Peace Through Strength: An In-Depth Analysis of President Zelenskyy's Victory Plan and Its Three Secret Annexes

Introduction: From Diplomatic Vision to Strategic Imperative

In the protracted and brutal war following Russia's full-scale invasion, Ukraine's strategy for achieving peace has undergone a critical evolution. This transformation is best understood by contrasting two landmark initiatives: the 10-Point Peace Formula of 2022 and the far more assertive Victory Plan unveiled in late 2024. The former was a diplomatic blueprint for a just world order; the latter is a direct and urgent strategic plan to create the battlefield and geopolitical conditions necessary to realize that vision. The Victory Plan, with its five public pillars and three classified annexes, represents a fundamental shift from defining the principles of peace to articulating a concrete, high-stakes strategy to achieve it from a position of undeniable strength.1

The Precursor: The 10-Point Peace Formula (2022)

First presented by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the G20 Bali Summit in November 2022, the 10-Point Peace Formula was a comprehensive diplomatic framework rooted in the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.3 Its core tenets were designed to address the full spectrum of Russia's aggression, calling for: radiation and nuclear safety, particularly concerning the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant; food and energy security; the release of all prisoners and deportees; the restoration of Ukraine's territorial integrity to its 1991 borders; the complete withdrawal of Russian troops; and justice through the prosecution of war crimes via a special tribunal.5

The primary objective of the Peace Formula was to build a broad international coalition, extending beyond Ukraine's traditional Western allies to include nations of the Global South, around a shared vision of a just and lasting peace.3 This diplomatic offensive aimed to isolate the Russian Federation and garner global consensus, culminating in a series of international summits, including a major conference in Switzerland in June 2024 attended by representatives of 92 countries.3 The Formula was fundamentally a vision of the desired end state—a world where sovereignty and international law prevail. However, its successful implementation was predicated on a military and political reality that would compel Russia to negotiate on these terms, a reality that had not materialized by late 2024.

The Pivot: The Victory Plan (2024)

Recognizing the limitations of a purely diplomatic approach in the face of relentless Russian military pressure, President Zelenskyy unveiled the Victory Plan in a pivotal address to the Verkhovna Rada on October 16, 2024.1 This new initiative is not a replacement for the Peace Formula but its necessary enabler. It is the strategic "road map" designed to forge the position of strength from which the principles of the Peace Formula can be enforced rather than merely proposed.11 As President Zelenskyy explicitly stated, the plan's success depends on the decisive actions of Ukraine's partners, not on the goodwill of Russia.10

The plan's architecture is twofold. It consists of five publicly articulated points—one geopolitical, two military, one economic, and one long-term security proposal—that serve as a declaration of intent to the world. Critically, however, the operational substance of the plan is contained within three classified annexes attached to the military and economic points, shared only with a select group of key allies.9 This structure allows Ukraine to publicly outline its strategic vision while privately conveying the specific, actionable, and sensitive requests required to achieve it.

Feature

Peace Formula (2022)

Victory Plan (2024)

Core Concept

A diplomatic blueprint for a just peace based on international law.

A military-political-economic plan to achieve a position of strength.

Primary Audience

The global community, including the Global South.

Key Western military and economic partners (US, UK, EU, G7).

Key Demand

Global support for Ukraine's principles of a just peace.

Decisive military, economic, and political commitments.

Stance on Russia

A call for Russia to adhere to international law and withdraw.

A plan to compel Russia into a peace through military and economic pressure.

Mechanism

Global summits and diplomatic pressure.

Classified annexes with specific, actionable requests to key allies.

Section I: The Public Architecture of Victory

The five publicly announced points of the Victory Plan constitute a sophisticated framework of strategic communication. Each point is designed not only to outline a specific requirement but also to reshape the narrative of the war and the nature of the partnership between Ukraine and its allies.

Point 1 (Geopolitical): The Unconditional NATO Invitation

The first and most foundational point of the Victory Plan is an "unconditional invitation right now" for Ukraine to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).9 This is presented not as a distant aspiration but as an immediate geopolitical necessity. President Zelenskyy framed this invitation as a "sign of determination" that would serve as a definitive signal to Moscow that its strategic goal of subjugating Ukraine and dictating the security architecture of Europe has failed irrevocably.9 The plan posits that a clear, irreversible path to NATO membership is the most robust security guarantee possible and a prerequisite for a lasting end to the war.15

This demand for an immediate invitation, made while active hostilities preclude full accession under current NATO protocols, is a calculated and pre-emptive diplomatic maneuver. Ukrainian leadership harbors a legitimate fear, reinforced by expert analysis, that its NATO aspirations could be compromised in future negotiations, potentially used as a bargaining chip by Russia or even by weary allies eager for a settlement.1 By demanding the invitation before any substantive talks with Moscow, Kyiv aims to remove this critical issue from the negotiating table entirely. It seeks to establish Ukraine's Euro-Atlantic trajectory as a non-negotiable fact, an "insurance policy" against being pressured into a disadvantageous peace that sacrifices its long-term security.1 This move is designed to define the fundamental parameters of any future settlement in Ukraine's favor from the outset.

