In a stark warning during a recent meeting in Kyiv, U.S. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll told Ukrainian officials their forces face “imminent defeat” on the battlefield and urged immediate acceptance of President Donald Trump’s peace proposal before the situation worsens further.

Driscoll emphasized that Russian attacks are intensifying, Moscow can sustain the war indefinitely, and the U.S. defense industry cannot maintain current levels of weapons and air defense supplies to Ukraine. He presented the U.S.-backed plan as the best option now, warning that delaying negotiations would leave Ukraine in an even weaker position.

Deepening Rift Inside Trump Administration Over Ukraine Strategy

The meeting highlights a growing divide within the Trump administration on how to end the Russia-Ukraine war. One faction, led by Vice President JD Vance and special envoy Steve Witkoff, views Ukraine as the main obstacle to peace and favors using American leverage to force major concessions from Kyiv.

The opposing group, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, blames Russia for the unprovoked invasion and insists on maintaining sanctions and pressure on Moscow until it relents. This internal conflict has Trump oscillating between approaches, complicating U.S. policy.

The Controversial 28-Point Peace Proposal and Its Evolution

The plan, leaked last week, initially embraced Russia’s core demands: freezing frontlines (ceding occupied territories), limiting Ukraine’s military, and barring NATO membership. Kyiv officials saw it as capitulation, prompting revisions after European pushback and congressional concerns.

Rubio, who led Geneva talks over the weekend, described them as the “most productive” yet, resulting in a “refined framework” with “clear next steps.” However, some provisions, like implied U.S. troop bans in Poland, contradicted prior administration stances.

U.S. Allies and Lawmakers Express Alarm Over Plan’s Direction

Republican Senators Lindsey Graham and Roger Wicker criticized the original draft as “problematic” and unlikely to achieve true peace. European leaders, including Finland’s President Alexander Stubb, warned against “yielding to the aggressor.”

Ukraine’s Ambassador Olga Stefanishyna called it an “unattainable wish list” for negotiations, emphasizing Kyiv’s refusal to sign the initial version. The revisions have reduced it to 19 points, but core issues like territorial concessions persist.

Trump’s Push for Quick Resolution Amid Internal Tensions

Trump has set a flexible Thanksgiving deadline for acceptance, calling the current draft “not my final offer.” He warned Zelenskyy could “fight his little heart out” otherwise, hinting at potential aid cuts.

The administration rift pits Vance’s camp, favoring leverage on Kyiv, against Rubio’s, advocating pressure on Russia. Former U.S. diplomats note this public split hinders coherent policy.

Global Reactions and Potential Path Forward

Ukraine’s national security secretary Rustem Umerov expressed optimism about the 19-point version, hinting at a possible Zelenskyy Washington visit. Russia’s Lavrov welcomed the initial draft but suggested revisions contradict prior Trump-Putin talks.

Driscoll continued diplomacy in Abu Dhabi, meeting Russian delegates. Experts like William Taylor warn prolonged division could undermine U.S. efforts.

Broader Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy

The Ukraine strategy rift reflects Trump’s second-term challenges in balancing “America First” isolationism with global commitments. Vance’s approach risks alienating NATO allies, while Rubio’s maintains pressure on Russia but faces domestic pushback.

If the plan fails, it could embolden Putin and strain transatlantic ties. Success, however, would bolster Trump’s peacemaker image ahead of 2026 midterms.