Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine -- is it real or just a phantom?
November 20 is a day that may go down in history textbooks as a day of great diplomatic intrigue or as an example of the largest information and psychological operation since Russia launched its full-fledged invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. President Volodymyr Zelensky met with Donald Trump’s envoys from the Pentagon and officially received from them a blueprint of what Washington is referring to as a “peace plan”. This event, shrouded in silence by officials, immediately and dramatically dominated public conversation and debate.
What the plan is about or what its main points are is highly uncertain yet. The Western media, however, have already exploded with details. And what is published in the columns of influential newspapers is shocking to the average Ukrainian, and causes deep skepticism among the expert community.
ANATOMY OF “BETRAYAL”: 28 POINTS THAT SHOCKED THE WORLD
Before diving into the analysis of expert opinions, it is worth outlining the contours of reality that are already known for sure. Despite the pressure being exerted on Ukraine by the Trump administration, its official position remains unchanged.
First, Ukraine categorically refuses to discuss territorial concessions as such, but demonstrates readiness for difficult discussions about the status of occupied territories.
Second, Kyiv rejects any possibility of a ban on the production of its own long-range weapons – this is a matter of existential survival.
Third, Ukraine stands ready to consider the concept of “limitations on the size of its Armed Forces”. An important clarification here is that this is not about reductions in regular military personnel during peacetime, but about certain limitations in exchange for firm security guarantees for Kyiv and, critically important, a proportional limitation on the strength of the Russian Federation’s army.
Europe, which is obviously not really enthusiastic about the initiatives coming from over the ocean, has actively engaged in the process. On November 21, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz held talks with Volodymyr Zelensky, Emmanuel Macron, and Keir Starmer. The European leaders reaffirmed their full support for Ukraine, welcomed the US efforts, but, most importantly, rejected key parts of the American plan.
EU leaders Antonio Costa, Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas took a similarly tough position. The latter clearly emphasized that Europe will not support the plan if it doesn’t involve Ukraine and the European Union, or will not yield a just and lasting peace.
But what do the “peacemakers” really propose? On November 18, US online news outlet Axios, citing its own sources, reported about secret consultations being held between the Trump administration and the Russian side. The key figures there are the White House’s envoy Steve Witkoff and the Kremlin’s representative Kirill Dmitriev. It was this tandem, according to Axios, that devised this “28-point peace plan”.
Initially, the Financial Times published only part of the plan, which looked like a list of surrender ultimatums: Kyiv must cede its Donetsk region in its entirety, downsize its armed forces in half, grant the Russian language the official status, and legalize the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. Later on, the list was supplemented with even more odious demands: a rejection of NATO membership aspirations, a ban on the deployment of foreign peacekeepers, amnesty for war criminals, and the lifting of all sanctions.
On November 20, the world saw another, already full version of this document. And if this is indeed the text that was put on the table in Kyiv, then the situation looks extremely serious. Here is the full list of what is defined as the “American proposal” (distilled version):
1. Ukraine’s sovereignty will be confirmed (declarative clause).
2. A comprehensive non-aggression agreement will be concluded between Russia, Ukraine and Europe. All ambiguities of the last 30 years will be considered settled.
3. It is expected that Russia will not invade neighboring countries and NATO will not expand further.
4. A dialogue will be held between Russia and NATO, mediated by the United States, to resolve all security issues and create conditions for de-escalation in order to ensure global security and increase opportunities for cooperation and future economic development.
5. Ukraine will receive reliable security guarantees.
6. The size of the Ukrainian Armed Forces will be limited to 600,000 personnel.
7. Ukraine agrees to enshrine in its constitution that it will not join NATO, and NATO agrees to include in its statutes a provision that Ukraine will not be admitted in the future.
8. NATO agrees not to station troops in Ukraine.
9. European fighter jets will be stationed in Poland.
10. The US guarantee:
- The US will receive compensation for the guarantee;
- If Ukraine invades Russia, it will lose the guarantee;
- If Russia invades Ukraine, in addition to a decisive coordinated military response, all global sanctions will be reinstated, recognition of the new territory and all other benefits of this deal will be revoked;
- If Ukraine launches a missile at Moscow or St Petersburg without cause, the security guarantee will be deemed invalid.