Point 2 (Military): Defense and Escalation Dominance

The second point details the "irreversible strengthening of Ukraine's defense against the aggressor".9 The public components of this point are explicitly offensive in nature and signal a significant strategic evolution. They include the comprehensive equipping of Ukrainian reserve brigades, a substantial bolstering of air defenses to a "sufficient level," and, most critically, the lifting of all restrictions on the use of Western-supplied long-range weapons against legitimate military targets deep inside Russian territory.1 The plan also calls for "further operations by the Defense Forces in designated areas of Russia," institutionalizing actions like the incursion into the Kursk region, and proposes "joint operations with partners to shoot down Russian missiles and drones" from the safety of allied airspace.1

This language marks a clear doctrinal shift away from a strategy of pure attrition and territorial defense toward one of active disruption and escalation dominance. The stated goal to "redirect the war towards Russia" 10 is not about conquest but about systematically dismantling Russia's ability to sustain its offensive from the sanctuary of its own territory. The strategy aims to destroy logistics hubs, command-and-control centers, airbases, and industrial capacity at their source. This proactive, offensive-defense posture is designed to exponentially raise the material and political costs of the war for the Kremlin. By demonstrating an ability to inflict unacceptable damage on the Russian war machine, Ukraine seeks to create the leverage necessary to compel Moscow to negotiate on terms consistent with the Peace Formula. It is a calculated move to break the strategic stalemate and seize the initiative.

Point 3 (Military): Crafting a Non-Nuclear Deterrent

The third point of the plan proposes the deployment of a "comprehensive non-nuclear strategic deterrence package" on Ukrainian territory.9 This is framed as a measure that would not only protect Ukraine from future aggression but would also significantly enhance the security of Europe as a whole, achieving "peace through strength".9 This concept goes far beyond simply receiving more weapons; it envisions a new, permanent security architecture on Ukraine's soil.

The call for a "strategic deterrence package" is a direct response to the failure of past security assurances, most notably the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, which proved hollow.5 Having relinquished its nuclear arsenal in exchange for paper guarantees, Ukraine now seeks a tangible, physical deterrent that cannot be ignored. This package is understood to involve the permanent or long-term stationing of advanced Western conventional systems, such as long-range precision missiles, integrated air and missile defense batteries, and potentially rotational deployments of allied advisory and support forces.1 The objective is to create a "poison pill"—a military reality on the ground so formidable that the cost-benefit calculation for any future Russian leader would make a renewed attack unthinkable. It is a strategy to make Ukraine strategically indigestible for Russia, thereby providing a credible deterrent even in the absence of formal NATO Article 5 protection.

Point 4 (Economic): The Geoeconomics of Alliance

The fourth point introduces a powerful economic dimension to the plan, proposing a special agreement with strategic partners for the "joint protection of the country's critical resources" and "joint investment and use of this economic potential".9 The plan specifically highlights Ukraine's vast and largely untapped reserves of critical minerals—including uranium, titanium, lithium, and graphite—which are valued in the trillions of dollars and are essential for the global transition to green energy and for advanced defense manufacturing.1 These resources are explicitly identified as a "key predatory objective of the Russian Federation in this war".9

This proposal represents a masterful act of geoeconomic statecraft. It strategically reframes Western support for Ukraine, shifting the basis from shared democratic values and international law to include concrete, material self-interest. By offering Western nations and corporations preferential access to and joint development of these vital resources, Kyiv is making a powerful argument: a sovereign, secure, and victorious Ukraine is a direct contributor to Western economic security and supply chain resilience. Conversely, a Russian victory would mean ceding control of this strategic wealth to a primary geopolitical adversary, with profound negative consequences for the West. This point is designed to create a powerful and enduring pro-Ukrainian constituency within Western industrial, financial, and technological sectors, transforming support for Kyiv from a matter of policy choice into a pragmatic economic and strategic imperative.

