February 20, 2025 • 19 mins
It has been three years since Russia invaded eastern Ukraine, a dramatic escalation in the conflict between the two countries that has been raging for over a decade.
And for three years, Ukraine has fought hard to defend itself. Over 12,000 civilians are believed to have died, a similar number captured or detained, while estimates on the military deaths range from the tens to hundreds of thousands.
During this war, most of the Western world has sided with Ukraine, and supported the country financially and with tanks and missiles.
But that could soon change, with US President Donald Trump arranging peace talks with Russia without Ukraine’s involvement.
New Zealand freelance journalist Tom Mutch has been in Ukraine for much of the last three years, and he returns to The Front Page today to discuss the state of the invasion as a potential end to the conflict approaches.
Follow The Front Page on iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can read more about this and other stories in the New Zealand Herald, online at nzherald.co.nz, or tune in to news bulletins across the NZME network.
Host: Chelsea Daniels
Sound Engineer/Producer: Richard Martin
Producer: Ethan Sills
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
He our own Chelsea Daniels and This is the Front Page,
a daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald. It's
been three years since Russia invaded Eastern Ukraine, a dramatic
escalation in the conflict between the two countries that has
been raging for over a decade, and for three years
(00:28):
Ukraine has fought hard to defend itself. Over twelve thousand
civilians are believed to have died a similar number captured
or detained, while estimates on the military deaths range from
tens to hundreds of thousands. During this war, most of
the Western world has sided with Ukraine and supported the
country financially and with tanks and missiles, but that could
(00:51):
soon change, with US President Donald Trump arranging peace talks
with Russia without Ukraine's involvement. New Zealand freelance journalist Tom
March has been in Ukraine for much of the last
three years, and he returns to the Front Page today
from Kiev to discuss the state of the invasion as
a potential end to the conflict approaches, Tom, can you
(01:17):
give us a lay of the land. How much has
actually changed in terms of control of land in recent months?
Speaker 2 (01:24):
The answer is not a huge amount. There have been
a bit of control. It's worth going back to that
August last year because that's when Ukraine actually took its
first major chunk of territory in a long time. When
it captured it was around a thousand square kilometers in
Russia's Cursed Oblast in a sort of a surprise lightning offensive.
(01:48):
Since then, the Russians have managed to take back maybe
just over half of that, and they have also managed
to take a little bit of territory in Ukraine's Don
bas Rea. So they captured a few major towns Karakhove, Velikanovasilka, Selindov.
Those names might not mean much to your listeners, but
(02:09):
they're basically medium sized towns of ten to twenty thousand
people at least before the war, and some of them
are being quite important Ukrainian defense of strongholds. But they
haven't yet captured pert Krovsk, which is a rather large
sized Ukrainian city in the south of the Dnetzk region
that has been their main target for a while. And
(02:30):
if you zoom out, it's really they've only captured about
half of one percent of Ukrainian territory in that time. Period.
So while it's not a good trajectory, it's very very
far from them looking like they're going to capture the
whole country anytime soon.
Speaker 3 (02:50):
I think I have the power to end this war,
and I think it's going very well. But today I heard, oh,
we weren't invaded. Well, you've been there for three years.
You should have ended it three years. You should have
never started, and you could have made a deal.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Leading to an unprecedented response from President Zelensky, who accused
Donald Trump of living in a bubble. It is unfortunate
the President Trump, and with great respect for him as
the leader of the American people who constantly support us,
unfortunately lives in this disinformation space.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
Right.
Speaker 1 (03:28):
I guess the big change in recent weeks and in
months that there's been some big diplomatic shifts. Donald Trump
held phone calls with Vladimir Puden and Zelensky and has
decided to initiate peace talks with Russia, but not with Ukraine.
Trump's now calling Zelensky a dictator, saying he's done a
terrible job and could have made a deal earlier. How
(03:49):
do Ukrainians feel about this?
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Well, the irony is that this has actually made Zolensky
quite a lot more popular to just dismiss the dictator allegations.