11. Ukraine is eligible for EU membership and will receive short-term preferential access to the European market while this issue is being considered.
12. A powerful global package of measures to rebuild Ukraine, including but not limited to:
- The creation of a Ukraine Development Fund to invest in fast-growing industries, including technology, data centers, and artificial intelligence.
- The United States will cooperate with Ukraine to jointly rebuild, develop, modernize, and operate Ukraine's gas infrastructure, including pipelines and storage facilities.
- Joint efforts to rehabilitate war-affected areas for the restoration, reconstruction and modernization of cities and residential areas.
- Infrastructure development.
- Extraction of minerals and natural resources.
- The World Bank will develop a special financing package to accelerate these efforts.
13. Russia will be reintegrated into the global economy:
- The lifting of sanctions will be discussed and agreed upon in stages and on a case-by-case basis.
- The United States will enter into a long-term economic cooperation agreement for mutual development in the areas of energy, natural resources, infrastructure, artificial intelligence, data centres, rare earth metal extraction projects in the Arctic, and other mutually beneficial corporate opportunities.
- Russia will be invited to rejoin the G8.
14. Frozen funds will be used as follows:
- $100bn (£76bn) in frozen Russian assets will be invested in US-led efforts to rebuild and invest in Ukraine;
- The US will receive 50% of the profits from this venture. Europe will add $100bn (£76bn) to increase the amount of investment available for Ukraine's reconstruction. Frozen European funds will be unfrozen. The remainder of the frozen Russian funds will be invested in a separate US-Russian investment vehicle that will implement joint projects in specific areas. This fund will be aimed at strengthening relations and increasing common interests to create a strong incentive not to return to conflict.
15. A joint American-Russian working group on security issues will be established to promote and ensure compliance with all provisions of this agreement.
16. Russia will enshrine in law its policy of non-aggression towards Europe and Ukraine.
17. The United States and Russia will agree to extend the validity of treaties on the non-proliferation and control of nuclear weapons, including the START I Treaty.
18. Ukraine agrees to be a non-nuclear state in accordance with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
19. The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant will be launched under the supervision of the IAEA, and the electricity produced will be distributed equally between Russia and Ukraine - 50:50.
20. Both countries undertake to implement educational programmes in schools and society aimed at promoting understanding and tolerance of different cultures and eliminating racism and prejudice:
- Ukraine will adopt EU rules on religious tolerance and the protection of linguistic minorities.
- Both countries will agree to abolish all discriminatory measures and guarantee the rights of Ukrainian and Russian media and education.
- All Nazi ideology and activities must be rejected and prohibited.
21. Territories:
- Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk will be recognised as de facto Russian, including by the United States.
- Kherson and Zaporizhzhia will be frozen along the line of contact, which will mean de facto recognition along the line of contact.
- Russia will relinquish other agreed territories it controls outside the five regions.
Ukrainian forces will withdraw from the part of Donetsk Oblast that they currently control, and this withdrawal zone will be considered a neutral demilitarised buffer zone, internationally recognised as territory belonging to the Russian Federation. Russian forces will not enter this demilitarised zone.
22. After agreeing on future territorial arrangements, both the Russian Federation and Ukraine undertake not to change these arrangements by force. Any security guarantees will not apply in the event of a breach of this commitment.
23. Russia will not prevent Ukraine from using the Dnieper [Dnipro] River for commercial activities, and agreements will be reached on the free transport of grain across the Black Sea.
24. A humanitarian committee will be established to resolve outstanding issues:
- All remaining prisoners and bodies will be exchanged on an 'all for all' basis.
- All civilian detainees and hostages will be returned, including children.
- A family reunification program will be implemented.
- Measures will be taken to alleviate the suffering of the victims of the conflict.
25. Ukraine will hold elections in 100 days.
26. All parties involved in this conflict will receive full amnesty for their actions during the war and agree not to make any claims or consider any complaints in the future.
27. This agreement will be legally binding. Its implementation will be monitored and guaranteed by the Peace Council, headed by President Donald J Trump. Sanctions will be imposed for violations.
28. Once all parties agree to this memorandum, the ceasefire will take effect immediately after both sides retreat to agreed points to begin implementation of the agreement.
