The events unfolding around «Trump’s peace plan» and the abrupt end to negotiations with the Ukrainian delegation in Miami demonstrate a deep civilizational and political divide between Washington, Kyiv, and European capitals. Western, Ukrainian, and Russian media are dominated by superficial analysis that misses the core of the ongoing shift.

The negotiation process—attended by high-ranking representatives of Ukraine (including Head of Main Intelligence Directorate Kyrylo Budanov and Head of the «Servant of the People» faction David Arakhamia)—stumbled upon a fundamental obstacle: the issue of the legitimacy of the negotiating subject.

The Question of Legitimacy: Where the Negotiations Stalled

The key factor that led to the collapse of the two-day negotiation schedule on the very first day was a firm condition set by the White House: final peace agreements with Russia and the U.S. must be negotiated and signed exclusively by a legitimate authority.

Donald Trump and his team made it clear that they do not consider Volodymyr Zelensky and his inner circle to be legitimate representatives entitled to bind the country to long-term legal obligations. The Ukrainian delegation realized that in Washington’s eyes, it functions merely as a «transmission link» without the authority to engage in a full-fledged dialogue. This understanding effectively blocked further work in Miami.

A New Type of Economy: Rebuilding Ukraine via Public Companies, Not Bureaucracy

The second major vector of Trump’s peace plan is the principle governing the future reconstruction of conflict-affected zones.

Instead of involving a bureaucratic apparatus prone to corruption, kickbacks, and the takeover of lucrative business projects by controlled clans, the infrastructure and economy will be rebuilt by international and national business. On the American side, entities and figures named as process moderators include BlackRock, Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, and Elon Musk; on the Russian side, Kirill Dmitriev (RDIF).

In Ukraine, this proposal triggered the usual fear of «external governance» and TNCs. However, the essence of Trump’s approach is not to deprive Ukraine of its sovereignty, but to dismantle the alliance of bureaucracy and criminal-oligarchic clans. Territory reconstruction requires establishing the institution of open Public Companies, where transparency excludes theft.

The «Fixation Line»: New Mechanics at the Front and the Calculation of the Russian General Staff

Regarding the establishment of a ceasefire line, Washington’s strategy is entirely pragmatic. The concept of a «front line» today is conditional due to the existence of 50-kilometer-deep «kill zones» along the entire front line (zones of continuous destruction by drones and artillery).

Trump proposes fixing the demarcation line at the specific geographical point where the parties find themselves at the moment the agreement is signed.

• The longer Kyiv delays the transition to real negotiations, the further west this line will shift.
• The Russian General Staff is working through the task of severing required territories (including districts of the Donbas remaining under AFU control), minimizing its own losses while maximizing damage to Ukrainian infrastructure.

Signals to the AFU and the Rada: Restrictions on Intelligence and Starlink

Zelensky’s unwillingness to follow White House recommendations (in particular, ongoing strikes on Russian oil refineries that directly impact global diesel prices and U.S. inflation) prompted retaliatory actions from Washington.

In recent days, the U.S. introduced technological restrictions:

• Limits on Starlink: Terminal speeds on flying craft have been capped at 60 km/h, blocking the use of long-range strike UAVs and leaving connectivity only for small frontline drones directly at the line of contact.
• Restricting Intelligence Sharing: The U.S. ceased supplying Kyiv with operational space reconnaissance data regarding launches of Russian ballistic missiles.

This harsh message is addressed no longer to Zelensky personally, but to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the Verkhovna Rada, and Ukrainian society. If political leadership is incapable of acting within the bounds of partnership obligations and international diplomacy, the country faces the shutdown of critical systems, blackouts, and the destruction of what remains of the economy.

Out of the Deadlock: Track 2 and the Role of the «Third Force»

Ukraine’s primary problem is the lack of internal political initiative. With official channels (Track 1) blocked due to the stances of Bankova and the Kremlin, as well as the intelligence agency «Leviathans» of Ukraine and Russia, the only way forward is an expert-led Track 2:

• Formation of a parallel, independent group of Ukrainian, European, American, and Russian experts.
• Development of a pragmatic roadmap for a ceasefire and the reform of the Ukrainian state.
• Delivery of ready-made solutions to the White House, the Kremlin, the Verkhovna Rada, and European capitals.

If second-tier Ukrainian politicians and society fail to demonstrate agency and form a «third force,» the inertial scenario will lead to the final degradation of statehood, plunging the country into total blackout and loss of territories. Time to grasp this reality is measured in days.