Diplomatic reckoning: U.S. Special Rep calls for strategic reset in Ukraine conflict [ANALYSIS]

By Farman Aydin I AzerNEWS

Keith Kellogg, the U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine, took the stage at the prestigious Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, presenting a sharp critique of current U.S. foreign policy towards Ukraine and Russia. His remarks signaled a growing shift in Washington's approach and underscored the complexities of the ongoing conflict. Kellogg’s analysis painted a picture of a diplomatic landscape in which the United States must confront its failures, recalibrate its strategies, and face hard truths about its alliances and adversaries.

Call for diplomacy, not isolationism

Kellogg’s central message was unambiguous: Washington must reset its relationship with Moscow. He argued that isolationism—refusing to engage with both allies and adversaries—has become a critical diplomatic failure. According to Kellogg, the strategy of cutting off dialogue and retreating into a narrow worldview has only undermined the U.S.’s position on the global stage. The notion of a "reset" with Moscow might sound unpalatable to some, but Kellogg insisted it is a necessary recalibration, given the failure of current policies to bring about a lasting resolution.

One of the most striking points in Kellogg’s speech was his acknowledgment of the suspended intelligence-sharing between the U.S. and Ukraine. This, he argued, represents a significant concession to Russia. By withholding vital intelligence, the U.S. has inadvertently limited Ukraine’s ability to target Russian forces and has reduced its capacity to mount an effective defense. Kellogg pointed to this as a serious misstep in the West’s commitment to Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Kellogg did not shy away from placing blame squarely on Ukraine for the current limitations on intelligence-sharing. According to Kellogg, Ukraine’s actions—cutting off intelligence access and limiting cooperation—directly impacted the Ukrainian military’s operations on the ground. This growing pressure, he contended, has effectively hampered the country’s ability to press forward on the battlefield, undermining the broader Western effort to weaken Russia's hold in Ukraine.

A surprising turn in Kellogg’s comments was his praise for the Trump administration’s stance on the conflict. He highlighted that the previous administration actively sought a peaceful resolution by balancing pressure and incentives for both Russia and Ukraine. These measures included the seizure of frozen Russian assets and imposing strict energy sanctions—a strategy designed to bring both sides to the negotiation table. Kellogg argued that this approach was more practical than the current policy, which seems mired in a stalemate.

Crucial U.S.-Ukraine minerals deal: precondition for military support

Kellogg also underscored the importance of a crucial development: the U.S.-Ukraine minerals deal. For the U.S. to resume intelligence sharing and military aid to Ukraine, Kellogg emphasized, Kyiv must agree to this deal. This requirement, according to him, is non-negotiable. The Ukrainian leadership, particularly President Zelensky, has been under increasing pressure to sign the deal. Kellogg was clear in his assessment, warning that without this agreement, military aid and intelligence sharing would not resume.

Kellogg went on to recount President Zelensky’s recent visit to the White House, noting that the purpose of the trip was to move forward with the signing of the U.S.-Ukraine agreement. However, the document was never signed—a setback that Kellogg framed as a clear roadblock in U.S.-Ukrainian relations. In no uncertain terms, he asserted that no further progress could be made without this vital signature.

The Special Representative shared that during his recent trip to Kyiv, he had been "blunt and clear" with President Zelensky about the consequences of not signing the agreement. Kellogg made it clear to Zelensky that failure to proceed with the deal would have direct and negative consequences for Ukraine’s access to U.S. support, leaving no room for ambiguity.

Despite these criticisms, Kellogg did not hold back from expressing admiration for Zelensky. He lauded the Ukrainian president’s leadership in the face of overwhelming adversity, recalling his refusal to flee Kyiv at the onset of the invasion, instead opting to remain and request ammunition rather than a "taxi." This, Kellogg stated, was the mark of a true leader—one who inspires loyalty and respect from his allies, a leader with whom "you’d want to have a beer."

Kellogg’s remarks reveal a growing frustration with the current direction of U.S. foreign policy regarding Ukraine and Russia. His speech points to the necessity of a more pragmatic, diplomatic approach—one that does not shy away from tough negotiations and honest conversations. As the situation continues to unfold, it remains clear that U.S. support for Ukraine is conditional, and the path forward hinges on strategic concessions and agreements that align with both Ukrainian and American interests.