How Europe struggled to regain influence after Trump’s Ukraine peace plan leaked

Donald Trump with Volodymyr Zelenskyy (File photo)

European leaders were caught off guard when President Trump’s proposed peace plan for Ukraine surfaced in the media before any official communication reached them. Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany reportedly first learned of the document from a news headline, not from American diplomats.

His team scrambled to secure a call with the U.S. president to understand the plan, which outlined major concessions to Russia, limited Ukraine’s autonomy and barred future NATO membership for Kyiv, the New York Times reported.

Senior European officials had known the U.S. was drafting a proposal, but the substance of the leaked 28-point plan stunned them. The proposal appeared to side heavily with Moscow, granting it more territory than its forces currently occupy and rolling back long-standing Western positions on Ukraine’s sovereignty. European ministers heading into a scheduled Brussels meeting the same day were left scrambling for clarity.

A continent left out

The leak made clear that Europe had not been included in the Trump administration’s back-channel negotiations. Multiple officials described a sense of disbelief that the United States would attempt to reshape Europe’s security environment without consulting its closest allies. The frustration was compounded by comments from U.S. Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, who reportedly said Europe had been excluded to avoid “too many cooks” and because European officials were “too close” to Ukraine to assess the war objectively.

The sudden revelation forced

European capitals into crisis mode. German officials cancelled public events. Diplomats began urgent calls to Kyiv and to each other. At the Brussels meeting, foreign ministers questioned Ukraine’s representative, Andrii Sybiha, about whether Kyiv had been briefed. He had limited information, mirroring their own confusion.

The dilemma for Ukraine and Europe

For Ukraine, the plan posed a precarious choice: either reject it and risk alienating Washington, or engage with it and risk legitimising terms that undercut its sovereignty. President Volodymyr Zelensky acknowledged the difficult position publicly, noting that Ukraine could face the loss of “dignity” or a key partner depending on how it responded.

European governments confronted a similar dilemma. Outright rejection risked antagonising the U.S. administration and losing any influence over the plan’s evolution. Accepting it wholesale risked endorsing a proposal that clashed with core European principles, including the idea that borders cannot be changed by force.

A strategy of engagement forms

By the time European leaders gathered at the G20 summit in South Africa, a consensus began to form: they needed to engage with Washington, not oppose it. António Costa, president of the European Council, and Ursula von der Leyen, head of the European Commission, coordinated discussions with Zelensky and other European heads of government. Leaders began shaping a unified set of principles: no territorial concessions imposed by force, no limitations on Ukraine’s armed forces, and no decisions about Europe’s security without Europe’s involvement.

A joint statement cautiously welcomed U.S. efforts while signalling that the draft required “additional work.” Behind the scenes, top EU diplomats rushed to Geneva, where Secretary of State Marco Rubio was scheduled to meet Ukrainian officials.

Europe pushes back in Geneva

In Geneva, European envoys held a series of urgent meetings with Ukrainian and American officials. Although initially sidelined, they eventually secured a meeting with Rubio’s team late on Sunday. According to several officials, Rubio privately assured them that issues affecting European nations would not be finalised without their involvement. He publicly described the proposal as a “living, breathing document” open to changes — a marked shift in tone that generated cautious optimism in Brussels.

Lingering uncertainty

Despite this tactical victory, European unity remained fragile. Disagreements continued over funding Ukraine in 2026, and questions lingered over whether the United States would continue including Europe in substantive negotiations. Russia also signalled resistance to the plan, complicating any momentum toward a cease-fire.

Still, leaders such as Germany’s foreign minister described the weekend’s outcome as a “win” for European diplomacy. But as Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk warned, optimism had to be tempered. Europe could not afford to alienate the United States — yet it also could not allow major decisions about the continent’s security to be made without it.