Bloomberg has published intercepted conversations suggesting that a Kremlin-drafted peace proposal for Ukraine was deliberately routed to Donald Trump’s team with the intention that it be presented as an American initiative rather than a Russian one.
One recording from 29 October captures a call between Yuri Ushakov, Vladimir Putin’s long-standing foreign policy aide, and Kirill Dmitriev, head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund and a key presidential confidant on Ukraine. In it, the two men discuss how to transmit a Russian “peace plan” to Steve Witkoff, a long-time Trump associate and the US president’s special envoy on Russia.
Dmitriev is reported as proposing that a paper reflecting Moscow’s position be passed to Witkoff on an entirely informal basis, allowing the Trump camp to present the ideas as its own work. The Russian financier says the document will be drawn up “in our position” and then handed over quietly so that the Americans “can make it as their own”, while expressing the hope that the eventual US version will remain “as close as possible” to the Russian original.
The call also suggests a conscious strategy of tabling maximal demands. Ushakov and Dmitriev debate “how strongly Moscow should push for its demands” in any potential settlement, with Dmitriev indicating that there is little point advancing a plan unless it reflects Russia’s full negotiating position from the outset.
Ushakov is heard worrying about the political risk. He warns that Trump’s envoys might change the draft and then claim that the modifications had been cleared with Moscow. “They may not take [our version], but say that it is agreed with us. That is what I am afraid of… They can then twist everything,” he says. Dmitriev replies that he will ask Witkoff to keep the wording “word for word” and assures Ushakov the process will be handled “carefully”, adding that the Kremlin aide will have an opportunity to discuss the text with Witkoff directly.
A separate recording, dated 14 October and also attributed to Bloomberg, appears to show Witkoff himself coaching Ushakov on how Putin should speak to Trump about Ukraine. In that call, Witkoff reportedly urges Putin to congratulate Trump on the Gaza deal, praise him as a “man of peace” and then outline a plan for Ukraine, including Russian control of Donetsk and potential land swaps, as something Trump could sell as a personal diplomatic success.
These disclosures come against the backdrop of a 28-point US peace plan on Ukraine, unveiled this month and immediately criticised in Kyiv and across Europe as heavily aligned with Russian interests. Reuters has reported that the US framework drew directly on a Russian “non-paper” submitted to the Trump administration in October, which set out conditions including Ukrainian territorial concessions in the east, limits on the size of the Ukrainian armed forces and a commitment to NATO neutrality.
The content of the 28-point plan reflects those themes. It envisages Ukraine ceding control of occupied territories, accepting long-term restrictions on its military and remaining outside NATO, in return for a ceasefire and a broader political settlement.
Questions over authorship have been reinforced by linguistic analysis. The Guardian’s Luke Harding and other commentators have pointed to a series of phrases and structures in the English text that appear to be literal translations from Russian. One oft-cited example is the third point: “It is expected that Russia will not invade neighbouring countries and Nato will not expand further.” Analysts note that the passive “it is expected” is common in Russian bureaucratic language (“ожидается”) but sounds markedly awkward in modern English usage. The new audio material, in which Dmitriev speaks of passing a Russian paper for the Americans “to make it as their own”, appears to support that interpretation.
Following strong criticism from Kyiv, European capitals and members of the US Congress, the 28-point proposal was subsequently revised. Ukrainian and European delegations meeting in Geneva cut nine points and produced a 19-point version, removing at least one of the most contentious provisions. However, key issues – including territorial control, Ukraine’s future relationship with NATO and the permitted size of its armed forces – have been left for direct talks between Presidents Trump and Zelenskyy.
The political handling of the plan in Washington has been mixed. US senators have told that, in a private briefing, Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the text as a Russian “wish list”, characterising it as a proposal originating in Moscow rather than in Washington. Rubio has since stated publicly that the peace proposal was developed by the United States, while acknowledging that Russian ideas had been received and discussed.
Trump has publicly defended Witkoff’s conduct following the leak, describing the envoy’s discussions with Russian officials as “standard negotiating practice” and saying that a mediator has to “sell” any compromise to both sides.
Dmitriev has dismissed the recordings as fake, while the Kremlin has neither fully confirmed nor denied their authenticity; Ushakov has acknowledged contacts with Witkoff and warned that leaks could damage US-Russian relations.
For Kyiv and many European observers, the combination of the leaked calls, the linguistic trail and the subsequent revisions to the plan has sharpened concerns that a Kremlin-drafted blueprint was fed into US deliberations, then re-presented as a Washington peace initiative. With Zelenskyy now signalling conditional readiness to work from the revised 19-point framework, but insisting on changes to the most controversial clauses, the provenance of the original text is likely to remain a central point of contention as talks move forward.
Linguistic clues in Trump’s ‘peace proposal’ point to Russian drafting
