Trump envoy reveals NATO troop deployment plans for Ukraine
Washington is in talks with its European NATO allies about deploying military contingents to Ukraine as part of a possible post-conflict settlement, US President Donald Trump's special envoy, Keith Kellogg, has said.
A group of European NATO member states has for months been seeking to muster a force to be deployed to Ukraine as part of a so-called 'coalition of the willing,' purportedly in a post-conflict peacekeeping role. Russia has repeatedly warned it would treat any foreign troops on Ukrainian soil as legitimate targets, saying such a move could escalate the conflict.
Speaking to Fox Business on Tuesday, Kellogg said troops from France, Germany, the UK, and Poland could be part of what he described as a 'resiliency force.'
'This is a force referred to as the E3, but it's actually now the E4 – when you include the Brits, the French, and the Germans, and in fact, the Poles as well,' he said. Kellogg added the troops would be positioned west of the Dnieper River, placing them 'outside the contact zone.'
'And then to the east you have a peacekeeping force, and what it would look like with a third party involved with that. So, you can actually monitor a ceasefire; we have this thing pretty well planned out,' he said.
The remarks come as preparations are underway for possible direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul. Kellogg and Steve Witkoff, another senior envoy for US President Donald Trump, are reportedly expected to attend. Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday proposed conducting negotiations without preconditions in Türkiye on May 15.
Vladimir Zelensky said he was ready to meet Putin on Thursday, but insisted that any talks should be preceded by the start of a 30-day ceasefire. Moscow has repeatedly ruled out this suggestion, saying such a pause would give Kiev an opportunity to regroup militarily and renew hostilities.
On Monday, the foreign ministers of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the UK, along with the EU's top diplomat Kaja Kallas, issued a joint statement after talks in London. They pledged 'robust security guarantees for Ukraine,' including 'exploring the creation of a coalition of air, land, and maritime reassurance forces that could help create confidence in any future peace and support the regeneration of Ukraine's armed forces.'
Russia has rejected the presence of NATO troops in Ukraine in any form. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said it would pose a direct threat to Russia. Security Council Secretary Sergey Shoigu has warned it could trigger World War III, potentially involving nuclear weapons.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
17 minutes ago
- Russia Today
The Russians' new enemy #1 is not the US. And we've been there before
They probably won't but Germans should pay close attention to a recent news item out of Russia: The Levada polling institute – long internationally acknowledged as serious and dependable – has published the result of a recent survey. It shows that Germany is now considered peak hostile by ordinary Russians: 55% of them name Germany as the country most unfriendly toward Russia. Five years ago, that figure stood at 40%. That was no small number either, but two things stand out now: First, the rapid increase in Germany's un-favorability rating and, second, the fact that Berlin has managed to take over the top position in this dismal ranking: For 20 years it was securely held by the US, which still came in at a whopping 76% as recently as last year. But now, clearly responding to Trump's new, comparatively more rational course toward Moscow, 'only' 40% of Russians see the US as the most unfriendly state. To paraphrase an old Soviet motto: Berlin has caught up with and overtaken America. Many Germans, especially in the political, mainstream media, and conformist 'expert' elites will either completely ignore or dismiss this shift. Others will even be foolish enough to feel pleased: What better evidence that the new German bellicism has left an impression? For a historian – or really anyone with a memory – the Levada finding should be alarming. To see why, we need a broader context. The thing about Germany is that, sooner or later, the question of war or peace – at least in Europe or even the world – depends on it, whatever usually unoriginal ideas its elites get worked up about at any given time. Maybe that special combustibility is due to a deep mismatch between Germany's resources and location, on one side, and its geopolitical environment, on the other, as Henry Kissinger used to quip. Perhaps the explanation is less forgiving and has to do with a failing political culture shaped by persistent habits of shortsightedness and misguided ambitions. In any case, in about 1945, after the second global war caused by Berlin in much less than half a century, everyone who mattered – not the Germans anymore at that point – seemed to understand that one large Germany can be, let's say, awkward for the rest of the world. Two seemed about right, especially when both were under firm control, from Washington and Moscow, respectively. The other thing generally accepted was that the old enmity between Germany and France had to be buried. A third crucial issue, however, was not only left unresolved but instead weaponized for Cold War purposes: if Germans had to finally play nice with the French and other West Europeans in general, the US needed its Germany to stay nasty toward the Russians, that is, at the time, the Soviets. In effect, West Germany was re-trained to come to heel toward the West but keep barring its teeth toward the East. The polite term for this act of national house-training in Western 'values,' 'civilization,' and, last but not least, geopolitical hierarchies is 'the long way West.' Fortunately, from the 1970s and through the unexpected yet quietly earthshaking advent of German unification (de