Evidently, its emergence is linked to a group within President Trump's circle—specifically Witkoff and Kushner—who were immensely impressed by the success they believe they achieved in brokering agreements between Israel and Hamas regarding the Gaza Strip. It seemed to them that a similar model could be applied to the Russian-Ukrainian war."But this was a completely flawed idea, as comparing the conflict between Israel and Hamas with the war between Russia and Ukraine is extremely dangerous and misguided. If only for the reason that Ukraine, unlike Hamas, is an independent state. Ukraine is a sovereign country that makes its own decisions about its future."Hamas, on the other hand, is dependent on a number of Persian Gulf states that seek good relations with the U.S., want to do business with them, and are authoritarian regimes. Ukraine, however, is a democratic country with a different goal: to survive and preserve itself as a state. It aspires to be a member of the European Union. Therefore, attempts to mechanically transfer the Gaza model to Ukraine are not just unacceptable, but also dangerous.This is precisely why Witkoff called Ushakov and suggested how Putin should act to disrupt the transfer of Tomahawks to Ukraine and render Volodymyr Zelenskyy's visit to the U.S. ineffective—a visit that was supposed to be successful but, in fact, became merely a formality. They truly succeeded in this first stage of the operation. Another of their goals was to cancel existing sanctions, prevent the adoption of new ones, and stop Ukraine from receiving a reparations loan from the EU.At that time, Dmitriev and Witkoff developed a 28-point plan that fully aligned with Russian interests—a plan to end the war by stripping Ukraine of its sovereignty and creating conditions for further occupation. Naturally, Ukraine could never support a document with such content. This is why Trump refrained from bringing this plan up for discussion for a long time.Subsequently, it is likely that either the Witkoff-Kushner group, seeking to profit from the plan's implementation, or the Russian side "leaked" the document into the information space. This forced Trump to publicly claim authorship and announce the start of the "plan's" implementation. If not for this information leak, the plan would have quietly "died" within the American administration: neither Rubio nor European partners would have ever supported it.Why it was important for Russia to publicize the plan in its original formRussia insisted that this specific, Russian version of the document become the basis for Trump's position. This is directly evidenced by the telephone conversations between Dmitriev and Ushakov, published by Bloomberg. It was critically important to them that the plan remain unchanged. As for the motive behind the emergence of the recorded conversations with Ushakov, the theory is this: after Rubio and European partners began to actively rewrite the document, making it acceptable to the West, Russia lost interest. To exit a process that no longer aligned with its goals, the recordings of conversations between Witkoff and Ushakov, and Dmitriev and Ushakov, were released. Because Putin does not need a real peace agreement for now."This large-scale information manipulation shows that Russia is ready to end the war—but exclusively on its own terms, which entail the liquidation of Ukrainian sovereignty and the complete defeat of Ukraine."Who in Ukraine supports this plan and whyThe people calling for the implementation of this plan are not actually advocating for peace, because peace cannot be achieved this way. Peace with Russia is possible only through strength. For this, we need support from the U.S.—in the form of sanctions—and support from the European Union, particularly funding for Ukraine in the form of a reparations loan or other instruments that will allow the state to survive the next year.Russia wanted to disrupt this very funding, which is why it initiated the most rapid promotion of its "peace plan" on its own terms.As always in such situations, politicians have emerged who are trying to take advantage of the chaos to earn the favor of Witkoff, Kushner, other people in Trump's circle, and perhaps even Putin himself. It is they who are promoting Russian narratives, calling for the plan's adoption, and voicing anti-European slogans that appeal to both Trump's circle and the Kremlin.After all, what unites these two forces today is the desire to see a weak Europe and to decide Europe's fate without Europe itself.On 'loss of sovereignty' as a tool of Russian and far-right propagandaSuch woeful politicians are imposing on Ukrainian society the narrative that Ukraine's accession to the EU would mean a loss of sovereignty. But these slogans are not new. All far-right parties that want to weaken the EU have been using them for many years.For instance, British politician Nigel Farage declares: "We must free ourselves from the shackles of the European Union and reclaim our sovereignty." Viktor Orbán says the same thing: "Brussels must respect our sovereignty. We will not allow its will to be imposed on us."All these forces—both in Great Britain and in the EU—oppose the European Union and simultaneously do not support Ukraine. Now, similar politicians are emerging in our country as well: they dream of coming to power through the support of Russia and certain groups in Trump's circle.But these dreams are dangerous for Ukraine. After all, it is precisely membership in the EU and the support of the EU that are our greatest guarantees of security, survival, and the very existence of the Ukrainian state.SourceAbout the author. Mykola Kniazhytskyi, journalist, Ukrainian MP.The editors do not always share the opinions expressed by the authors of blogs or columns.