Nobody in Ukraine who's really calling Zelensky a dictator. There
are certainly people who disagree with him politically. There are
also military leaders who've criticized his strategic policies on the battlefield,
(04:12):
and there are some definitely, particularly in the area of
military strategy, where Zelenski can be quite roundly criticized for
his decisions over the last several years. But there's no
massive clamor in Ukraine for elections, and rather, actually this
is giving Zelensky quite a big boost of support in Ukraine.
I think one poll showed his poll numbers had gone
(04:33):
up by about ten percent literally overnight since Trump made
that comment, Because it's not like Ukrainians are opposed to
having new elections. They're opposed to having new elections on
the timetable of the US and Russia, who now look
like they're gaining up against Ukraine. And in some ways
it's also made Ukrainians sort of feel like even more
(04:56):
like they're resisting a great enemy. They're not just resisting Russia,
They're resisting both the pressure of Russia and the US.
At the same time.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
Well, Ukraine's also been under martial law since Russia invaded
in February twenty twenty two, and you don't have elections
under marshal law, right.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
Well, yes, that's according to the Ukrainian constitution. And the
thing is, though there are different historical precedents. You can
argue the US had elections during the Civil War, Britain
and most European countries didn't have elections during the Second
World War. However, to hold an election a few years
late after a period of martial war when the country
(05:34):
is an a real you know, getting hit by rockets
every day, Like imagine trying to imagine if Australia was
bombing New Zealand every day and you were trying to
set up polling stations in schools, how popular do you
think that would be? What would people be saying? It
would be considered a total joke. And so I think
what people in Ukraine are really angry at is that
(05:57):
the US and Russia trying to use that as a
widge to ouse the president for who, whatever his flaws,
has been democratically elected. And I will say Ukraine does
have many problems with issues about the rule of law
and issues with corruption. However, Ukraine has had six peaceful
democratic transfers of power since independence. Russia has had the
(06:22):
same leader for twenty five years.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
This is something that should have never happened, would have
never happened. And I used to discuss it with Putin.
President Putin and I would talk about Ukraine and it
was the apple of Isaya, I will tell you that.
But he never there was never a chance of him
going in. And I told him you better not go in,
don't go in, don't go in. And he understood that,
he understood it fully. But I'm only interested. I want
(06:48):
to see if I can save maybe millions of lives.
This could even end up in a World War three.
I'm mean to be honest with you. You've been hearing
now Europe to say, well, I think we're going to
go in, and we're going to go all of a sudden,
you could end up in World War three.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
Well, there are reports that the US now wants half
of Ukraine's critical mineral deposits to quote payback the US
billions spent fighting Russia. What are these critical minerals? And
is this idea even realistic?
Speaker 2 (07:19):
So I am I'm certainly not a geologist, so I
hope any geologists listening don't tear me to pieces. But
as I understand, Ukraine has quite large reserves of I
believe lithium, cobalt, I believe a silica that are very
deep beneath its sort of steps, particularly in the east.
(07:43):
It also has a bit of gold, and it has
quite a lot of coal as well. But Ukraine has
never really been in a position to be able to
extract all of these, and so originally Zelenski and Trump
seemed to be talking about a partnership whereby the US
would provide support and help Ukraine to extract these minerals.
The US would get the effectively right to verse refusal
(08:06):
to buy them, and then would use them effectively to
both pay back the money that Ukraine had taken for
them for its military defense and also to help with
the reconstruction of Ukraine. So on the face of it,
it didn't seem like that terrible an idea when people
were first talking about it, particularly when Zelensky met Trump
I believe it was November of last year. However, it
(08:29):
turned out that Zelensky had basically been given a fake
a company be like give US all the stuff and
basically not really being given anything in return, not being
given US security guarantees. I remember I was in the
room with Zelensky when he was asked this question, and
he just said, it just wasn't in our sovereign national interest.
(08:50):
It wasn't you know, what we want to what we need.
