Ukraine partition proposal: Envoy's words spark controversy

According to his concept, British and French forces would oversee the western region of Ukraine as part of an international "stabilization force." At the same time, the Russian military would maintain control over the occupied zones in the east. Positioned between these two areas would be Ukrainian troops and a demilitarized zone.

In his vision, British and French troops could control the western part of Ukraine as part of "stabilization forces," while the Russian army would control the occupied territories in the east. Ukrainian forces and a demilitarized zone would be located between these areas.

Kellogg believes that the presence of Anglo-French forces west of the Dnieper, which runs through Ukraine from north to south, would not be provocative for Moscow.

Dramatic footage from the US: A helicopter fell into a river

He emphasized that Ukraine is large enough to accommodate international forces that would ensure compliance with a peace agreement. He added that the United States does not plan to send its troops to Ukraine.

To prevent direct clashes between the Anglo-French and Ukrainian forces, along with other allied "voluntary coalitions," and Russian troops, Kellogg proposed establishing a buffer zone between the Ukrainian and Russian lines. Based on the geographical layout, both sides could be repositioned approximately 9 miles apart to create a demilitarized zone.

After the article's publication, Kellogg wrote on his social media profile that "The Times" distorted his words.

"I was referencing areas or zones of responsibility for an allied force (without US troops). I was NOT referring to a partitioning of Ukraine," he assured.