Latest / The Fourcast / Inside Trump’s meetings with Putin and Zelenskyy

Transcript

Inside Trump’s meetings with Putin and Zelenskyy · The Fourcast

0:00
If you read the tea leaves, it is clear that some sort of land
0:03
swap is going to happen. What some of these conversations
0:05
have have revealed is the extent to which Russia is interested in
0:09
trying to pry apart the the Americans and the Europeans.
0:12
One of the arguments that comes up over and over again is that
0:15
the reason why we need to contain Putin in Ukraine is that
0:18
it could spill over into the rest of Europe.
0:21
Do you actually think that is a possibility?
0:26
Hello and welcome to the forecast.
0:28
It has been a week of extraordinary diplomacy.
0:31
Donald Trump first meeting Vladimir Putin in Alaska and
0:35
then Vladimir Zelensky in Washington, DC, together with
0:38
his backup band of seven European leaders.
0:41
Encounters that could shape the future of the war in Ukraine and
0:45
America's role in the world. For Putin, it is about
0:48
legitimacy and legacy. For Zelensky, above all, about
0:52
survival. And for Trump, well, maybe
0:55
getting that Nobel Peace Prize, but also proving that he is
0:58
still the master of the art of the deal.
1:02
To unpack what really happened and what it means for NATO, for
1:05
Europe and beyond, I'm joined by Emily Ferris from RUSI and
1:08
William Albert, an expert on arms control and NATO strategy.
1:11
Welcome to you both. Let me start with you, Emily.
1:15
Is this an an exceptional week? Is it an unprecedented week in
1:19
terms of the kind of weird shuttle diplomacy that we've
1:21
seen? I think it is actually, it's
1:25
always very tempting, I think with with these sorts of summits
1:28
to try to divide it into winners and losers and who came out on
1:31
top. But the very fact that it took
1:33
place, at least from Moscow's perspective is, is enormous.
1:36
It's the chance to be seated at the table with another great
1:40
power, to be regarded on equal footing, which after all, is
1:43
what Russia has been wanting for many years.
1:46
It's a chance to put their perspective across, which they
1:49
they claim is something that's lacking from the conversation.
1:53
And it's an opportunity, just as you say, to to cement Putin's
1:56
legitimacy as a great leader. What about you, William?
1:59
What do you think? Put it into context.
2:02
Oh, I absolutely agree. I mean the the fact that the US
2:05
is meeting face to face the president with President Putin
2:09
is legitimacy he so dearly craves.
2:13
The fact that the US is negotiating on the behalf of
2:16
Ukraine without Ukraine in the room is just really painful
2:19
thing for Zelensky to have to go through.
2:22
And the fact that all of this may collapse and what we have in
2:25
the end is some sort of conversation that's happened
2:29
that could lead to further US, Russia relations, arms control
2:33
talks, trade deals, whatever, what have you, at the expense of
2:37
Ukraine. So it really is an unprecedented
2:39
situation as far as I've seen. Emily, what really struck me
2:43
when I was in Alaska and then also covering the events in
2:45
Washington yesterday is that there are two negotiations going
2:49
on here. There's the one between Putin
2:52
and Trump or maybe Putin and then eventually Zelensky and the
2:56
European leaders. And then there's the other
2:58
negotiation that's a daily thing between the Europeans and mostly
3:03
Zelensky and Trump. Because the Western camp, as it
3:07
were, the NATO side is divided and there are things to be seem
3:11
to be changing literally on a on a daily, possibly even hourly
3:14
basis. So given the latest summit in
3:16
Washington and all the really positive mood music and the glad
3:20
handing and the kind of love fest that we saw, where do you
3:23
think today those relations, first of all between the
3:27
Europeans and Zelensky on one side and Trump actually stand?
3:33
Well, I think as far as Russia is concerned, the fact that
3:37
Putin and, and Trump met 1st and they were sort of the, the big
3:41
ticket if you were. And then you have the Europeans
3:43
scrambling for, for an audience with Trump and having a, a
3:48
conversation completely separately is something that the
3:51
Russian press has pointed to with a, with a bit of Glee.
3:54
And they've been talking up especially since Trump took
3:58
office, the the sort of perceived rupture in the West
4:01
between European powers and trying to divide NATO into
4:05
different flanks. And whilst they've been sort of,
4:08
I suppose, cautiously flattering of the American part of NATO,
4:13
what they're really trying to do is so divisions among NATO.
