relentless Russian onslaught on the eastern front. He has been given an intelligence assessment from the CIA and other American agencies that says the war is hopelessly lost, and that casualty figures showing massive Russian losses have been faked.

Trump is reported to have thrown aside charts and maps ostensibly showing Ukraine's military success at last month's White House meeting with Zelenskyy, where he refused the dictator's request for advanced Tomahawk cruise missiles that could strike deep inside Russia. "Don't show me this shit," he shouted at Zelenskyy, who nonetheless persuaded Trump to go with a plan for a "ceasefire in place," backed by Kellogg and the Europeans and rejected by the Russians, without security concessions that NATO and Zelenskyy refused to make on ending Ukraine's bid for NATO membership.

Sanctions, Setbacks, and Return to Alaska Concept

Kellogg along with Secretary of State Marco Rubio had, according to one source, "sold Trump a bag of shit, that the Russians could be brought to the table by continuing military aid to the beleaguered Ukrainians and applying stiff sanctions on the Russian energy sector, aimed at halting Chinese purchases of Russian oil and gas. 

"So, Trump backed away from Alaska and went with the sanctions. The sanctions have been shown to have zero effect on Chinese policy towards Russia. They will not reduce energy purchases. It is hard for the President to accept this, but he has almost zero leverage on Russia. In the last weeks, he has pivoted back to the Alaska 'land for peace' concept, accepting the reality of the battlefield, with his thinking being Ukraine needs to make concessions now before all is lost on the battlefield. This thinking is still rejected by Kellogg, the Europeans, Rubio, and Zelenskyy, but it has informed Witkoff's approach to the renewed talks."

Outline of the Peace Plan

The outlines of the plan were reportedly presented by Army Secretary Driscoll to Zelenskyy in Kyiv this morning; Driscoll was sent there by Trump with a military delegation to discuss the state of fighting with military figures, and not just the civilian government. The New York Post says that Trump wants Ukraine to sign off on the 28‑point plan before Thanksgiving, or face a total cut‑off of American aid, including intelligence needed to program its weapon systems.

These and other sources now say the following elements have been agreed to and are reflected in the current written text, which few people have actually seen.

• There will be no NATO membership for Ukraine, not now, not ever. European Union membership would be possible.
• Ukraine will give up its remaining positions in Donbas to Russian control. An absurd idea, reportedly suggested by Kellogg, that Russia would pay rent on this land is no longer there. It is agreed that for the time being, Russia would station no troops there, but that could change in the future. There would be other changes in the borders of other regions, with some Russian‑held land ceded back to Ukraine.
• There would be no formal concession of sovereignty by Ukraine over Donbas or the other three oblasts that have joined the Russian Federation, along with Crimea, although Russian control would be recognized by the United States.
• No foreign troops of any kind for any purpose would be stationed in Ukraine. This means that the so‑called peacekeeping force that is one of the main features of the European/Kellogg plan is abandoned.
• Instead, both parties would state their non‑aggression positions towards the other. The security of Ukraine and Russia would be guaranteed by the United States in a manner similar to, but not identical with NATO's Article 5 commitment.
• The Ukrainian armed forces would be reduced to about 50,000 and could possess no long‑range weapons. Other reports have had different size ranges for the AFU, including a high figure reported by the New York Post of 600,000 personnel.
• Russian would be declared as the second national language of Ukraine. It has already made its comeback as the most‑spoken language, even in the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The Russian Orthodox Church would be restored to full status, with any properties seized returned. These two points would mark the utter failure and collapse of the whole Maidan project that has led to this current crisis.
• There will be no reparations of any kind. Instead, there will be a massive economic reconstruction and development program, the shape and funding of which have yet to be worked out.
• The document talks of a new security architecture for all of Europe, that would imply a new non‑aggressive role for NATO, as well as for Russia, that would usher in a new era of peace and prosperity for all of Europe and Russia.
• The plan reportedly calls for elections in Ukraine within 100 days of its signing. Zelenskyy had cancelled scheduled elections in 2024, declaring martial law which enabled him to rule without a mandate from the people.

Obstacles and Corruption Allegations

Sources contacted stressed that there are many details that need to be refined, but that the key elements make it clear that Ukraine and NATO have suffered a major defeat in their plans to destroy the Russian Federation and its leader Vladimir Putin. They report that these are harsher terms for Ukraine and NATO than the Istanbul agreement of April 2022, which Putin and Zelenskyy were prepared to sign, but was sabotaged by then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the Biden White House. As such, most sources say there is little or no chance that either NATO or Zelenskyy, or for that matter anyone in current leadership circles in Ukraine, would ever accept this plan.

As one source, with decades of experience in the region, put it: "NATO would prefer to suffer a military defeat, as would the massively corrupt Ukrainian government and elite. Terms would then be imposed on them, rather than suffer the humiliation of having them imposed by Trump. So, NATO and Zelenskyy remain the obstacles to peace and want the killing to continue. Trump now understands this.

'Does Trump have any real leverage here?' the source continued. 'Yes, he does. First, he can bring down the Ukrainian government in a way that would force a halt to further public and other support for the war effort. All he needs to do is to call for a full accounting of all U.S. aid provided Ukraine. This would reveal that billions of dollars of weapons and munitions have been sold off by the Ukrainians who run the world's largest weapons bazaar, selling American weapons, including advanced weapons to drug cartels, terrorists and anyone who has the cash. This operation is reportedly run by Zelenskyy's chief of the Presidential Office, Andriy Yermak. Revealing this level of corruption would allow for opposition leaders or the military to lay the blame for Ukraine's defeat and severe peace demands on Zelenskyy and his corruption.'"

Future of NATO and Security Architecture

But this source pointed out that at this moment there is no one among the opposition who will step forward to accept terms so favorable to the Russians. Such leaders would fear that a new government could emerge which would seek closer relations and even collaboration with Moscow, which would wipe away the whole Maidan crowd. This has caused some "experts" to say that they expect the current attacks on Zelenskyy to weaken, following reaffirmation of support from European NATO.

There is also another route to peace: force the end of NATO, and its warnings about a Putin invasion of Europe. Trump, these sources say, could simply declare that NATO's opposition to ending a war which its policies provoked means that Europe should go it alone, that the U.S. would simply leave the alliance, or worse, refuse to honor its Article 5. If Europe wants a war, then let it have that war—without the involvement or protection of the United States.

"In a new security architecture for Europe, based on reality not fear of the boogeyman Putin, what is the role of NATO?" said a source close to the current discussion. "It becomes an artifact of a bygone time. Trump could acknowledge this, but does he have the guts to do so? We shall likely get to see if he does."