It doesn't help secure the future of our country. And honestly,
I think that's why Trump is so mad, because he's
kind of used to having in the US sort of
putting all his opponents under his thumb, and now there's
one person who's coming out with him, you know, from
a small, poor, corrupt country all the way across the
(09:12):
rest of the world, is one of the only people
who's actually willing to stand up and say, no, that's
not in me or my country's national interests, and I'm
not going to accept that. I think that's just driving
Donald Trump crazy.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
French President Emmanuel mccran hosted European leaders for an emergency
summit after they too felt cut out of those peace talks.
Speaker 2 (09:42):
How are leaders across.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Europe reacting to the dramatic change in the US's approach
to Ukraine.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
They're not reacting particularly well. They've been shocked, right, And
you know, there was one incident where the chairman of
the Munich Security Conference was caught on cam in tears
following Vice President J. D Vance's speech. Now, some people
are saying that that was a clip slightly out of context, but.
Speaker 4 (10:09):
What it really did was sort of it's sort of
regardless of how strictly it sticks to the timeline of
who said what, when, it sort of captured the overall
mood that the Europeans.
Speaker 2 (10:19):
Were shocked and appalled. And you know, the security blanket
that they'd taken from for granted from the US basically
since the late nineteen forties had suddenly been ripped from
under them. And at least I felt that this was
rather silly of them, because they've had a lot of warnings.
I remember I was at a conference in Prague about
(10:40):
three months ago and the President of the Czech Republic
gave the keynote speech in which he said something along
the lines of, look, Donald Trump was the wrong messenger,
but he did have a message we should have listened to,
which is that Europe cannot rely on the United States
for its security indefinitely. And they had a warning. This
(11:01):
is what Peter Pava, the chef President, said there was
a warning between twenty seventeen to twenty twenty one that America,
even if it wasn't Donald Trump, would probably end up
electing a leader who was not going to see European
security as worth investing it. And we've got to do
it ourselves. And then another warning came, surely the biggest
one of all should have said, the Clatson's absolutely firing
(11:23):
red lights everywhere. That was when Russia escalated its invasion
of Ukraine in February twenty twenty two. And yet still
they didn't take it seriously. Still, they didn't start massively
ramping up production facilities. Still they decided to have the endless,
interminable debates over how to drip feed weapons to Ukraine
in what announts and at what time periods, and where
(11:44):
they were allowed to use them on what square kilometer
of the battlefield. That rubbish. And now they're sort of
looking very scared and helpless because they don't really know
what to do because none of those countries have invested
in their arms. And honestly, there's only really one country
in Europe left with a powerful, modern armed forces, and
(12:07):
that is Ukraine.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
Well, uk PM Kiir Stamer's suggested he's prepared to put
troops on the ground.
Speaker 2 (12:13):
Is that really likely?
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Wouldn't that kickstart a wider kind of NATO conflict, one
potentially without the US's backing.
Speaker 2 (12:20):
Oh yeah, So this is the worry, right, So what
we're trying to talk about now is that one thing
is and look, it seems like the peace talks have
kind of maybe even broken down before they started, after
what Trump's been saying over the last few days. However,
one of the ideas that was coming through is Ukraine
was basically saying, Okay, look, we're willing to potentially sign
up to a ceasefire to ORG recapturing the occupied territories.
(12:43):
But what's most important to us is that we get
a guarantee that this is not going to happen again,
because the problem is, in nineteen ninety four they signed
the Budapest Memorandum where they gave up nuclear weapons. Now,
just to be clear, there's a big debate over whether
Ukraine could have actually had a functioning nuclear deterrent in
the nineteen nineties, but regardless, the piece of paper that
(13:06):
was signed was to respect Ukraine's international borders. Then in
twenty fourteen they effectively conceded the loss of Crimea without
a fight, you know, and were forced to fight that
sort of Russian insurgency in the in the eastern Donbass region.
And then remember that Crimea, so they conceded without a
fight in twenty fourteen, was then used as effectively one
(13:29):
big military base to invade the rest of southern Ukraine.
So they are just worried that the Russians will take
any cease fire as a chance to re arm, regroup
and come back and do this again in five or
teen or twenty five years now. The ideal guarantee of
Ukraine's security, their leaders believe, would be NATO membership, But
even before Trump was elected, most people in diplomatic circles
(13:51):
were saying, we're not willing to sign up to that.
