"His tool is blackmail' How Ukrainian media reacted to Trump's appointment of Keith Kellogg as Ukraine-Russia envoy

[Passages]

2:51 pm, November 28, 2024Source: Meduza


On November 27, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump chose retired General Keith Kellogg to serve as his special envoy for the war in Ukraine. Kellogg, who previously served as chief of staff for the National Security Council and as national security adviser to then-Vice President Mike Pence, has long been considered a contender for the role; his name gained traction in June when Reuters revealed a ceasefire plan he co-authored. Here’s a closer look at Kellogg’s potential strategy for ending the war — and how Ukrainians are responding to his appointment.


The Kellogg plan
Kellogg’s proposed plan, as reported by Reuters, involves pressuring both Ukraine and Russia to negotiate. With regard to Ukraine, the plan includes leveraging military support as a bargaining chip: Washington would threaten to withhold further aid if Kyiv refuses talks. For Russia, the U.S. would issue the opposite threat: escalating weapons supplies to Ukraine if Moscow rejects negotiations.

Fred Fleitz, another former Trump advisor who reportedly helped draft the plan, emphasized to Reuters that the proposal wouldn’t necessarily require Ukraine to formally cede territory. It would, however, entail freezing the conflict along the current front lines, with the understanding that territorial claims would be addressed diplomatically in the future — and likely not anytime soon. Fleitz explained:

SNIP

Shortly before Kellogg’s nomination was announced, former Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said it was “inconceivable” that Zelensky would sign a deal that surrenders territory — as Kellogg’s effectively would. Kuleba argued that the U.S. cutting off weapons supplies for Ukraine could therefore lead to a collapse of the front. However, Strana.ua noted that this implies Ukrainian leaders would prefer a collapse of the front to a ceasefire along the front lines, which is unlikely to be the case — and that it’s thus “far from certain” that Zelensky would refuse to enter negotiations even if it requires territorial concessions.
https://meduza.io/en/feature/2024/11/28/his-tool-is-blackmail

[dutch777]

1. Ending the war is easy at present front lines but bad precedent that Putin will leverage and we will pay...

...even more for in the future. Of course if Trump pulls us from NATO that will all be Europe's problem. They and we really messed up in 2014 not contesting Putin's Crimea grab and here we are on the slippery slope.

[Passages]

2. I agree, the US underestimated Putin.

Big time.

[karynnj]

4. The US and allies did contest the seizure of Crimea

They fought it via economic sanctions, which did not result in Russia backing off. They were increasing sanctions to add pressure from 2014 through 2016. Would you have suggested a military threat to Russia? At minimum, the first resort to sanctions had to be tried.

Note Trump was then President for 4 years, as Russia increased its hold on both Crimea and the Donbass.

[Passages]

7. We did not cut Russia out of the SWIFT system.

Which is for international bank transfers. The credit card companies opposed it. I don't think it was strictly about credit cards but that those banks all still also do bank transfers too.

[karynnj]

8. True, but there was a response and some international diplomacy

It is true that more economic response was unused, but that does not mean they did nothing.

[Passages]

10. I did not mean to suggest we did nothing, we did....yet our actions

should have included removal from SWIFT at the time.

[dutch777]

12. Unfortunately sanctions and diplomacy don't dissuade military force, it just looks like you are doing "something".

There are no examples in my lifetime (68) where sanctions reversed military action once it was in motion. And there was certain to be little effect as long as Putin was in charge and NATO intelligence well knows his character. (He was on the radar since 1978 when I was in counter intelligence against the Russians.) Fact is the EU had put itself in a no win situation getting addicted to easy and cheap Russian fossil fuels and would not endure the political and economic pain (then) of dealing with that. And we wouldn't act on a European problem unilaterally. Ukraine was sacrificed.

[Igel]

11. Isn't that what a lot of people want the current admin to do when it comes to Israel?

With less leverage or "stick" and more carrot with Hamas/Iran?

And the same counterargument: To supply-limit Israel to get it to a ceasefire and peace talks (round number 293) strengthens Hamas and Israel will "pay even more for in the future".

[Deuxcents]

3. Here's a plan..Russia pack up all their war equipment, soldiers and paid mercenaries,

Return the Ukrainian children they kidnapped, give back property and real estate taken and then sit down to negotiate reparations for damages to Ukraine. 🇺🇦

[Kid Berwyn]

5. Putin Wins!

Attaboy, Dimdonnie!

[Emrys]

6. Ukraine's constitution forbids surrendering Ukrainian territory

This proposed "deal" might be able to fudge that by stipulating this wouldn't be a permanent status quo, but would Putin buy into that? In another interview I saw, Kellogg felt that any future negotiations about territorial holdings could only happen once Putin was gone. Kellogg's on record as saying a lot about all this before he was offered the post, so it remains to be seen what survives when he's working for Trump.

Anyway, just this last week, Putin signalled that Russia had no interest in negotiating anything with the USA.

So, by Kellogg's logic, why waste time? Biden and Congress can now proceed with arming Ukraine to the hilt (honouring past commitments would be a good start), on the basis that this would be pursuing Trump's stump "promise" that the conflict would be resolved very quickly, and honouring Biden and Trump's public commitment to a smooth transition.

At the moment, delays in resolving this could work in Ukraine's favour as long as it gets more effective air defences and the weapons and ammunition it's already been promised. Russia is staggering along under sanctions, and that's only going to get worse in the coming year - some predict catastrophically so.

Zelensky has already laid the groundwork for negotiations through international peace conferences in the past year - maybe that framework should be adopted rather than the US and Kellogg taking a leading role?

[GoCubsGo]

9. It's not blackmail. It's extortion.

That being said, both are Trump tactics. And, as with the previous attempt that got Trump impeached the first time, Ukraine will not give into his extortion attempts.