4:16
And I think what what some of these conversations have have
4:19
revealed is, is the extent to which Russia is interested in
4:24
trying to prior part the the Americans and the Europeans.
4:29
Which has been, you could argue, the policy in Moscow for a very
4:32
long time, William. Are they succeeding in prying
4:35
apart the the Europeans from the Americans?
4:38
Because it seems to change literally on a daily basis.
4:42
It really does. And I mean, the Europeans have
4:44
been adapting on the fly on how to deal with Donald Trump.
4:47
I mean, you'll recall in his first term, Jens Stoltenberg was
4:51
very effective at mitigating the the threat of Trump withdrawing
4:56
from NATO. And this time around, they've
4:58
been much better. They've they, they're so well
5:01
prepared this time with Secretary General Ruta
5:03
flattering President Trump very heavily.
5:06
And even the fact that they're there, that the European leaders
5:09
are there with Zelensky, that they're showing support, that
5:13
they're meeting with Trump, although they've been divided,
5:15
the very fact that they're there is kind of an extraordinary
5:18
display of unity that reminds Trump that there are real
5:22
consequences here. But it's also a signal that the
5:24
Europeans realize they're going to have to bear the brunt of
5:27
whatever kind of peace deal, whatever kind of peacekeeping
5:30
force, they're going to be paying the costs for whatever
5:33
happens in Ukraine next. And they're making sure that
5:36
Trump sees that. Trump knows that they're working
5:38
together. They're influencing him.
5:39
I would be far more concerned if they were nowhere to be seen
5:42
throughout this entire process. The fact that they're actually
5:45
putting some influence into the situation means we have at least
5:48
not the worst outcome here. Not a great outcome, but we're
5:51
not seeing the worst outcome, which would be a complete
5:54
washing of the hands of the United States from Europe or
5:56
from NATO or from the Ukraine situation.
5:59
Instead, Trump does seem to be engaged.
6:01
Indeed. But really the price of that
6:03
engagement is sycophancy or a basement in front of Donald
6:07
Trump. I mean, it was amazing.
6:08
I talked to a number of senior European leaders, you know, over
6:11
the years and they always laughed at the fact that there
6:14
was this sort of show of fealty around the cabinet table in
6:16
Washington, you know, with everyone putting up their hand
6:19
up and saying, Trump, you're an amazing guy or Mr. President,
6:22
Sir, you're remarkable. And they were doing exactly the
6:24
same thing yesterday in the White House.
6:26
They each had their little preamble, you know, of, of
6:29
sucking up to Donald Trump. And that is, I guess, the way it
6:32
works in the king of in the in the court of King Donald.
6:37
Unfortunately, yes. And they're the fact that
6:39
they're able to recognize this and they're able to look at
6:42
what's in their real long term interest here and to understand
6:44
that working with Trump requires a certain way of adapting your
6:48
your, the way you would normally do things.
6:50
The fact that they're willing to do this shows that they have
6:53
learned there is an outcome here that they think is possible.
6:57
That would be positive. And again, there was a real fear
7:00
when Trump came in the second time that he would finish the
7:02
business of the first term and withdraw from NATO.
7:05
And the fact that that's not being discussed, that Trump is
7:07
praising NATO, if the cost of that is, you know, kissing up a
7:12
little bit then. And let's face it, the United
7:14
States has always dominated NATO militarily. the United States
7:18
has always played the tune. This may be the most naked and
7:21
distasteful way of showing it, but it's always been in the
7:24
background of these conversations.
7:25
And the fact that instead of, you know, Macron saying no and
7:29
refusing to do so, the fact that he's willing to go along and
7:32
say, hey, look, this is what we need to do for European security
7:35
and for the future of NATO. I'm I'm sad and I'm a little bit
7:39
embarrassed, but I'm also glad that they're working so hard and
7:43
willing to do anything it takes to maintain this alliance.
7:46
Emily, there's, of course, someone else who's playing this
7:48
Bonfire of the Vanities game, and that's a guy called Vladimir
7:51
Putin. I mean, the flattery that he
7:53
came up with in Alaska on Friday was frankly astonishing.
7:56
I mean, he repeated all the president's talking points, some
7:58
of which are frankly, looney from the campaign trail, how the
8:01
2020 election was rigged. And if he had, if Trump had been
8:04
president, then there wouldn't have been war in Ukraine.