So what people are looking for instead is alternative potential
security guarantees. One of those would be to have a
European peacekeeping force along the line of contact with Russia,
so we're talking along that it's about nine hundred mile
long front line. The idea would be that that would
(14:12):
be demilitarized, that everybody would move their heavy weapons back
that they'd be like a demilitarized zone of say, you know,
a little bit like there is between North and South Korea,
or like there was between North and South Vietnam.
Speaker 5 (14:27):
If Ukraine is ultimately left out of some of the
major negotiations and does not agree to any potential deal,
what could.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
It mean for the future of that country.
Speaker 5 (14:37):
Yeah, I mean they always have the final scene, right,
I mean, that's definitely the privilege that they have, and
they should have and they should be involved in this
and at every stage. But I think that one of
the leverage points here would be what kind of support
are they getting to the United States? That seems to
be the leverage the same thing of what is being
done to Russia.
Speaker 2 (14:55):
Were they given to get out of this?
Speaker 5 (14:58):
You know, they have huge inflation, they have a lot
of sanctions against them, so there's probably some carrots there.
And then again, Ukraine would be depending on the United
States greatly, And this is where a lot of the
talks right now about Europe and NATO being able to
support them directly. That's where I think we're coming to
you at this point.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
Now, you've met with Zelensky recently, Hey, what did you
guys discuss so.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
I got very lucky. I was cool to a small,
quite intimate meeting of journalists and here it was a
couple of journalists and we were in Munich in the
Bairishahoff Hotel, and I actually got a chance to say
to him, Look, a lot of people in New Zealand
and this is honestly true, and we both know it,
(15:44):
have sort of switched off from this. They think it's
very sad, but that it's sort of a far away
conflict with which we can't do anything about, and that
honestly doesn't really concern us. And it's not just how
people in New Zealand feel, it's how people in Australia feel,
or maybe in Canada to feel. However, and I put
that question to him and I said, look, we're a
(16:06):
small country, very far away the Lenscape. You just broke
and he said, he said, yeah, you should be very
very happy you are so far away from Russia. In
the room sort of just burst out laughing. I'm from
New Zealand. We're a very small country, we're very far
away and a lot.
Speaker 5 (16:21):
Of people you're very happy that you're.
Speaker 2 (16:28):
But then he turned on on a more serious note. Look,
this war is not really confined to Ukraine anymore. First,
the first other nation to join the war has been
North Korea, and North Korea getting a lot of missiles,
They've been getting a lot of drones, and in modern warfare,
these drones have ranges of thousands and thousands of kilometers
and this can be used to affect the security of
(16:51):
the Asia Pacific region, which is very relevant to New
Zealand and Australia's security interests. He then goes on to
say that there was a you know, there's a possibility
of a wider regional conflagration with he just sad other
conflicts in the region, and I understand that he was
referring to China and Taiwan, but he did. I don't
(17:11):
think he wanted to say China out loud because Ukraine
does see China as a potential partner that could put
pressure on Russia to de escalate its war aims.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
And like you said, we are far away. What can
the New Zealand government do at this point. Should we
be involving ourselves in the diplomatic side of things or
is aid the best tool at the moment.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
So I was actually contacted a while ago by a
representative of Ukrainian government with precisely this in mind, and
he said something which was basically, look, you know, New
Zealand has a reputation for being a peaceful country, that
New Zealand's contribution to peace talks would actually be encouraged.
(17:57):
She wanted me to encourage New Zealand politicians to attend
the Swiss peace conference that was held without huge amounts
of success a couple of months ago. So there is that,
and then it's always worth noting the most important contribution
that New Zealand has made to Ukraine's security, which is
the New Zealand troops that have been training Ukrainian forces
(18:20):
in the UK. They've gotten very good reviews and they've
done a very important job. So I think continuing or
even escalating to that support to that training mission is
a very important way to do it. It's also low
cost not putting New Zealand soldiers in Kalm's way, and
from my experience talking to the soldiers there, they were
(18:42):
saying it was one of the most rewarding things they'd
ever done in their life. So I think that New
Zealand training mission is always really important to keep in mind.