Point 5 (Security): Ukraine as a Future Security Provider

The fifth and final point is designed for the post-war period and offers a bold vision for Ukraine's role in the future of European security. It proposes replacing "certain U.S. military contingents stationed in Europe with Ukrainian units" once the war is concluded.9 The rationale is that Ukraine will emerge from the conflict possessing one of the largest, most experienced, and most technologically adept armies in the world, with unparalleled real-world experience in modern, high-intensity warfare against a peer adversary.9 This unique and hard-won expertise, the plan argues, should be leveraged to strengthen the entire NATO alliance and guarantee security across the continent.1

This proposal cleverly inverts the narrative of Ukraine as a perpetual recipient of security assistance. It addresses a potential source of long-term "Ukraine fatigue" among allies by presenting the country not as a permanent security liability but as a future net provider of security. The offer to backfill U.S. forces in Europe is a tangible value proposition, suggesting that robust investment in Ukraine's victory today will yield significant security dividends for the entire alliance tomorrow. This could potentially allow the United States to reallocate forces and resources to other global priorities. This final point positions the battle-hardened Armed Forces of Ukraine as a future cornerstone of the European security architecture, making the case for its full integration and comprehensive equipping even more compelling for its partners.

Section II: The Classified Core: Deconstructing the Three Secret Annexes

While the five public points of the Victory Plan outline Ukraine's strategic vision, the plan's operational substance—the specific, actionable requests that transform it from a declaration into a workable strategy—is contained within three secret annexes. These classified documents, attached to the plan's defense, deterrence, and economic points, have been shared only with a small circle of key allies possessing the capabilities to fulfill them.9 Their secrecy is essential for operational security and for facilitating candid, high-level discussions with partners. An analysis based on the public framework and credible reports allows for a detailed construction of their likely contents and strategic purpose.

Public Point

Associated Secret Annex?

Inferred Content of Secret Annex

1. NATO Invitation

No

N/A (This is a purely political request).

2. Defense

Yes (Military Annex 1)

Itemized list of specific advanced weapon systems (quantities, types); operational plans for strikes inside Russia; detailed intelligence sharing protocols; logistical requirements for equipping new brigades.

3. Deterrence

Yes (Military Annex 2)

Technical specifications and deployment plans for a "non-nuclear strategic deterrence package"; proposals for rotational deployment of Western forces/advisors; draft rules of engagement for joint air defense operations.

4. Economic Potential

Yes (Economic Annex)

Detailed geological data on mineral reserves; proposed legal frameworks for joint ventures and production sharing agreements; security plans for protecting critical infrastructure and resource deposits.

5. Post-War Security

No

N/A (This is a long-term strategic proposal).

The First Secret Annex (Defense): Itemizing the Arsenal for Victory

The first secret annex is attached to Point 2 (Defense) and is accessible only to partners with the "appropriate military assistance capabilities" to act on it.9 This is the detailed military "ask," the comprehensive list of materiel and support required to execute the plan's shift toward an offensive-defense strategy. Its classification is paramount, designed to prevent Russia from preemptively developing tactical and strategic countermeasures before the requested capabilities can be delivered, integrated, and deployed effectively.

The contents of this annex almost certainly go far beyond general requests for aid. It is an itemized and quantified list of the specific advanced weapon systems needed to achieve a decisive advantage. This would include not just more of the same equipment, but a qualitative leap in capability: additional F-16 squadrons equipped with advanced air-to-air and air-to-ground munitions; specific long-range missile systems like the full-range Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) and the German Taurus KEPD 350; advanced electronic warfare and counter-drone systems; and precise numbers of air defense batteries (such as Patriot and SAMP/T) required to establish a truly "sufficient level" of protection over critical infrastructure and population centers.1

Beyond a simple hardware manifest, this annex likely contains detailed operational blueprints. It would outline the conceptual framework for the "operations in designated areas of Russia" mentioned publicly 9, identifying priority target sets—such as logistics hubs, ammunition depots, airbases, and command posts—and specifying the real-time satellite and signals intelligence support required from partners to enable these strikes.1 Furthermore, the annex would contain a comprehensive force generation plan, detailing the specific Western assistance needed to train and equip new Ukrainian reserve brigades to NATO standards, including timelines and logistical requirements.1

By submitting such a detailed, integrated, and coherent plan, Kyiv is doing more than just requesting aid; it is forcing its partners to make a conscious and explicit strategic choice. The era of providing aid incrementally, allowing Western capitals to manage escalation without committing to a specific outcome, is what this annex seeks to end. It lays out a complete and logical plan for achieving a Ukrainian victory and inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia. Therefore, for Western leaders, approving the contents of this annex is a deliberate commitment to this strategy. Conversely, denying or only partially fulfilling its requests is a de facto decision to continue the current strategy of managed attrition, with all its attendant risks of a frozen conflict, a Russian victory, or the eventual exhaustion of Ukraine. The annex makes the strategic stakes explicit and unavoidable.