8:06
I mean, this is even by by Putin's standards, just kind of
8:09
jaw-dropping really. And again, you kind of wonder
8:13
who's more, you know, who's bigger in Trump's ear, Vladimir
8:16
Putin, you know, the strong man from Moscow who he probably
8:19
admires on one level, or all those Europeans, you know, in
8:23
their, in their varying degrees of English fluency, whispering
8:26
into his ear. Who is more persuasive, do you
8:28
think? Well, I think there's certainly
8:32
a degree of commonality between Putin and Trump in the way that
8:35
they sort of, I suppose, admire personalities that are a little
8:39
bit more brash and perhaps the sort of strong man image.
8:43
But well. That's kind of big.
8:44
Sorry. That's quite a big commonality
8:45
is that, I mean, I'm sure, you know, Trump likes to shut down
8:48
free media that criticizes him. You know, who's done the very
8:51
that very effectively for years, one Vladimir Putin.
8:54
You know, when it comes to kind of, you know, interfering in the
8:56
economy, maybe Putin does less of that than Trump would like to
9:00
do. I mean, there's quite a lot of
9:01
commonality on one level. Well, I suppose there's a
9:05
difference very much between taking personality traits that
9:08
you find appealing and finding common ways of running a
9:11
country. I think those are quite
9:12
different things. But certainly, you know, the
9:14
fact that that Putin is repeating talking points, it's
9:16
something that Trump has also done with Russia's talking
9:19
points, most notably. So it's, it's very interesting
9:22
to see that Trump is sometimes as good as the last thing that
9:25
he's heard. And sometimes if the the last
9:27
thing that he's heard is something that that Putin has
9:29
said, it can be quite alarming. But I don't think it
9:32
particularly costs Putin anything to repeat some of the
9:34
things that the Trump was talking about it.
9:37
It was I think an exercise in trying to restore the bilateral
9:41
relationship that didn't require him to do make any concessions.
9:45
It didn't require him particularly to seem weakened.
9:49
The level of flattery didn't really extend, I think to
9:51
anything particularly overly sincere.
9:55
And then I think the the reaction in the Russian media
9:57
afterwards has been that yes, there might be a meeting, there
10:01
might be a trilateral meeting, but they haven't really they
10:04
committed to the fact that that Putin would attend.
10:06
They suggested, well, there might be other more senior
10:09
leaders in Russia that might come to A to a meeting between
10:13
Zelensky and Trump. But I think they're trying to
10:16
kick this into the long grass to see what the Americans might
10:18
come up with next. And, and just I want to ask you
10:22
both this question. You know, we spent so much time
10:24
analysing the theatre and the body language, you know, of
10:27
Donald Trump and his court and the people around him and all
10:30
that is important because those words actually really do matter.
10:34
And the mood can translate into policy.
10:36
But where we stand right now, what do you think was actually
10:40
decided in Washington? The nitty gritty of any kind of
10:44
security guarantee? What do those plans look like?
10:47
First you, Emily. Well, I don't think anything
10:51
particularly concrete has been decided.
10:53
And perhaps the reason that it's not been published is, is that
10:56
it's in such a sort of febrile state that there isn't really
10:59
anything to discuss yet. I know it's a little bit of a
11:02
boring thing to say, but the fact that the meeting took place
11:05
in and of itself is pretty historic.
11:07
Russia obviously isn't politically isolated when it
11:09
comes to its own partners like China and Iran and Belarus and
11:13
North Korea. But when it comes to the West,
11:15
this is a pretty big deal that they've, they've sort of scored
11:18
this audience with Trump. So I wouldn't denigrate too much
11:22
perhaps the fact that it took place and that it might open the
11:25
door for more conversation. I suppose it just depends the
11:28
extent to which people think that the diplomacy and dialogue
11:33
can be used as a tool of national security and A and a
11:37
tool of foreign policy, rather than something that, as you
11:40
referred to earlier, is is more sort of a basement.
11:42
Right, William, it's interesting.
11:44
I mean, Trump had us all guessing yesterday when he said,
11:46
again, very much off the cuff. You know, there's a lot of loose
11:49
talk there about, you know, maybe there'll be, you know,
11:51
American security guarantees, maybe the troops will get
11:54
involved, maybe not. I mean, again, I was left
11:56
completely confused by the end of it.