Thanks for joining us, Tom, No worry, It's always a pleasure.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You
can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
at enzdherld dot co dot nz. The Front Page is
produced by Ethan.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
Sills and Richard Martin, who.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
Is also a sound engineer. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to
The Front Page on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts,
and tune in on Monday for another look behind the headlines.
He our own Chelsea Daniels and This is the Front Page,
a daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald. It's
been three years since Russia invaded Eastern Ukraine, a dramatic
escalation in the conflict between the two countries that has
been raging for over a decade, and for three years
(00:28):
Ukraine has fought hard to defend itself. Over twelve thousand
civilians are believed to have died a similar number captured
or detained, while estimates on the military deaths range from
tens to hundreds of thousands. During this war, most of
the Western world has sided with Ukraine and supported the
country financially and with tanks and missiles, but that could
(00:51):
soon change, with US President Donald Trump arranging peace talks
with Russia without Ukraine's involvement. New Zealand freelance journalist Tom
March has been in Ukraine for much of the last
three years, and he returns to the Front Page today
from Kiev to discuss the state of the invasion as
a potential end to the conflict approaches, Tom, can you
(01:17):
give us a lay of the land. How much has
actually changed in terms of control of land in recent months?
Speaker 2 (01:24):
The answer is not a huge amount. There have been
a bit of control. It's worth going back to that
August last year because that's when Ukraine actually took its
first major chunk of territory in a long time. When
it captured it was around a thousand square kilometers in
Russia's Cursed Oblast in a sort of a surprise lightning offensive.
(01:48):
Since then, the Russians have managed to take back maybe
just over half of that, and they have also managed
to take a little bit of territory in Ukraine's Don
bas Rea. So they captured a few major towns Karakhove, Velikanovasilka, Selindov.
Those names might not mean much to your listeners, but
(02:09):
they're basically medium sized towns of ten to twenty thousand
people at least before the war, and some of them
are being quite important Ukrainian defense of strongholds. But they
haven't yet captured pert Krovsk, which is a rather large
sized Ukrainian city in the south of the Dnetzk region
that has been their main target for a while. And
(02:30):
if you zoom out, it's really they've only captured about
half of one percent of Ukrainian territory in that time. Period.
So while it's not a good trajectory, it's very very
far from them looking like they're going to capture the
whole country anytime soon.
Speaker 3 (02:50):
I think I have the power to end this war,
and I think it's going very well. But today I heard, oh,
we weren't invaded. Well, you've been there for three years.
You should have ended it three years. You should have
never started, and you could have made a deal.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Leading to an unprecedented response from President Zelensky, who accused
Donald Trump of living in a bubble. It is unfortunate
the President Trump, and with great respect for him as
the leader of the American people who constantly support us,
unfortunately lives in this disinformation space.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
Right.
Speaker 1 (03:28):
I guess the big change in recent weeks and in
months that there's been some big diplomatic shifts. Donald Trump
held phone calls with Vladimir Puden and Zelensky and has
decided to initiate peace talks with Russia, but not with Ukraine.
Trump's now calling Zelensky a dictator, saying he's done a
terrible job and could have made a deal earlier. How
(03:49):
do Ukrainians feel about this?
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Well, the irony is that this has actually made Zolensky
quite a lot more popular to just dismiss the dictator allegations.
Nobody in Ukraine who's really calling Zelensky a dictator. There
are certainly people who disagree with him politically. There are
also military leaders who've criticized his strategic policies on the battlefield,
(04:12):
and there are some definitely, particularly in the area of
military strategy, where Zelenski can be quite roundly criticized for
his decisions over the last several years. But there's no
massive clamor in Ukraine for elections, and rather, actually this
is giving Zelensky quite a big boost of support in Ukraine.