facto West Germany annexing East Germany with Soviet, i.e., Russian permission), the deterrent logic of the Cold War and a fundamentally wise 'Ostpolitik' mitigated that teeth-baring a little. But now that policy has not merely been abandoned but anesthetized. Today, even wanting to talk to 'the Russians' to convey anything other than ultimatums is smeared as 'appeasement.' Former representatives of normal engagement are either forced into humiliating public recantations (for instance, President – no less – Frank-Walter Steinmeier) or ostracized (the once tone-setting journalist Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, for example). The worst sin in the new old German catechism is to even try to 'understand' Russia, literally: A 'Russlandversteher' is a heretic almost worthy of the stake now. Such heretics are clearly in the way of a new course – taken by all mainstream parties – that starts from the assumption that Germany and Russia must always be enemies, as current Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul recently stated in an unguarded and therefore honest moment. Consequently, the only policy that seems to be left to such hidebound minds is to build up the military and massively increase armament spending. That such spending has already been practiced and has a miserable record of inefficiency in Europe, as even the Financial Times admits, does not matter to them. Neither will it, of course, to the arms industry and its shareholders. And perish the thought that Germans could be smart enough to do both: (sensibly) modernize their military and, at the same time, engage in genuine talks and compromise – as well as renewed, mutually beneficial commerce, too – with Russia. That pattern – not dumb 'appeasement' – after all, was the real signature style of the cheaply maligned 'Ostpolitik.' But it seems that this ability to walk and chew gum, as Berlin's former American idol Joe Biden would have said, has been lost, or, perhaps, willfully abandoned. With the urge to splurge on weapons comes a clearly coordinated propaganda campaign as not seen since the early 1980s (at best): German politicians, generals, mainstream media, and conformist 'experts' have been unleashing a torrent, a veritable 'Trommelfeuer' of war hysteria on the German public. Professors of ancient history – noticing unintentional irony has never been a German forte – are explaining again that parents must be ready to sacrifice their offspring in war. Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori, and so on… As if the First World War had never been lost. The German military's top general can't quite make up his mind if Russia will attack in a few years or maybe tomorrow. And one TV talk show and documentary after the other is dedicated to the need for 'war proficiency' (in the original German 'Kriegstüchtigkeit,' a term with an untranslatably traditional ring to it, in a bad way). Finally, we have Friedrich Merz, a German chancellor with a flimsy mandate who clearly believes that it is his historic task to be even more bellicose than the Americans and take over their role in NATO Europe if necessary. The irony of a vassal government finally finding a spine just to be even more ideologically immobile than even its changing hegemon is not new in recent German history. That is, after all, how Erich Honecker, the last (relevant) leader of the former East Germany, chose to go out: by demonstratively snubbing Moscow's thaw with the West. In a similar spirit, Merz insists on continuing the proxy war in Ukraine and makes a point of not wanting the Nord Stream pipelines repaired, even while Russian and US investors (close to Trump, as it happens) are talking about precisely that. Merz has just been to see Trump in Washington. And mainstream media reporting on their encounter is unintentionally revealing of just how little he has achieved. In essence, the German chancellor is being praised for not having been brutally humiliated by Trump. Indeed, Merz was spared the fate of Vladimir Zelensky of Ukraine – and that is the best that can be said. Let's set aside that, actually, Trump did haze his guest, if comparatively mildly, teasing him about Germany's not-so-great experience of D-Day 1944 and offering condescending congratulations on his English. It was the kind of affability that Trump the former reality show host would have displayed toward an 'apprentice' currently in favor. What is more substantial is that Merz was not given one inch on any topic he cares about: Regarding NATO, US-European trade, and the Ukraine War, the German chancellor got precisely nothing. On the contrary, Trump has already made sure to signal how absolutely unimpressed he is by whatever Merz may have had to say, when not modestly silent: On Ukraine, Trump has publicly conceded that Kiev's recent sneak drone attack gives Russia the right to massively retaliate. On trade, Trump has increased the pressure again with steel and aluminum tariffs that will hit the EU and Germany hard. What a world Germany has made for itself: It has the US, a hegemon and 'ally' that first either blows up or is involved in blowing up its vital-infrastructure pipelines and then gets ready to take over and repair the ruins to have even more power over Berlin. With Zelensky's Ukraine, it has a very expensive, very corrupt client that even the Germans now admit was involved in the same terrorist attack on Nord Stream. Germany's economy, meanwhile, would greatly benefit from re-establishing a reasonable relationship with Russia. But Berlin's only strategy regarding Moscow is prolonged confrontation, an extremely costly armament program, and war hysteria so intense it makes it look as if German elites are not-so-secretly longing for yet another devastating clash with Russia. And by now, Russians have taken notice, not only within the elite but the general population. Good luck, Berlin: You've poked the bear long enough to get his attention. Again.