The Second Secret Annex (Deterrence): Defining the "Peace Through Strength" Doctrine

The second secret annex, attached to Point 3 (Deterrence), is the most geopolitically sensitive component of the Victory Plan. It has been shared with the leaders of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Germany, the core group of allies with the capacity to establish a new security architecture for Ukraine.9 This document details the technical and operational specifics of the "comprehensive non-nuclear strategic deterrence package".9 It is, in effect, a proposal for a robust security arrangement that falls just short of formal NATO membership but is far more tangible than any previous assurance.

The annex would logically specify the types, numbers, and proposed deployment locations for Western long-range conventional strike systems to be based on Ukrainian territory.1 It would outline the necessary command and control structures, basing infrastructure, and security arrangements required to host and operate these advanced assets. Critically, it almost certainly contains concrete proposals for a rotational or semi-permanent presence of Western military personnel on Ukrainian soil. These forces would not serve in direct combat roles but as trainers, maintenance crews, advisors, and technicians for the deterrence systems. Their presence would act as a human "tripwire," dramatically raising the political and military stakes of any future Russian aggression. An attack that resulted in the deaths of American, British, or French service members would create immense domestic and international pressure for a direct and forceful response.

Furthermore, to give substance to the public proposal for "joint operations" with neighboring countries to intercept Russian missiles 1, this annex would need to contain draft rules of engagement (ROE). It would have to specify the precise conditions under which a NATO air defense system or aircraft operating from Poland or Romania could engage a Russian cruise missile or drone transiting through international or Ukrainian airspace toward a target in Ukraine. While a highly escalatory concept, such an action would be purely defensive, and the ROE would be designed to minimize the risk of direct confrontation while maximizing the protection of Ukrainian civilians.

The overarching goal of this annex is to restore deterrence by creating a state of calculated "strategic ambiguity" for Moscow. Without the certainty of an Article 5 guarantee, Russia knows that a conventional attack on Ukraine does not automatically trigger a full-scale NATO response. However, with Western strategic systems and personnel physically present on the ground, the Kremlin could no longer be certain that an attack would not provoke a direct Western military reaction. This calculated uncertainty is designed to replace the failed paper guarantees of the past with the potent and unpredictable risk of a direct clash with NATO, thereby compelling Russian restraint.

The Third Secret Annex (Economic): The Geoeconomic Prospectus for Victory

The third secret annex is attached to the fourth public point on strategic economic potential and has been shared with key economic partners like the United States and the European Union.10 This document functions as a high-stakes investment prospectus, designed to inextricably link the economic and industrial security of the West with the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine.

This annex would undoubtedly contain detailed geological surveys, independent reserve estimates, and comprehensive economic valuations for Ukraine's vast deposits of lithium, titanium, uranium, graphite, and other resources critical to 21st-century industries.1 It would include precise mapping of these deposits, clearly delineating which are currently under Russian occupation or threatened by the proximity of the front lines, thereby graphically illustrating what is at stake.

To translate this potential into reality, the annex would propose specific legal and financial frameworks for joint ventures between Ukrainian state-owned companies and major Western corporations. This could include production sharing agreements (PSAs) that guarantee a return on investment, the creation of special economic zones with preferential tax regimes and streamlined regulations, and the inclusion of binding international arbitration clauses to protect foreign investments from political risk.

Most importantly, this annex would detail a security plan to protect these multi-billion-dollar investments. This is a crucial component, as no corporation would invest heavily in a conflict zone without credible security assurances. The plan could involve proposals for Western funding and training of specialized Ukrainian military or national guard units tasked with protecting critical resource extraction sites and transportation infrastructure. It may even include provisions for internationally backed private security contractors. In essence, the annex asks partners to help secure the very assets they are being invited to develop and profit from.