11:59
What do you think he was actually trying to say and what
12:02
does he mean? Right.
12:05
I think if you boil it down, if you really parse, if you read
12:09
the tea leaves, I think what was discussed was it is clear that
12:13
some sort of land swap's going to happen.
12:14
So Russia's going to have some land, but they're going to have
12:17
to give up some territory that they're currently holding.
12:21
France, Britain and Germany can put troops in Ukraine as part of
12:25
the peacekeeping force, but not under a NATO flag per SE.
12:29
Now there are ways, hybrid ways to do that, that NATO has done
12:32
before, where it's using the tools of NATO for planning and
12:37
for commitment control, but without a NATO flag, with EU
12:40
leadership instead, which we've done in the Balkans before.
12:43
He said that Crimea is not being returned to Ukraine.
12:46
He said accession to NATO is not going to happen and that the US
12:51
could help Europe to deploy troops and could even possibly
12:55
supply some sort of air support. So I think what was discussed
12:58
was a no fly zone. I think what was discussed was
13:00
European troops on Ukrainian soil.
13:02
I think what was discussed was a security guarantee.
13:04
That would be harder than the Budapest memorandum, which
13:07
promised to have a meeting. If you know anything bad
13:09
happened, this could actually be, you know, kinetic if
13:12
something bad happens and European boots on the ground
13:15
will be absolutely essential to any kind of peace and stability.
13:17
The fact that Trump said those things and that these aren't
13:20
things that people interpreted that he said suggests to me, you
13:23
know, the the way you see him operate, you have a pretty good
13:25
idea of what was discussed now. And you can see the framework of
13:28
a peace agreement coming to force.
13:31
The real question is what's going to happen when Zelensky
13:33
and Putin are in the room together?
13:35
Yeah, and that's going to be our next question.
13:37
But but just before that, there was an interesting article by
13:39
Timothy Snyder, the historian. He was obviously not a a Putin
13:44
fan and not a Trump fan either, saying that the the mere wording
13:48
land swap is incredibly toxic because the Ukrainians have no
13:52
land to speak of to give back to the Russians after they lost
13:56
most of Kursk province. So it would be a swap of land
14:00
for peace and security. But the fact that the Russians
14:03
are talking about land swaps and the fact that Trump picked that
14:05
up sort of makes it look as if, you know, there's an equality
14:08
there of, you know, invasion of territory.
14:11
And there just simply isn't. And I think that's a really
14:13
important point, you know, to keep in mind.
14:15
And so, Emily, I mean this again, because we're so busy
14:18
trying to work out what, you know, Donald Trump thinks.
14:20
What we haven't really established yet is how far do
14:25
you think Vladimir Putin is prepared to compromise?
14:29
Well, I think it's right that that Peter will probably stop at
14:31
nothing to subjugate Ukraine ultimately, whether in the short
14:34
term there would be some sort of security negotiation with
14:38
Ukraine that would, you know. So obviously we're we're not
14:43
going to go for for boots on the ground, but perhaps some sort of
14:46
intelligence showing relationship between the
14:48
Americans and the Ukrainians that endures some sort of aerial
14:52
defence patrol similar I suppose to to what NATO has over the
14:55
Baltic states. There was, I think a lot of
14:58
wiggle room in some of the security guarantees without it
15:01
being something so clumsy as a as sort of soldiers that are
15:04
posted in Ukraine as a deterrence.
15:07
But ultimately the longer term problem is going to be, as
15:10
you've said that that really Putin will not leave it there.
15:13
It will always be the fact that in the next, I don't know, sort
15:17
of 5-10 years when you see perhaps another president in
15:20
power. I mean, it was very interesting
15:21
what you pointed to earlier when you noted that, that Putin
15:25
agreed that if, if Trump, if Trump had been president at the
15:29
time, that he maybe would have considered not invading Ukraine.
15:33
Obviously, we can't know that, but it's a possibility.
15:36
So if, for example, you have, say, a Democrat president in
15:39
power and their position on the Russians is, is very well known
15:44
and very negative, I'm sure that you could see an opportunity for
15:48
the Russians to attempt again, perhaps not something like a
15:51
military invasion of Ukraine, but certainly over the next 5 or
15:54
6 years, you could see them try to invest in their political
15:57
technologies. They'll, as they like to call
15:59
it, to try to influence election processes in Ukraine, to try to
16:02
get parties in power that are ultimately favourable to Russia.
