KYIV, July 11 — When President Volodymyr Zelenskyy first unrolled his 10-point peace formula at the G20 summit in November 2022, the document demanded, among other things, the full withdrawal of Russian troops, restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and accountability for war crimes. Russia’s response then was a flat rejection, coupled with a counter-demand that the world recognise Moscow’s September 2022 annexation of four Ukrainian regions: Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. The 10-point plan is a sequenced framework.
Point one covers radiation and nuclear safety. Point two demands food security.
Point three addresses energy security. Point four calls for the release of all prisoners and deportees. Point five demands implementation of the UN Charter and restoration of territorial integrity.
Point six insists on the withdrawal of Russian troops and cessation of hostilities. Point seven seeks justice and accountability for war crimes.
Point eight aims at prevention of ecocide. Point nine asks for security guarantees for Ukraine. And point ten proposes a conference on ending the war.
Ukraine has spent years building diplomatic momentum behind this framework. Multiple UN General Assembly resolutions have endorsed the plan, including Resolution ES-11/6 in February 2023. Ukraine convened international summits to promote the plan — in Copenhagen in June 2023 and in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, in August 2023.
Each gathering widened the circle of countries willing to discuss the terms, even if Russia itself stayed away. The catch has always been Russia’s refusal to engage.
Moscow has insisted that any peace settlement must begin with recognition of its annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson — a condition that directly contradicts point five of the Ukrainian plan. For more than two years, the public record showed no daylight between the Kremlin’s stated position and any internal dissent. That changed in February 2025.
Zelenskyy made a claim, since then the first public indication of its kind, that elements within Putin’s own circle had begun to express support for the 10-point plan. No names were attached to that claim.
No documents were produced. But the assertion itself marked a shift in the diplomatic narrative — a suggestion, however unverifiable, that the walls around the Kremlin’s negotiating position may not be as solid as they appear. If the claim of internal backing is accurate, it would represent the first crack in Russia’s unified rejection of the plan.
If it is not, the diplomatic effort remains stalled at the same impasse that has defined the conflict since 2022. The plan’s structure places the hardest political concessions — territorial integrity, troop withdrawal, war crimes accountability — in the middle of the list, bookended by issues where compromise has historically been easier: nuclear safety, food security, prisoner exchanges. What to watch next is whether any further evidence emerges to substantiate Zelenskyy’s claim of internal Russian backing.
Without it, the 10-point plan remains a document endorsed by international bodies and discussed at summits, but without a negotiating partner on the other side. With it, the diplomatic terrain shifts — not necessarily toward a settlement, but toward the possibility of one.