This approach represents a sophisticated attempt to "weaponize" Western capitalism as an instrument of geopolitics. The strategy recognizes that while the political will of governments can fluctuate with election cycles and shifting public opinion, corporate interests, once established, create powerful and persistent lobbies. By creating a secure and profitable framework for massive Western investment in Ukraine's resource sector, Kyiv aims to forge a reality where major American, German, and French corporations have billions of dollars at stake in Ukraine's ability to defend its territory. This would create a permanent, self-interested constituency within Western nations advocating for robust and sustained security support for Ukraine, embedding that support into the very economic fabric of its allies and making it far more resilient to "Ukraine fatigue."

Section III: Strategic Assessment: A High-Stakes Appeal for Decisive Action

The Victory Plan, in its totality, represents far more than a simple list of requests. It is a comprehensive and integrated geostrategy designed to force a decisive shift in the trajectory of the war. It is an appeal to Ukraine's allies to abandon incrementalism and commit to a strategy aimed at achieving a clear and sustainable victory.

The Core Intent: Forcing a Paradigm Shift

At its heart, the Victory Plan is a direct challenge to the prevailing Western policy of "controlled escalation" or "regulated volumes of military-technical support".12 This policy, while preventing a Ukrainian collapse, has provided just enough aid for Ukraine to survive but not enough to win decisively. The plan is an explicit rejection of this attrition-management approach, which Kyiv views as a slow path to defeat against a larger adversary. It is framed as an "eleventh-hour appeal for action to reverse the looming defeat" for both Ukraine and its partners.1

The fundamental premise underpinning the entire plan is that Ukraine and the West "would lose or win this war together".1 It seeks to eliminate any ambiguity about the stakes of the conflict. The plan is meticulously designed to move Ukraine from its current position of relative weakness to a "position of strength" from which it can negotiate a just and lasting end to the war on its own terms, consistent with the principles of the Peace Formula.1

Feasibility and Geopolitical Hurdles

Despite its strategic coherence, the Victory Plan faces immense geopolitical and practical obstacles. The core requests push the boundaries of what Ukraine's partners have thus far been willing to countenance, and the initial reactions have highlighted the challenges ahead.

The first point, a demand for an immediate NATO invitation, was promptly rebuffed by NATO officials and the US Mission to NATO, who cited the noncommittal language of the July 2024 Washington Summit, which offered no firm timeline.1 The proposal for neighboring countries like Poland and Romania to engage in joint air defense operations is politically perilous. These nations are highly reluctant to risk direct Russian retaliation without an explicit and unambiguous NATO Article 5 guarantee covering such actions, a guarantee that is unlikely to be forthcoming.1

Furthermore, the deployment of a "non-nuclear strategic deterrence package" on Ukrainian soil, as detailed in the second secret annex, would cross what Russia has vehemently and repeatedly described as a "red line" since before the full-scale invasion.1 Implementing this point would carry a significant risk of a severe and unpredictable escalation of the conflict, potentially drawing NATO into a direct confrontation with Russia. The success of the entire military dimension of the plan is contingent upon a "surge" of Western assistance that, at the time of the plan's unveiling, was described by analysts as looking "distant".1

Implications of Success or Failure

The Victory Plan places a stark and unavoidable choice before Ukraine's allies. The response to its proposals will have profound and lasting implications for the outcome of the war and the future of European security.

If Accepted (Even Partially): A significant Western commitment to the core military and economic components of the plan would represent a fundamental strategic decision to enable a Ukrainian victory and inflict a strategic defeat on Russia. It would signal an end to the policy of ambiguity and a commitment to a decisive outcome. While this path would dramatically increase the near-term risk of a direct NATO-Russia confrontation, it would also provide Ukraine with a plausible path to restoring its territorial integrity and securing a long-term, sustainable peace backed by credible deterrents.

If Rejected: A rejection of the plan's core tenets, either explicitly or through continued inaction and insufficient support, would be a devastating blow to Ukrainian morale and its capacity to continue the fight. It would signal to Moscow that its strategy of attrition is succeeding and that the West lacks the political will for a decisive outcome. This would likely force Kyiv into negotiations from a position of profound weakness, potentially leading to a "frozen conflict" on Russia's terms—a scenario Ukraine has repeatedly rejected 2—or, in the worst case, the eventual collapse of Ukrainian defenses. The Victory Plan, therefore, is not merely a proposal; it is a moment of truth that forces a critical and unavoidable choice upon Ukraine's allies.

Conclusion: The Future of European Security at a Crossroads

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's Victory Plan is a landmark strategic document, representing a critical evolution from the aspirational diplomacy of the 2022 Peace Formula to a concrete and urgent plan for national survival and victory. It is a sophisticated and direct appeal to Ukraine's allies, arguing that the time for incremental support and strategic ambiguity has passed.