The first thing that comes to mind after reading this “plan” is that it looks very much like the document was written in the Kremlin, not the White House. There are too many points that look like the embodiment of the Russian imperialists’ wet dreams. Moreover, some experts believe that the publication of all these “plans” in the media is part of a targeted information campaign. Again, we do not discount this possibility. After all, as a British saying has it, "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck".
About the British, by the way. In his recent reporting for The Guardian, journalist Luke Harding has highlighted that the language used in the proposed U.S.-Russia 28-point peace plan suggests that parts of it may have been originally drafted in Russian before being translated into English. Harding notes several phrases and words that sound unnatural or "stilted" in English but would be common and natural translations from Russian. He points specifically to clause three of the document, which reads: "It is expected that Russia will not invade neighboring countries, and NATO will not expand further". Harding notes that while "it is expected" is an awkward passive construction in English, its Russian equivalent, "ozhidayetsya", is a standard verb form that fits the sentence perfectly. Harding also suggested that the words "ambiguities" (from the clause "all ambiguities of the last 30 years will be considered settled") and "to enshrine" (from "Ukraine agrees to enshrine in its constitution that it will not join NATO") could be direct translations of the Russian words "neodnoznachnosti" and "zakrepit", respectively. This linguistic analysis casts doubt on the true authorship of the text and supports reports that the plan was hammered out by U.S. President Donald Trump's representative, Steve Witkoff, and Vladimir Putin's envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, without involvement from Ukrainian or European officials.
PARADE OF “PEACE PLANS”: THE FIFTH IN THE LAST YEAR
It is worth recalling that the information leakage is far from the first of this kind. This is the fifth attempt in the last year to test the reaction from society and political community. An analysis of the chronology reveals how the rhetoric and “stakes” have changed.
As soon as in February 2025, there was a point on holding elections added to this plan.
In April-May 2025, a seven-point plan was suggested that included a clause on joint management of the Zaporizhzhia NPP and the actual recognition of Russian sovereignty over the occupied Ukrainian territory.
And in August of the same year, the media reported on Moscow’s proposal: a ceasefire without a peace agreement and postponing the issue of territories for 49 or 99 years.
The dynamics are obvious: with the emergence of each new peace plan, the conditions for Ukraine become tougher, while the preferences for Russia become sweeter. The question is whether the most recent document is a real plan from the US administration, or a skillful forgery by Russian special services?
EXPERT VERDICT: SKEPSICISM, CAUTION, EVEN OPEN OUTRAGE
Ukrainian experts, diplomats and political analysts are of different opinions, but they all agree on one thing: the situation requires a cool head.
“The final nail in the coffin of the world order”
International policy analyst Maksym Yali draws attention to the synchronicity of the appearance of this plan with high-profile corruption controversies inside Ukraine’s government and the overall degradation of conditions for Kyiv compared to previous proposals.
In his opinion, the recognition of Crimea and the occupied territories as Russian, even if this is done under the guise of a compromise, would amount to a catastroph: “The new plan suggests the recognition of Crimea and the occupied territories of Donbas as Russian not only by the United States, but also by other countries. This is totally unacceptable for Ukraine... Basically, this would go against international law and will actually be the final nail in the coffin of the rules-based international order... That is to say, we are actually being thrown back into the 19th century."
This is Putin's long-term goal he had voiced back at the Munich Conference in 2007, according to the political scientist. Legitimizing the occupation will create a legal basis for the third stage of the war, considering that even the yet unoccupied parts of the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine are enshrined as Russian in the Russian constitution.
"An attempt to revive the negotiations process before Christmas"
Political scientist Volodymyr Fesenko calls for a sober look at the situation. He doesn’t consider this document as a verdict, but, rather, as a blueprint for bargaining, but recognizes the risks involved. He draws parallels with previous attempts to impose the Russian agenda on Ukraine.
"Against the backdrop of our domestic political turmoils, which could potentially evolve into a full-fledged political crisis, reports of the US “negotiating hype” regarding the end of the Russo-Ukrainian war have become no less stunning. A number of publications by Western media outlets have reported about the existence of the 28-point Witkoff-Dmitriev peace plan, which is actually about achieving an end to the Russia-Ukraine war by squeezing unilateral concessions from Ukraine. There have been quite a few leaked reports about this plan, so I would not retell their contents. In fact, this is about "demilitarization" and "denazification" of Ukraine, the objectives the Kremlin aims to achieve through this war, as well as the formal legalization of the Russian occupation of part of Ukrainian territory, albeit in a seemingly compromise form," Fesenko says.