16:07
It will be difficult, but it's certainly something that given
16:10
the mistakes that the Russians made in their intelligence
16:12
assessments of how the Ukrainian people would have responded to
16:15
an invasion of their country, they thought they would welcome
16:17
them with open arms. They're going to be doing a lot
16:20
of, I suppose, revisiting of their own intelligence
16:24
assessments of how Ukraine works, and it will be
16:26
interesting to see what else wrote it next.
16:29
William, I mean, in order to make a deal, whether it's a
16:31
cease-fire or a lasting peace deal, you do need the Russians
16:35
to sign that piece of paper having raised the stakes in
16:39
Ukraine. I mean, he calls it a special
16:41
military operation. But it's, you know, everyone
16:43
knows it's a full scale war. The Russians have lost up to
16:46
1,000,000 men either killed or maimed.
16:48
That's a huge number of men that they've lost and, you know,
16:52
they've been turned into pariah state as a result of the
16:54
response. Certainly in the West And for
16:57
Putin himself, he has said we've got a, a Nazi government in
17:02
Kiev, which of course is nonsense.
17:04
Zelensky is Jewish. But, you know, he said this is
17:06
the worst possible threat. If he doesn't get rid of that
17:09
government, if it doesn't change fundamentally, then in the eyes
17:12
of his own propaganda, he would have lost that war.
17:15
So again, I come back to this, you know, we are very good at
17:17
doing the nuance of security measures here and there.
17:20
But ultimately Putin doesn't do nuance when it comes to Ukraine.
17:25
So where do we meet? Where?
17:26
Where's the Where's the landing strip here?
17:29
Look, this is really an extraordinary situation because
17:31
if if Trump is correct and you're talking about the
17:33
possibility of European troops in Ukraine and the possibility
17:37
of some kind of no fly zone, you're talking about fixing the
17:40
front lines somewhere where Russia does not achieve its war
17:44
aims. You have to believe that Russia
17:46
is just going to try to rearm and somehow divide the Europeans
17:50
and do this again, this is not something that Putin is ever
17:53
going to stop. He, he, he really feels this is
17:56
an existential threat to, to his rule.
17:59
You're right there. Emily is correct as well.
18:01
This will go on. So what really intrigues me is
18:04
what's going to happen between Zelensky and Putin.
18:06
It may be that Putin goes in and blows that meeting up, blame
18:10
Zalenski, and then sees if Trump will side with Putin or Zalenski
18:13
at the end of this and hoping that Trump will side with Putin,
18:17
blame Ukraine for all of this and just wash his hands of the
18:20
whole thing. I think that's got to be Putin's
18:22
play here because otherwise he could declare an end to this
18:25
conflict or cessation of hostilities anytime he wants.
18:29
He can go home anytime he wants. He and and I would push back a
18:33
little bit against what you said.
18:34
I think Putin could declare victory tomorrow and would just
18:38
change the propaganda. He has done this so many times
18:41
during his rule of, you know, whatever I said yesterday that
18:44
never happened. How dare you say I said that?
18:45
This is what I've always said. This has always been the case.
18:48
He can redefine reality within Russia however he wants.
18:51
But I do think it would be an incredible weakening of his
18:54
position of anything less than regime change or, as you point
18:57
out, the complete loss of Ukrainian sovereignty.
19:00
And really, what's on the table right now is more of a holding
19:04
position like the end of World War 2 with East and West Germany
19:06
or the Baltic states under Soviet control, where we're
19:09
kicking some of these problems into the long grass with the
19:12
idea of eventual reunification of Ukraine under Western terms,
19:16
not reunification of Ukraine under Russian control or as a
19:19
Russian province. So I do think Putin is losing
19:22
here. I think he can declare whatever
19:24
he wants and change the narrative.
19:25
I think it will weaken him. But he's also, you know, he's
19:28
also incredibly old as well. I think he's nearing the end of
19:31
his presidency. Yeah, his life.
19:33
I think he wants to. Bring up the same thing, by the
19:36
way. Yeah, no, you're right.
19:38
You're absolutely right. Russian presidents don't leave
19:40
through the door. They get carried off on the
19:42
door. Yeah, So we'll see.
19:44
But I, I do think, I think for Putin, this is existential.
19:48
He can end it, but he could have ended at any point.