The plan's public framework masterfully articulates a vision where Western interests—geopolitical, military, and economic—are inextricably aligned with a decisive Ukrainian victory. It reframes Ukraine not as a supplicant but as a future pillar of European security and a vital partner in securing critical resources.

The three secret annexes form the operational core of this strategy. They transform a public declaration of intent into a concrete, actionable, and deeply challenging set of proposals for the West. The annexes detail the specific military hardware, security architectures, and economic partnerships required to turn the tide of the war and secure a lasting peace. They represent a clear-eyed assessment of what is needed to win, forcing a level of strategic clarity and commitment that has thus far been elusive.

Ultimately, the Victory Plan places the future of the conflict, and by extension the future of the entire post-Cold War European security architecture, squarely in the hands of Ukraine's partners. It presents a clear, albeit perilous, path to a just and lasting peace achieved through strength. It implicitly warns that the alternative—a continuation of the status quo—is not a path to a stable stalemate but a slow descent toward a catastrophic defeat that would embolden aggressors globally and destabilize the continent for decades to come. The response to this plan will be a defining moment of 21st-century statecraft.

Works cited

1. Ukraine's Victory Plan: Last Chance for West to Reverse Trajectory ..., accessed on October 7, 2025, https://jamestown.org/program/ukraines-victory-plan-last-chance-for-west-to-reverse-trajectory-of-defeat/

2. Zelenskyy's Victory Plan and Possible Negotiations - CEPA, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://cepa.org/article/zelenskyys-victory-plan-and-possible-negotiations/

3. Ukraine's Peace Formula - Wikipedia, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%27s_Peace_Formula

4. Statement by HE Mr. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine, at UN GA General Debate New York, 25 September 2024, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://gadebate.un.org/sites/default/files/gastatements/79/ua_en.pdf

5. Zelenskyy's peace plan: 10 essential points - War in Ukraine, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://war.ukraine.ua/faq/zelenskyys-10-point-peace-plan/

6. PEACE FORMULA OF THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE | Embassy of Ukraine to the Republic of Senegal, the Republic of Guinea, the Republic of Guinea-Bissau, the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire and the Republic of Liberia, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://senegal.mfa.gov.ua/en/news/peace-formula-president-ukraine

7. Peace negotiations in the Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) - Wikipedia, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_negotiations_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_war_(2022%E2%80%93present)

8. Zelensky's Peace Summit - Experts Respond - Ukrainian Research Institute, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://www.huri.harvard.edu/june-peace-summit

9. Victory Plan Consists of Five Points and Three Secret Annexes ..., accessed on October 7, 2025, https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/plan-peremogi-skladayetsya-z-pyati-punktiv-i-troh-tayemnih-d-93857

10. Zelenskyy presents the Victory Plan: five points and three secret appendices, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/10/16/7479922/

11. Volodymyr Zelenskyy presented the Victory Plan of Ukraine | Центр протидії дезінформації, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://cpd.gov.ua/en/results/volodymyr-zelenskyy-presented-the-victory-plan-of-ukraine/

12. Ukraine's victory plan: what is the Ukrainian vision of the end of the war, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://neweasterneurope.eu/2024/11/18/ukraines-victory-plan-what-is-the-ukrainian-vision-of-the-end-of-the-war/

13. Five points and three secret annexes: media reveals the contents of ..., accessed on October 7, 2025, https://tsn.ua/en/ato/five-points-and-three-secret-annexes-media-reveals-the-contents-of-zelenskyy-s-victory-plan-2680872.html

14. Victory Plan for Ukraine - Wikipedia, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_Plan_for_Ukraine

15. Ukraine's Plea: Security Pledges Are the Path to Lasting Peace, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://www.usip.org/publications/2024/10/ukraines-plea-security-pledges-are-path-lasting-peace

16. Five points and three secret provisions: Zelenskyy presents Ukraine's victory plan to parliament, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://visitukraine.today/blog/4804/ukraines-victory-plan-what-it-is-about-and-how-it-should-help-end-the-war

17. President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy Presented the Victory Plan to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine - Mission of the President of Ukraine in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, accessed on October 7, 2025, https://ppu.gov.ua/en/press-center/prezydent-ukrainy-volodymyr-zelenskyy-predstavyv-plan-peremohy-u-verkhovniy-radi-ukrainy/