In an interview published on Friday Kellogg He suggested that as part of a peace agreement it would be possible to introduce in Ukraine zones controlled by international forces.
British and French troops would be deployed in western Ukraine, creating – as the envoy said – “security forces”. The eastern part of the country, occupied by the Russian army, would remain under their control. Demilitarized areas and zones controlled by Ukrainian troops would be built between these zones.
“The forces of Great Britain and France, deployed west of the Dniepr River, would not be provocatively focused on Russia in any way,” Kellogg said, while indicating that The United States does not provide for sending their troops to Ukraine as part of this scenario.
See also: Donald Trump loses his patience to negotiate with Russia. “They must move”
The interview quickly caused a stir in the media and in political circles. In response to criticism, Kellogg referred to his statements on Platform X (formerly Twitter), claiming that The Times daily incorrectly interpreted his words. “I talked about the resistance forces deployed after suspending weapons, supporting the sovereignty of Ukraine, not about its division,” Kellogg wrote. He explained that he referred to the zones of allied responsibility of troops that would not include American units.
The words of the special envoy Trump are another voice in the debate on possible scenarios of the end of the war in Ukraine, which has been going on since 2014. So far, none of the parties to the conflict has expressed an official position on the proposal suggested by Kellogg.