19:50
So I do think he's going to try to see this as some kind of
19:53
pause to rearm and then do it again.
19:56
Emily, I want to ask you broaden it out a little bit.
19:58
I mean, it was so impressive to see the Europeans all show up in
20:01
Washington speaking with one voice.
20:03
You know, that's a remarkable thing for Europe these days, to
20:06
have a voice. I know that some some awkward
20:08
squad members were not there, like Viktor Orban.
20:11
But you know, they've got Maloney onside.
20:12
It's sort of populist, right? And they've got and then they've
20:15
got Merts. Who's sort of more in the
20:16
middle? And Macron, you know, I mean,
20:19
it's it's an interesting bunch and they're all talking from the
20:21
same song sheet singing and even.
20:24
But one of the arguments that comes up over and over again is
20:28
that the reason why we need to contain Putin and Ukraine is
20:30
that it could spill over into the rest of Europe.
20:34
Now, do you actually think that is a possibility?
20:37
I think I'd take some convincing about whether Putin really has
20:41
designs on, on the Baltic states.
20:44
Yes, it was psychologically difficult for for Russia to lose
20:47
the Baltic states to the EU and to NATO.
20:49
But I think broadly there is an acceptance in Russia that they
20:52
are part of NATO. And I think Article 5 is, is
20:54
very effective as a deterrence. That doesn't mean that that
20:58
Russia is not interested in the Baltic states.
21:00
They expend a lot of resources, political, financial and and
21:03
intelligence on penetrating the Baltic states to figure out
21:06
what's going on to see if they they can influence political
21:09
parties. And that's much more effective
21:11
than just say a land invasion, something as clumsy as that,
21:15
that would generate a third World War.
21:17
I don't believe that Russia has that interest.
21:19
Then I suppose there's the more, the more practical aspect of it.
21:22
So if Russia has failed geographically to conquer
21:25
Ukraine in terms of territory, which is enormous, there is
21:29
nothing to lead us to suspect that Russia would be able to do
21:31
similar in Europe. I know there's lots of, you
21:33
know, these NATO scenarios about the sulky gap, but this is not
21:37
really something that Russia really refers to or talks about
21:40
very much. It's not an area of weakness
21:42
that Russia is as interested in probing as other things.
21:46
So trying to figure out NATO's logistical weaknesses, for
21:49
example. So there's been plenty of
21:51
attacks on NATO infrastructure in multiple different countries
21:55
across Europe. It's something that Russia is
21:57
very keen to to, to, you know, distance itself from and use the
22:01
third parties and proxies. But we can, we can pretty much
22:04
attribute it to Russia's attempt to try to overload NATO
22:08
infrastructure, things like hospitals and, and water
22:11
treatment plants. So it's clear that Russia thinks
22:15
that trying to distract NATO, prevent it from continuing to
22:19
arm Ukraine and share intelligence, all of these are
22:21
sort of worthwhile causes for Russia to spend its time on.
22:25
But that's a very different scenario than than trying to
22:29
have a sort of territorial takeover of another country.
22:32
And I think there was a real distinction to be made between
22:35
the way that Russia sees Belarus and Ukraine and the way that
22:38
Russia sees other former Soviet territories.
22:40
Because as, as we've sort of discussed earlier briefly, you
22:44
know, Russia sees these countries as that kind of
22:46
triumvirate of, you know, the origin of Kiev and Ruse and the
22:50
heir to this historical Orthodox tradition.
22:53
That's a very different way of thinking than former Soviet
22:58
Union territories and trying to reconstitute.
23:00
I don't really believe that Russia is interested, for
23:03
example, in taking trunks out of northern Kazakhstan.
23:05
The relationship is completely different.
23:07
Yeah. William, do you agree with that
23:10
or do you do you look a little bit doubtful there?
23:13
Well, I think the Cazaks would disagree with that because you
23:15
remember when there was the CSTO, quote, UN quote,
23:18
peacekeeping mission in Kazakhstan and the Russian
23:20
troops wanted to stay. And you had the unprecedented
23:22
step of the president of Kazakhstan talking to Putin in
23:26
Kazakh for the first time that had ever happened in public to
23:29
kind of push back against this what was seen as real Russian
23:33
revanchism. I do think moving nuclear
23:36
weapons into Belarus is a part of the broader effort to
23:39
reabsorb Belarus into a a Russian confederation into what
23:43
they call the Union state that removes with Armenia and
23:45
Azerbaijan before that conflict re kicked off where Russia was
23:49
trying to position itself with Azerbaijan to put peacekeepers
23:52
in there right before the war. And now all that's been blown
23:56
away. So I do think if this war had
23:58
gone differently, if Ukraine had collapsed immediately as Russia
24:01
thought it would, Russia thought this was going to be like the
24:03
Czechoslovakia 1968 campaign and be over in 72 hours.