Russia Today
an hour ago
- Russia Today
Russian tycoon Abramovich ‘done' with professional football
Russian businessman Roman Abramovich has said he no longer intends to be involved in professional football or own any club again, according to a new book excerpt cited by the Daily Mail. Abramovich was forced to sell the football club Chelsea to a US-led consortium shortly after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. The UK government imposed sanctions on him in March 2022 over his alleged Kremlin ties. The tycoon has denied the allegations and acted as a mediator between Moscow and Kiev on several occasions. In an interview with Nick Purewal, the author of a book titled 'Sanctioned: The Inside Story of the Sale of Chelsea FC', Abramovich confirmed he has 'no interest in any role in a football club, certainly not a professional role.' 'As for ownership or a professional role at a club, I am done with that in this lifetime,' he was cited as saying. He added that he still wishes to attend a Chelsea match in the future 'to say a proper goodbye,' but reiterated he has no plans for further involvement in the sport. However, he expressed a willingness to support initiatives for underprivileged youth if a meaningful opportunity arises. The British government has increased pressure on Abramovich to approve the release of the £2.5 billion ($3.4 billion) proceeds from the Chelsea sale to Ukraine. Last week, Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Foreign Secretary David Lammy warned in a joint statement that the UK is prepared to take legal action if he does not authorize the transfer. 'The government is determined to see the proceeds from the sale of Chelsea Football Club reach humanitarian causes in Ukraine,' the statement read. While the money is frozen in a UK account, Abramovich remains its legal owner and must approve its distribution. According to The Guardian, officials have held extensive talks with Abramovich's legal team but have failed to resolve a 'fundamental disagreement' over how the funds should be used. Abramovich has insisted the proceeds be used to assist victims of the conflict on both sides, not exclusively Ukraine.
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
Kiev's backers demanded Ukraine conscript 18-year-olds
Some of Kiev's Western backers demanded that Ukraine lower the age of military conscription to 18 in return for their support for stricter sanctions on Russia, Vladimir Zelensky has claimed. Manpower shortages in Ukraine's army have triggered a wave of forced conscription raids across the country which the public is increasingly opposing. In an interview with Hungarian daily Valasz Online on Tuesday, Zelensky acknowledged that mobilization remains a major issue. 'Mobilization is a problem in every war. Ukraine is no exception… People are tired,' he said, estimating that Kiev can mobilize 27,000 people a month. Despite his Western backers seeking it, Zelensky has opposed mandatory conscription of 18-year-olds. 'It is not the number of people that matters, but weapons and technology,' he said, adding that the same is true for the scale of Western sanctions against Russia. 'At the same time, Western partners list the reasons why they did not decide on sanctions, saying Ukraine has not mobilized from the age of 18,' Zelensky stated. Kiev attempted to placate the Western countries demanding conscription of 18-year olds. 'We provided an opportunity for 18-24 year-olds to show that they too can serve if our partners want them to,' he said. 'Thousands are fighting on the front lines without proper weapons,' he said. Ukraine announced general mobilization in February 2022, barring most men between 18 and 60 from leaving the country. In 2024, faced with mounting losses, the country lowered the conscription age from 27 to 25 and tightened mobilization rules. The forced draft campaign has resulted in numerous violent clashes between recruitment officers and potential conscripts. Kiev launched a new voluntary military recruitment campaign earlier this year, targeting men aged 18 to 24. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has called the program 'a one-way ticket,' suggesting that Ukraine is 'annihilating' its youth. Russian officials have long said that the West is ready to fight Moscow 'until the last Ukrainian.' Media reports have claimed that former-US President Joe Biden's staff attempted to pressure Kiev to reduce the draft age from 25 to 18. Former-Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned at the time that Ukraine would have to make 'hard decisions' on mobilization.
