Trump Official Recommends European Troops Stabilize Ukraine After Ceasefire
- Europe International Affairs News On Russia North America
Shreya Naskar- 0
- 5 minutes read
In a noteworthy proposal that may shape the post-war architecture in Eastern Europe, Keith Kellogg, special envoy to Ukraine under former U.S. President Donald Trump, has outlined a plan for a multinational “reassurance force” to operate in Ukraine following a ceasefire with Russia. At the heart of the strategy lies the deployment of British and French troops to establish control zones west of the Dnipro River—a move Kellogg believes could stabilize the region, support Ukrainian sovereignty, and avoid further escalation with Russia.
Proposal Overview
The Dnipro River, one of Ukraine’s most prominent natural features, has emerged as a central element in Kellogg’s peacekeeping proposal. Acting as a geographic barrier that roughly bisects Ukraine, the Dnipro provides a logical division line between Ukrainian-controlled territories to the west and Russian-occupied areas to the east. Kellogg’s vision involves stationing British and French troops west of this river in a post-ceasefire environment. This area would serve as a demilitarized buffer zone, reducing the likelihood of renewed hostilities and helping to enforce the terms of any peace agreement. Kellogg drew historical comparisons to post-World War II Berlin, where Allied powers administered separate sectors to preserve order and deter conflict. He emphasized that the use of a natural boundary, rather than arbitrary lines, would make the proposal more acceptable to both Ukraine and Russia. “You’re west of the Dnipro, which is a natural barrier,” Kellogg explained, reinforcing the logic of using geographical limits to de-escalate tensions. To further reduce risks, Kellogg suggested the establishment of a no-fire zone or a monitoring buffer area along the current front lines. While acknowledging that ceasefire violations may still occur, he asserted that such breaches would be easier to identify, document, and address in a structured framework.
Following concerns and speculation regarding potential U.S. military involvement in this initiative, Kellogg took to social media to provide important clarifications. He made it explicitly clear that the United States would not be sending troops as part of the peacekeeping arrangement. Instead, Washington’s role would be focused on diplomatic support and coordination behind the scenes. Kellogg also pushed back against criticisms that the plan might imply a partitioning of Ukraine. “I was talking about a peacekeeping force to support Ukraine’s sovereignty after a ceasefire, not about dividing the country,” he wrote on X (formerly Twitter). This distinction was vital in addressing anxieties within Ukraine and among its allies that any foreign-led military oversight could compromise national unity or independence.
While the proposal presents a clear vision for stabilizing post-conflict Ukraine, it is far from without challenges—most notably, the uncertain response from the Kremlin. Russian President Vladimir Putin has historically rejected any peacekeeping initiatives involving NATO-affiliated forces, viewing them as thinly veiled attempts at Western expansion. Although Kellogg’s proposal emphasizes non-U.S. involvement and is led by European powers, Moscow may still perceive it as a strategic threat. Further complicating the situation is the question of Ukrainian leadership legitimacy. Zelensky’s original five-year presidential term is set to expire in May 2024, yet elections remain suspended under martial law—a situation that Russia and some opposition groups have used to question his legitimacy. Kellogg acknowledged these concerns but argued that elections could follow a ceasefire, returning decision-making power to the Ukrainian people and parliament. This vision places sovereignty and democratic legitimacy at the centre of the post-war order, reinforcing the proposal’s focus on Ukrainian agency rather than foreign imposition.
Beyond military considerations, Kellogg’s proposal is part of a broader vision to strengthen U.S.-Ukraine relations, especially through economic collaboration. Recent discussions between the two nations have focused on Ukraine’s valuable mineral resources, which include rare earth elements essential for global technology and defence industries. While these talks began as business-oriented initiatives, there is growing momentum to transform them into a diplomatic agreement that could support Ukraine’s economic recovery and strategic independence. Such agreements would offer Ukraine not only financial support but also long-term geopolitical security, reducing its vulnerability to foreign coercion by diversifying its economic partners and export channels.
