It seems that Keith Kellogg, Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine, got fired over leaking news of the 28-point ‘peace plan’. Let’s follow the traces.
On Tuesday the 18th November someone ‘leaked’ to Axios reporter Barak Ravid who then wrote the first story of Trump’s new plan for Ukraine.
Scoop: U.S. secretly drafting new plan to end Ukraine war
The plan’s 28 points fall into four general buckets, sources tell Axios: peace in Ukraine, security guarantees, security in Europe, and future U.S. relations with Russia and Ukraine.
…
Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff is leading the drafting of the plan and has discussed it extensively with Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev, a U.S. official said.
Shortly thereafter Steve Witkoff made a mistake on Twitter when he sent a response meant for a private direct message to the public side of his account. He soon deleted it but someone had already taken a screenshot.
bigger
Senior US officials confirm details of 28-point plan to end Ukraine war
The [Marco Rubio] comment came after Axios on Tuesday reported a deal had been reached, citing Putin henchman Kirill Dmitriev, who claimed he worked on the plan with Witkoff.
Senior US officials believe Dmitriev leaked the plan to Axios as a way to put their “their POV out there first [because] it seemed like they were winning,” one of the officials said. “This is just a tit for tat. Always has been.”
Witkoff appeared to have surmised the same in a quickly deleted post to X in response to the article Tuesday night.
“He must have got this from K,” Witkoff wrote of the Axios author, Barak Ravid — apparently meaning to send it as a DM referring to Dmitriev by his first initial.
I seriously doubt that the “K” Witkoff mentions was Kirill Dmitriev. Dimitriev is not a Washington insider. He is unlikely to leak anything to an Israeli mouthpiece at Axios.
Another “K”, intimately involve in all things Kiev is General Keith Kellogg. When the leak happened he still was Trump’s special envoy to Kiev and will have had knowledge of the plan.
A day later after the leak to Axios Kellogg got fired. As Reuters reported on Wednesday:
Exclusive: Trump’s Ukraine envoy Kellogg to leave post in January, sources say
WASHINGTON, Nov 19 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s Special Envoy for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, has told associates he plans to leave the administration in January, four sources told Reuters, a departure that would mean the loss of a key advocate for Ukraine in the Trump administration.
Special presidential envoy is a temporary designation, and such envoys in theory must be confirmed by the Senate to stay in their positions past 360 days. Kellogg has indicated that January would be a natural departure point, given existing legislation, said the sources, who requested anonymity to discuss private conversations.
His departure will be unwelcome news in Kyiv. The retired lieutenant general was widely viewed by European diplomats, Ukrainians included, as a sympathetic ear in an administration that has at times leaned toward Moscow’s view on the origins of the war in Ukraine.
I doubt that the sources claim to Reuters that Kellogg is leading because of a January deadline. That would be an official reasoning. But The Hill reported on Friday that the White House is dumb on this:
Trump special envoy for Ukraine to leave post
President Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, will depart his position in January, the White House confirmed to The Hill on Thursday, as the president has renewed efforts to end Russia’s war against Kyiv.
The White House did not provide any other details about the reasons for the departure of Kellogg, whose role and influence in the Trump administration elicited mixed reactions.
…
He was originally appointed in January as special envoy for Russia and Ukraine, and had earlier advocated conditioning U.S. military aid on Kyiv agreeing to participate in peace talks. Kellogg’s profile was downsized to only focusing on Ukraine when Trump brought in Witkoff to serve as a special envoy to Russia.In his position, Kellogg was viewed as an advocate for Kyiv in an administration that more closely hewed to the Kremlin’s negotiating position.
Anonymous sources to Reuters, and The Hill, say that Kellogg was leaving because time was running out before he would needed Congress confirmation. The point in time for that would be in January.
But if that is so why wouldn’t the White House confirm it?
And if January is the end-date, why was Kellogg’s replacement already named on Friday?
As the Guardian wrote yesterday:
Zelenskyy says Ukraine has impossible choice as Trump pushes plan to end war
A delegation of senior US military officials led by the army secretary, Dan Driscoll, held talks with Zelenskyy on Thursday in Kyiv. Trump has named Driscoll – Vance’s friend and former classmate – as his newest “special representative”. The group of American generals was likely to fly to Moscow at the end of next week to discuss the “peace plan” with the Kremlin, US sources said.
To summarize:
- The 28-point plan leak to Axios happened on Tuesday.
- Witkoff texting immediately that “K” was the leaker.
- On Wednesday Reuters reports that Kellogg is leaving in January.
- On Thursday The Hill reports that the White House ‘gave no detail’ about his leaving.
- ‘Senior US officials’ obfuscate the issue in the NY Post by claiming that Witkoff’s “K” meant Kirill Dmitriov.
- On Friday The Guardian says that Kellogg’s job and title have already been handed over to someone else.
I will bet a 100 in any currency that it was Kellogg who had leaked the plan. Witkoff complained about it to Trump (or Vance). Kellogg got fired with immediate effect. His replacement is already in. Anonymous claims that Kellogg is leaving for other reasons are obfuscations (by Kellogg himself?) and wrong.
Yesterday Dan Driscol, Kellogg’s replacement, was already briefing European ambassadors in Kiev:
The US army secretary Dan Driscoll briefed ambassadors from Nato nations at a meeting in Kyiv late on Friday, after talks with Zelenskyy and taking a phone call from the White House. “No deal is perfect, but it must be done sooner rather than later,” he told them, according to one person who was present.
The mood in the room was sombre, with several European ambassadors questioning the content of the deal and the way in which the US had conducted the negotiations with Russia without keeping allies informed.
“It was a nightmare meeting. It was the ‘you have no cards’ argument again,” said the source, referring to Trump’s claim that Zelenskyy had no cards to play, during a contentious White House meeting back in February.
Alastair Crooke, who has personal experience in hardcore diplomacy, thinks that the 28-point plan is part of an escalation to press Russia into making concessions:
This set of proposals is not likely to be accepted by the Europeans, Russia or even Zelensky. Their purpose is to dictate a completely new start-point to any negotiation. Any Russian concessions stipulated in the text will be ‘pocketed’ by the US, whilst the rug will be pulled on Russia’s ‘stated principles’. The pressures on Russia will escalate.
In fact, escalation has already begun. Coinciding with publication of the proposals, four long-range US-supplied and targeted ATACMS were fired deep into Russian pre-2014 territory at Voronezh, which is where Russia’s over-the-horizon strategic radars are situated. All were shot down, and Russian Iksander missiles immediately destroyed the launch platforms and killed the 10 launch operators.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has threatened yet more sanctions for Russia, and Trump has indicated that he is ok with Senator Lindsay Graham’s 500% sanctions proposal for those trading with Russia – provided that he, Trump, has complete discretion over the new sanctions package.
The overall aim to these proposals clearly is to corner Putin, and push him off his fundamental principles — such as his insistence on eliminating the root causes to the conflict, and not just the symptoms. There is no hint in this paper of any recognition of root causes [expansion of NATO and missile emplacements] beyond the vague promise of a “dialogue [that] will be conducted between Russia and NATO, mediated by the United States, to resolve all security issues and create conditions for de-escalation, thereby ensuring global security and increasing opportunities for cooperation and future economic development”.
Blah, blah, blah.
It seems that escalation is ahead. Russia will need to consider how to militarily deter the US effectively, yet without starting up the steps of the escalatory ladder to WW3 …