24:07
If that happened, I think you would see Putin bringing back,
24:11
putting the band back together, you know, putting enormous
24:13
pressure on Kazakhstan, putting enormous pressure on Armenia and
24:17
Azerbaijan, absorbing Belarus more politically rather than
24:20
only militarily. And so then what's the next
24:23
step? As you seen with Ukraine, our
24:25
whole discussion going back to how you started, Russia wants to
24:29
take away Ukrainian sovereignty. I think he wants to take away
24:32
Baltic sovereignty the same way he wants to take away Finnish
24:35
sovereignty. He wants none of the countries
24:36
on his borders to have true sovereignty.
24:39
Whenever you take down a statue of Stalin, the Russians say you
24:42
can't do that. You remember the Russians
24:44
proposed to this big treaty, the European Security Treaty back in
24:47
2010, which would have given Russia veto right over domestic
24:52
legislation in NATO countries. Russia has a very different idea
24:55
of what sovereignty in its near abroad should be.
24:59
And I do think they want to see a massive sphere of influence as
25:02
to whether it's a territorial invasion or not.
25:04
I think if Russia thought it could take some NATO territory
25:07
and break Article 5, show the weakness of NATO, then he would
25:11
do that. But of course, with the 2014
25:15
vision of Crimea and all the things that NATO has done since
25:17
then, including putting troops, NATO troops in Eastern Europe on
25:22
a rotational first and then more on a permanent basis in
25:25
Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, this has sort of taken that move off
25:28
the table. But I think Russia will
25:30
continually test where our boundaries are.
25:33
And if, if we did not put more NATO troops into the Eastern
25:37
Front, I do think he would have thought about more of a
25:39
territorial grab, not to conquer them all per SE, but just to
25:43
show that NATO was hollow. Because ultimately, and again,
25:45
Matt, I go back to what you started with, Russia's longest
25:48
term ambition going back to the Soviet Union is to decouple the
25:52
United States and the UK from European security to to
25:56
sequester them so that he can dominate them.
25:59
And that's the longer term ambition here.
26:01
OK, couple of things before we end Ukraine, right?
26:05
Whether it's a member of NATO or even the EU, at the end of this
26:08
whole process, whether you like it or not, it is going to become
26:11
the best armed, the most qualified at war fighting nation
26:16
probably anywhere in the world. I mean, these guys are really
26:19
good at fighting. I know they're tired.
26:21
They, they're, they're tooled up to the eyeballs.
26:23
They have a mission, you know, they're prepared to sacrifice
26:26
despite more fatigue setting in and all that.
26:29
You don't invite them into your tent at your peril.
26:32
I would say if you have them outside floating around, you
26:35
know, who knows it's going to be running Ukraine in five years
26:37
time. Could Ukraine?
26:39
And Angela Mozila von der Leyen likes to say, you know, it's
26:42
like swallowing a porcupine, the porcupine swallowed by Russia.
26:45
But also it could be porcupine swallowed by Europe or pricking
26:49
up against Europe next to Europe in a kind of uncomfortable way.
26:52
I do think that Ukraine will integrate more and more into
26:56
European structures. Certainly there is much more of
27:00
a problem in the Far East of Ukraine in terms of feeling more
27:03
Russian and being just, you know, separate in terms of how
27:07
they think of themselves. I wouldn't concede that as a
27:09
territorial concession, but I can see the rest of Ukraine
27:12
integrating very well into Europe.
27:14
It really was. I mean, the Maidan protest at
27:17
the 1st place was a real desire by the majority of Ukrainians to
27:21
integrate into Western Europe. So I can see this as a long term
27:24
project. And you're absolutely right, we
27:26
shouldn't leave them alone. They have massive capability.
27:29
We've seen their technological prowess, their ability to
27:32
develop even under wartime, amazing technologies, their
27:35
ability to adapt, their willingness to adopt, you know,
27:38
great countermeasures against crime and corruption, to take on
27:42
EU legislation. This was all part of this whole
27:44
story. And so I do think they will
27:46
integrate. And leaving them alone is,
27:47
you're absolutely right. It would be a terrible move.