At the same time, the expert advises to avoid falling into despair, but to get prepared for a difficult diplomatic game, where agreement to negotiate is not equal to agreement to surrender.
"Never fall into despair. This is not the first peace plan suggested by the United States, neither is it the first attempt by the Russian-American "sweet couple" to impose on us what are actually Russian conditions for ending the war. I would briefly assess the so-called 28-point peace plan from the United States as leading to nowhere, because it is unacceptable to us in its current form. Agreement to negotiate on this plan is not agreement to it, it is a tactic to neutralize the risks associated with this plan. Another thing is how it will work. The statement about an aggressive signing schedule is psychological pressure. The plan contains individual points that are impossible to implement without the Europeans’ consent."
These actions by the Trump administration signify nothing else but a desire to achieve a quick result, the analyst says, while at the same time waring of the traps the White House is setting for itself by underestimating the Kremlin’s ambitions.
“It is quite likely that the Trump administration wants to revive and step up the negotiation process. There is certainly a desire to end the war in Ukraine by Christmas. This plan is not a final document, but rather a blueprint for further negotiations. And in this context, we must understand that there will inevitably be pressure exerted on us. Given our military and domestic political situation, more concessions will be demanded from us than from the Russians. And therefore, we must meticulously work out a flexible tactic for negotiations with the Americans. Its basis has already been understood and stated by President Zelensky: we stand ready to start peace negotiations, which should also involve the Europeans, and then we must seek compromises and come to terms on controversial issues. We must insist on a cessation of hostilities, at least in the air, for as long as negotiations continue, while revealing and exploiting the Kremlin’s explicit reluctance to end the war. The White House, unfortunately, is once again repeating its tactical mistakes in a false belief that concessions to the Kremlin will be leading to a peace. But the result will be exactly the opposite,” he concludes.
Volodymyr Fesenko is also skeptical about the chances of a quick breakthrough being achieved. “Russia has no interest in ending the war now. Russian forces have intensified hostilities in the Donetsk region and in the Zaporizhzhia direction. As a strong argument for use in the upcoming negotiations, they have to capture Pokrovsk, at least. Secondly, the Kremlin is closely monitoring the course of internal disturbances in Ukraine, in the hope that these may ultimately evolve into a severe political crisis that would weaken us from within. Productive peace talks are unlikely to take place before at least a relative stabilization is achieved on the frontline and on the domestic policy front in Ukraine.”
If they are actively trying to convince us of something by injecting insinuations of this kind into the media discourse, then the reality will most likely be very different from what they are painting to us
Kyrylo Sazonov, political analyst and acting officer of the Ukrainian Armed Forces suggests an even more pragmatic view. He calls for separating facts from information noise.
“Let’s separate the wheat from the chaff, the reality from the fog of war, information from manipulation. This leakage came primarily from the media outlets like Axios, The Financial Times and from indirect reports on social networks. Witkoff claims that the leak comes from Kirill Dmitriev, while Rubio says “we are working”. Is there anything that catches the eye right from the start? Of course, there is. There are no statements to this effect coming from Donald Trump, neither there are statements coming from the European leaders*. There are no statements from officials in Kyiv or Moscow either. Every media outlet, every channel or independent journalist are citing some undisclosed sources. And we have already been through this more than once. That is, in actual fact, we have no comments at all coming from serious people at the highest level. "Are Witkoff and Dmitriev planning for something? Certainly, they are. But they are not those who make decisions," Sazonov says.
Sazonov recalls that the realities on the frontline and in geopolitics have not changed: Moscow is pressing, Kyiv is holding its ground, the West is sitting on the fence.