I think one poll showed his poll numbers had gone
(04:33):
up by about ten percent literally overnight since Trump made
that comment, Because it's not like Ukrainians are opposed to
having new elections. They're opposed to having new elections on
the timetable of the US and Russia, who now look
like they're gaining up against Ukraine. And in some ways
it's also made Ukrainians sort of feel like even more
(04:56):
like they're resisting a great enemy. They're not just resisting Russia,
They're resisting both the pressure of Russia and the US.
At the same time.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
Well, Ukraine's also been under martial law since Russia invaded
in February twenty twenty two, and you don't have elections
under marshal law, right.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
Well, yes, that's according to the Ukrainian constitution. And the
thing is, though there are different historical precedents. You can
argue the US had elections during the Civil War, Britain
and most European countries didn't have elections during the Second
World War. However, to hold an election a few years
late after a period of martial war when the country
(05:34):
is an a real you know, getting hit by rockets
every day, Like imagine trying to imagine if Australia was
bombing New Zealand every day and you were trying to
set up polling stations in schools, how popular do you
think that would be? What would people be saying? It
would be considered a total joke. And so I think
what people in Ukraine are really angry at is that
(05:57):
the US and Russia trying to use that as a
widge to ouse the president for who, whatever his flaws,
has been democratically elected. And I will say Ukraine does
have many problems with issues about the rule of law
and issues with corruption. However, Ukraine has had six peaceful
democratic transfers of power since independence. Russia has had the
(06:22):
same leader for twenty five years.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
This is something that should have never happened, would have
never happened. And I used to discuss it with Putin.
President Putin and I would talk about Ukraine and it
was the apple of Isaya, I will tell you that.
But he never there was never a chance of him
going in. And I told him you better not go in,
don't go in, don't go in. And he understood that,
he understood it fully. But I'm only interested. I want
(06:48):
to see if I can save maybe millions of lives.
This could even end up in a World War three.
I'm mean to be honest with you. You've been hearing
now Europe to say, well, I think we're going to
go in, and we're going to go all of a sudden,
you could end up in World War three.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
Well, there are reports that the US now wants half
of Ukraine's critical mineral deposits to quote payback the US
billions spent fighting Russia. What are these critical minerals? And
is this idea even realistic?
Speaker 2 (07:19):
So I am I'm certainly not a geologist, so I
hope any geologists listening don't tear me to pieces. But
as I understand, Ukraine has quite large reserves of I
believe lithium, cobalt, I believe a silica that are very
deep beneath its sort of steps, particularly in the east.
(07:43):
It also has a bit of gold, and it has
quite a lot of coal as well. But Ukraine has
never really been in a position to be able to
extract all of these, and so originally Zelenski and Trump
seemed to be talking about a partnership whereby the US
would provide support and help Ukraine to extract these minerals.
The US would get the effectively right to verse refusal
(08:06):
to buy them, and then would use them effectively to
both pay back the money that Ukraine had taken for
them for its military defense and also to help with
the reconstruction of Ukraine. So on the face of it,
it didn't seem like that terrible an idea when people
were first talking about it, particularly when Zelensky met Trump
I believe it was November of last year. However, it
(08:29):
turned out that Zelensky had basically been given a fake
a company be like give US all the stuff and
basically not really being given anything in return, not being
given US security guarantees. I remember I was in the
room with Zelensky when he was asked this question, and
he just said, it just wasn't in our sovereign national interest.
(08:50):
It wasn't you know, what we want to what we need.
It doesn't help secure the future of our country. And honestly,
I think that's why Trump is so mad, because he's
kind of used to having in the US sort of
putting all his opponents under his thumb, and now there's
one person who's coming out with him, you know, from
a small, poor, corrupt country all the way across the
(09:12):
rest of the world, is one of the only people
who's actually willing to stand up and say, no, that's
not in me or my country's national interests, and I'm
not going to accept that. I think that's just driving
Donald Trump crazy.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
French President Emmanuel mccran hosted European leaders for an emergency
summit after they too felt cut out of those peace talks.