27:49
It would create this weird Badlands in the center of
27:52
Europe, you know, between Belarus and Ukraine as the sort
27:55
of ungoverned space with rampant corruption.
27:57
And that's where we were 1015 years ago.
27:59
We need to take care of this. And I'd say the same thing with
28:02
Moldova and Transnistria as well.
28:03
We can't allow these Cold War hangover gaps to exist.
28:08
We need to integrate more of these territories into a
28:11
European way of thinking, European business style,
28:13
European education. And I do think that's the great
28:16
way forward. And whether it's through the EU
28:18
or through NATO or some combination, I I think it has to
28:22
happen for Europe's future. OK.
28:24
Emily, just briefly, will you can become a liability or an
28:26
asset for us in Europe? Annoyingly, I'm sorry to answer
28:31
this in such a way. It very much depends on how the
28:33
war ends. I think it depends on whether
28:37
this is a an enormous defeat for Ukraine.
28:40
It depends on Europe's willingness to to sort of
28:43
integrate them, as William was saying.
28:45
But it also depends on the extent to which they're able to
28:47
root out some of the corruption problems that they do have.
28:50
The reason that they have been precluded from NATO membership
28:52
before was not only because there was a war on their
28:55
territory, but also the corruption problems that William
28:58
noted earlier. They're really quite systemic.
29:01
It's very difficult to get out of that way of thinking.
29:04
And yes, of course there are European standards that that can
29:06
be imposed. But as some of the processes in
29:09
Ukraine around their anti corruption agencies showed only
29:11
a few weeks ago, it will be a little bit of a damper to those
29:15
that were hoping that Ukraine might be able to rid itself of
29:18
some of those elements. So hopefully there will be a
29:23
strategic plan for integrating Ukraine into into structures
29:26
because of course what you don't want is the porcupine that you
29:30
referred to and you don't want that to be absorbed by Russia or
29:34
for Russia to take advantage of that chaos as well.
29:36
So if there is a vacuum that that Europe and NATO are not
29:39
able to fill, you can probably guarantee that Russia will be
29:42
there to try to absorb some of that discontent and and
29:45
weaponize it against Europe. OK, we're going to end with one
29:48
quick question to both of you. There's a lot of bad that has
29:52
happened in the last 3 1/2 years.
29:54
Lots of lives lost, countries trampled on.
29:57
Now we have the insecurity, the mercurial nature of Trump's
30:01
presidency, Monarchy. Call it what you like.
30:03
What is the one good thing that has come out of this strange
30:07
relationship between Trump, Europe, Zelensky and Putin?
30:10
The one good thing? Emily, you first.
30:12
One good thing. Sorry, I can't think of
30:15
anything. OK, All right.
30:16
Yeah. What about you, William?
30:17
Is there a good thing? Yes, I think there is.
30:19
I think the fact that Europe has woken up to the idea that the
30:22
world is a dangerous place and that defence matters and you go
30:26
back to 2013, the US had removed the last battle tank from
30:29
Europe. NATO spending on defense was
30:31
hovering around 1%. The Japanese had very little
30:35
spent on defense. Everyone in the West was just
30:37
thinking we don't have to take care of these things.
30:40
And Russia and China and North Korea and Iran did not think
30:44
that way. And they were arming.
30:46
You know, we now know that China was well into a nuclear build up
30:48
at this point. Russia is, you know, at that
30:51
point was still 15 years into a major nuclear build up.
30:54
And the fact that we were willing to ignore that across
30:56
Europe, that in the UK, if they were talking about, you know,
31:00
getting rid of nukes, all of this is over.
31:03
And now we're looking at Europe and the UK really thinking hard
31:07
about the future of security. And that it's based on the
31:10
traditional things of national power, of cooperation and
31:13
alliances on top of all that, of solid industrial base, all these
31:18
kinds of thinking. I think that this is a terrible
31:21
dark timeline, but at least you see people waking up and being
31:25
serious about security and how to contribute to peace is not
31:29
through total unilateral disarmament, but through working
31:31
together to make a stronger future.
31:33
Emily Ferris, William Albert, thank you very much to both of
31:36
you. I hope you've enjoyed the
31:37
forecast. See you next time.