"There is Moscow’s real position - they have not advanced a single step forward, but insist on their maximalist demands. There is Kyiv’s position - it has not changed either. Ukraine's only response to Moscow's ambitious demands is reminiscent of a painted Native American dwelling called “Figvam”**. That's it, there is no point in further reading or explaining anything else. This is basically what we have in reality today. The rest is speculation and throw-ins of desires and wishes. Reality has not changed from what it was like a week or a month ago. The Kremlin is pressing on the battlefield, bombarding Ukrainian cities and demanding surrender. Ukraine is holding its defenses. Ukraine is suffering minor territorial losses while striking at infrastructure on the aggressor's territory. The US and Europe have imposed sanctions against Russia, and there is no talk of them being lifted any time soon. Everyone is waiting for the Russian economy to crumble. It is already crumbling. Not instantly, but there are enough signs indicating this happening. We have already entered into negotiations more than once under such circumstances. And each time yielded zero results. What has changed? Nothing.”
Sazonov also advises against making hasty, fear-based decisions.
“There are controversies ongoing over Mindich’s tapes in Ukraine and Epstein’s tapes in the USA, there are internal political crises, but this is not enough to fundamentally change the overall attitudes to the war. In Russia, the impotent opposition does not start a revolution, “Swan Lake” is unfortunately not shown on Russian TV***. We are suffering lots of problems and fatigue, but our military, volunteers and active part of society are not demoralized, do not give up and continue the fight. The visit by a US military team to Kyiv is about a joint business of drone production, not about politics. So, there is no reason for panic, cries of “Treason” or “We are being betrayed!”. We are working. Everyone in their place is working for the cause of common victory. And let's remember: if they are vigorously trying to convince us of something by injecting faked information into the media discourse, then the reality is most likely very far away from what they are painting for us.”
PSYOP and Central planning
Valeriy Chaly, an experienced diplomat, explicitly describes the developments of recent days as an information warfare attack, which surprisingly coincides with the Russian narratives.
“I see another information warfare attack targeting the Ukrainian public discourse, passing certain political hurdles like a knife through butter… There is talk about the “peace plan” (obviously, everyone is interested), even in influential American media outlets (not in the Ukrainian ones!), citing famous names (however dubious reputation some of these may have). As the Russian architects of this new psychological influence operation claim, “Ukrainian defenses are collapsing”, “Ukrainian society is already ready to support anything [that can bring the war to an end]”; “European partners will no longer support Ukraine”, “The Ukrainian president, frustrated by the recent high-level corruption controversy, will have to surrender on Russian terms, and the Americans will help this happening on the terms agreed upon in Alaska…” Is it all gone? I don’t think so. I have my own scenario,” Chaly says ironically.
The diplomat regards the “peace plan” to be a compilation of Russian wishes and part of a large-scale psychological operation staged by the enemy.
“Firstly, some new “peace plan” is really going around, but judging by everything, it is a compilation of previous Russian “whimsies”. There are currently no realistic proposals for ending the war. Secondly, considering that the enemy’s Foreign Intelligence Service almost simultaneously came out with a public (!) statement containing similar narratives which we have already heard multiple times before, all this looks more like another test of sentiments, which the adversary is turning into a large-scale psychological influence operation right before our eyes, “supporting the ‘peace plan’ by deliberately killing Ukrainian women and children with missiles in order to force the people into surrender.”
Chaly's forecast is cautiously optimistic: the plan will remain on paper only, but the pressure will grow.
"This is the "Dmitriev-Witkoff plan", which has no chance of being implemented now. This is really the beginning of Washington building a certain framework for future "compromises". But the Russians will exploit the situation as part of their PSYOP campaign even now, supplementing it with terrorist-style pressure through attacks on infrastructure and mass killings. The acceleration of the narrative that "America has purposefully incited a corruption scandal as part of its plan to force Ukraine into surrender by exerting pressure on Zelensky", sounds, at least, dubious, if we recall when exactly the behind-the-scenes processes surrounding the NABU investigation began. We need to return to the practice of "nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine" while intensively working on our realistic plan for exiting the war, coordinating positions with European partners, the USA, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Australia and other major supporters of Ukraine. Therefore, this "peace plan" will most likely end up in a dud... And for now, we have to do what we are supposed to do: overcome the crisis, strengthen the frontline and home front, bolster our negotiating position and maintain order."
First Deputy Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Serhiy Kyslytsia’s comment was brief but apt, comparing the plan with Soviet practices: “At least two phenomena come to mind when reading some plans here: Gosplan**** – a factory of unrealistic plans – and PSYOPs – planned manipulation of information to influence people’s thoughts and emotions, which differs from ordinary fakes in its thoughtfulness and clear goals. The latter are also used to sow panic, to split society…”
Diplomat and politician Roman Bezsmertnyi speaks in a similar vein, strongly rejecting the reality of this “text” as an official document: “The whole “text” exists in Moscow’s sick imagination only. The current talks did not touch on any “text”, because there is no such text in existence. This is about a new reading of the agreements that Moscow proposed to the US and NATO in December 2021,” he says.