Speaker 2 (09:42):
How are leaders across.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Europe reacting to the dramatic change in the US's approach
to Ukraine.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
They're not reacting particularly well. They've been shocked, right, And
you know, there was one incident where the chairman of
the Munich Security Conference was caught on cam in tears
following Vice President J. D Vance's speech. Now, some people
are saying that that was a clip slightly out of context, but.
Speaker 4 (10:09):
What it really did was sort of it's sort of
regardless of how strictly it sticks to the timeline of
who said what, when, it sort of captured the overall
mood that the Europeans.
Speaker 2 (10:19):
Were shocked and appalled. And you know, the security blanket
that they'd taken from for granted from the US basically
since the late nineteen forties had suddenly been ripped from
under them. And at least I felt that this was
rather silly of them, because they've had a lot of warnings.
I remember I was at a conference in Prague about
(10:40):
three months ago and the President of the Czech Republic
gave the keynote speech in which he said something along
the lines of, look, Donald Trump was the wrong messenger,
but he did have a message we should have listened to,
which is that Europe cannot rely on the United States
for its security indefinitely. And they had a warning. This
(11:01):
is what Peter Pava, the chef President, said there was
a warning between twenty seventeen to twenty twenty one that America,
even if it wasn't Donald Trump, would probably end up
electing a leader who was not going to see European
security as worth investing it. And we've got to do
it ourselves. And then another warning came, surely the biggest
one of all should have said, the Clatson's absolutely firing
(11:23):
red lights everywhere. That was when Russia escalated its invasion
of Ukraine in February twenty twenty two. And yet still
they didn't take it seriously. Still, they didn't start massively
ramping up production facilities. Still they decided to have the endless,
interminable debates over how to drip feed weapons to Ukraine
in what announts and at what time periods, and where
(11:44):
they were allowed to use them on what square kilometer
of the battlefield. That rubbish. And now they're sort of
looking very scared and helpless because they don't really know
what to do because none of those countries have invested
in their arms. And honestly, there's only really one country
in Europe left with a powerful, modern armed forces, and
(12:07):
that is Ukraine.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
Well, uk PM Kiir Stamer's suggested he's prepared to put
troops on the ground.
Speaker 2 (12:13):
Is that really likely?
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Wouldn't that kickstart a wider kind of NATO conflict, one
potentially without the US's backing.
Speaker 2 (12:20):
Oh yeah, So this is the worry, right, So what
we're trying to talk about now is that one thing
is and look, it seems like the peace talks have
kind of maybe even broken down before they started, after
what Trump's been saying over the last few days. However,
one of the ideas that was coming through is Ukraine
was basically saying, Okay, look, we're willing to potentially sign
up to a ceasefire to ORG recapturing the occupied territories.
(12:43):
But what's most important to us is that we get
a guarantee that this is not going to happen again,
because the problem is, in nineteen ninety four they signed
the Budapest Memorandum where they gave up nuclear weapons. Now,
just to be clear, there's a big debate over whether
Ukraine could have actually had a functioning nuclear deterrent in
the nineteen nineties, but regardless, the piece of paper that
(13:06):
was signed was to respect Ukraine's international borders. Then in
twenty fourteen they effectively conceded the loss of Crimea without
a fight, you know, and were forced to fight that
sort of Russian insurgency in the in the eastern Donbass region.
And then remember that Crimea, so they conceded without a
fight in twenty fourteen, was then used as effectively one
(13:29):
big military base to invade the rest of southern Ukraine.
So they are just worried that the Russians will take
any cease fire as a chance to re arm, regroup
and come back and do this again in five or
teen or twenty five years now. The ideal guarantee of
Ukraine's security, their leaders believe, would be NATO membership, But
even before Trump was elected, most people in diplomatic circles
(13:51):
were saying, we're not willing to sign up to that.
So what people are looking for instead is alternative potential
security guarantees. One of those would be to have a
European peacekeeping force along the line of contact with Russia,
so we're talking along that it's about nine hundred mile
long front line. The idea would be that that would
(14:12):
be demilitarized, that everybody would move their heavy weapons back
that they'd be like a demilitarized zone of say, you know,
a little bit like there is between North and South Korea,
or like there was between North and South Vietnam.