Viktor Shlynchak, the Board Chairperson at the Institute of World Politics, views this “information injection into the media discourse” to be a special operation aimed to achieve fully pragmatic goals: “The special operation by the two scoundrels – Witkoff and Dmitriev – to promote the so-called “peace plan” – is designed to accomplish several tasks: to delay new US sanctions; to drive a wedge between the US and the EU; to inject a negative discourse into Ukrainian society; to intensify the dialogue between Trump and Putin again; to save frozen Russian assets from confiscation. None of these 28 points will bring peace closer. Quite the opposite, this will add to the chaos once again. Which is what Moscow is striving for.”
Shlynchak also points to Ukraine’s official statement at the UN, which is as explicit as it is tough in wording.
During recent emergency UN Security Council meeting convened after massive Russian air raids, Khrystyna Hayovyshyn, Deputy Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations had been a prominent voice for Ukraine's "red lines" for any potential peace negotiations. She firmly stated that: 1) "Our land is not for sale" and Ukraine will not cede any territory to Russia: 2) Kyiv will not accept any limitations on its right to self-defense or the size of its armed forces: 3) The only realistic way to end the war is to force Russia to retreat economically, politically, and militarily through sustained international pressure: 4) Ukraine will never tolerate any encroachment on its sovereignty, including the sovereign right to choose the alliances it seeks to join”: 5) “We will not reward the genocidal intentions underlying Russian aggression by undermining our identity, including our language”.
CONCLUSION
So what do we have in the end? The document that is circulating in the world media is more like a Kremlin’s wish list disguised as an American diplomatic initiative. Experts are unanimous in holding that this text, even if it had been discussed among some of Trump’s advisers, is only a blueprint, an attempt to explore the limits of the possible, or – and this is most likely – an element of a large-scale information warfare operation.
The purpose of such “information injections” is clear: to sow disbelief among the Ukrainian public, drive a wedge between Western partners, and to pressure Kyiv into obviously disadvantageous negotiations before they even begin. Ukraine has clearly outlined its “red lines”. No fake plans will replace real diplomacy, which should be based on the principle of “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine”. So, the Ukrainians, instead of panicking, should stock up on patience and critical thinking. There are difficult diplomatic battles ahead, but surrender is definitely not an option.
Myroslav Liskovych, Kyiv
* The European Union (EU) released its official comment on the 28-point peace plan in a joint statement alongside G7 summit leaders on November 22, 2025. The statement was issued after a meeting of European and other Western leaders on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Johannesburg. The leaders acknowledged the US effort as "a basis which will require additional work". They reiterated the core principle that "borders must not be changed by force". Concerns were raised regarding the proposed limitations on Ukraine's armed forces, which leaders warned could leave Ukraine "vulnerable to future attack". The statement also affirmed that any elements relating to the EU and NATO would require the explicit agreement of those organizations.
** "Figvam" most commonly appears to be a Cyrillic spelling or transliteration of the word wigwam, meaning “fig sign”, the same as your middle finger in some countries.
*** “Swan Lake” is a world-renowned classical ballet with music by Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. The repeated airing of "Swan Lake" and classical music became a recognized signal in the Soviet Union that political instability or a major event (like the death of a leader, which happened after the deaths of Leonid Brezhnev, Yuri Andropov, and Konstantin Chernenko in the 1980s) had occurred. Citizens instantly understood something significant was wrong.
**** Gosplan (State Planning Committee) was the official name for the agency responsible for central economic planning in the Soviet Union. Gosplan's primary function was to create and manage national economic plans, most famously the Five-Year Plans (Pyatiletka), which dictated virtually every aspect of the Soviet economy. The agency was the embodiment of the command economy system, where decisions were made by state bureaucrats rather than market forces (supply and demand). In the context of the Soviet Union, the "Gosplan" system was often inefficient, leading to chronic shortages of consumer goods, poor quality products, and economic stagnation compared to Western market economies.