Speaker 5 (14:27):
If Ukraine is ultimately left out of some of the
major negotiations and does not agree to any potential deal,
what could.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
It mean for the future of that country.
Speaker 5 (14:37):
Yeah, I mean they always have the final scene, right,
I mean, that's definitely the privilege that they have, and
they should have and they should be involved in this
and at every stage. But I think that one of
the leverage points here would be what kind of support
are they getting to the United States? That seems to
be the leverage the same thing of what is being
done to Russia.
Speaker 2 (14:55):
Were they given to get out of this?
Speaker 5 (14:58):
You know, they have huge inflation, they have a lot
of sanctions against them, so there's probably some carrots there.
And then again, Ukraine would be depending on the United
States greatly, And this is where a lot of the
talks right now about Europe and NATO being able to
support them directly. That's where I think we're coming to
you at this point.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
Now, you've met with Zelensky recently, Hey, what did you
guys discuss so.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
I got very lucky. I was cool to a small,
quite intimate meeting of journalists and here it was a
couple of journalists and we were in Munich in the
Bairishahoff Hotel, and I actually got a chance to say
to him, Look, a lot of people in New Zealand
and this is honestly true, and we both know it,
(15:44):
have sort of switched off from this. They think it's
very sad, but that it's sort of a far away
conflict with which we can't do anything about, and that
honestly doesn't really concern us. And it's not just how
people in New Zealand feel, it's how people in Australia feel,
or maybe in Canada to feel. However, and I put
that question to him and I said, look, we're a
(16:06):
small country, very far away the Lenscape. You just broke
and he said, he said, yeah, you should be very
very happy you are so far away from Russia. In
the room sort of just burst out laughing. I'm from
New Zealand. We're a very small country, we're very far
away and a lot.
Speaker 5 (16:21):
Of people you're very happy that you're.
Speaker 2 (16:28):
But then he turned on on a more serious note. Look,
this war is not really confined to Ukraine anymore. First,
the first other nation to join the war has been
North Korea, and North Korea getting a lot of missiles,
They've been getting a lot of drones, and in modern warfare,
these drones have ranges of thousands and thousands of kilometers
and this can be used to affect the security of
(16:51):
the Asia Pacific region, which is very relevant to New
Zealand and Australia's security interests. He then goes on to
say that there was a you know, there's a possibility
of a wider regional conflagration with he just sad other
conflicts in the region, and I understand that he was
referring to China and Taiwan, but he did. I don't
(17:11):
think he wanted to say China out loud because Ukraine
does see China as a potential partner that could put
pressure on Russia to de escalate its war aims.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
And like you said, we are far away. What can
the New Zealand government do at this point. Should we
be involving ourselves in the diplomatic side of things or
is aid the best tool at the moment.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
So I was actually contacted a while ago by a
representative of Ukrainian government with precisely this in mind, and
he said something which was basically, look, you know, New
Zealand has a reputation for being a peaceful country, that
New Zealand's contribution to peace talks would actually be encouraged.
(17:57):
She wanted me to encourage New Zealand politicians to attend
the Swiss peace conference that was held without huge amounts
of success a couple of months ago. So there is that,
and then it's always worth noting the most important contribution
that New Zealand has made to Ukraine's security, which is
the New Zealand troops that have been training Ukrainian forces
(18:20):
in the UK. They've gotten very good reviews and they've
done a very important job. So I think continuing or
even escalating to that support to that training mission is
a very important way to do it. It's also low
cost not putting New Zealand soldiers in Kalm's way, and
from my experience talking to the soldiers there, they were
(18:42):
saying it was one of the most rewarding things they'd
ever done in their life. So I think that New
Zealand training mission is always really important to keep in mind.
Thanks for joining us, Tom, No worry, It's always a pleasure.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You
can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
at enzdherld dot co dot nz. The Front Page is
produced by Ethan.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
Sills and Richard Martin, who.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
Is also a sound engineer. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to
The Front Page on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts,
and tune in on Monday for another look behind the headlines.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.