March 27, 2025 • 29 mins
Newt talks with Cliff May, founder and president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, about the recent ceasefire negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, led by the Trump administration. President Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, has engaged with Putin, leading to a tentative agreement on an energy and infrastructure ceasefire. Their discussion provides insights into the geopolitical dynamics and the challenges of negotiating with Putin. May emphasizes the importance of a firm stance by Trump to ensure a meaningful ceasefire and the broader implications of Russia's actions on global stability. They also discuss the historical context of Russia's ambitions and the strategic importance of supporting Ukraine.
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 (00:04):
On this episode of Newts World. The recent ceasefire negotiations
between Ukraine and Russia, led by the Trump administration, have
challenged the traditional way we negotiate with our allies and adversaries.
President Trump's Special envoy, Steve Whitcoff, has visited Moscow met
with Putin about what it would take to agree to
a ceasefire. Putin presented a list of demands. Appears some
(00:29):
progress may have been made in a phone call between
Trump and Putin. They agreed to quote an energy and
infrastructure ceasefire which may or may not be actually being
held here to discuss when negotiations stand with the potential
Ukraine Russia seasfire. I'm really pleased to welcome back my
guest and good friend, one of the most knowledgeable people
(00:50):
and one of the most active people on foreign policy
and the survival of America, Cliff May, founder and President
of the Foundation for Defensive Democracies. His recent hop ed
Trump's Ukraine diplomacy faces Putin test was featured in The
Washington Times on March eighteenth. I must say I also
sent it out to everybody I have on accent on
(01:12):
true social Cliff, welcome and thank you. For joining me
again on News World.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Thanks Nu, it always great to be with you.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
Before we get into specifics, would you just take a
minute to tell our listeners what is the Foundation for
Defensive Democracies.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Yeah, it's a think tank that was set up just
after the attacks of nine to eleven oh one. The
reason is called the Foundation for Defense of Democracies was
based on the idea that democratic societies, free nations are
under threat. And in two thousand and one, two thousand
and two, we thought that threat was mostly from non
state actors, from it Islamists and Jihattists. Those were new
(01:58):
words back then. Is worse than that today. In two
thousand and one, everybody kind of thought Russia would be,
you know, like become like Poland, it would become more European,
more liberal, more moderate. That's not happened over the more
than twenty years that Putin's been in power. And in
two thousand and one, you remember Knut, we gave most
Favored Nation status to communists China brought them into the
(02:20):
wto again they can say to be generous. The great
experiment there was. Once China became wealthier thanks to us,
it would become more modern, more liberal more of a
friend that also didn't happen, and instead what you have
now is at access of aggressors Shijinping in Beijing, Vadimir
Putin in Moscow, Ali Kameni and Tehran, and Kim Jongan
(02:42):
in Pianyang, North Korea, and they threatened the United States
and other democratic, free societies. That's kind of what we
concentrate on.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
Well, and you have a team of experts who were
collectively remarkable and many of them very knowledgeable with practical
experience in the field.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Yes, I mean it's a monthly crew of former academics,
former spies, former government officials, a few inkstainted wretches like myself.
As you know, I used to be a foreign correspondent
for the New York Times and other publications during better days.
I would say.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Better days for them too.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
Yeah, they've unfortunately gone off the rails almost as much
as the rest of the planet. So on March eleventh,
the United States and Ukraine released a joint statement after
a meeting in Saudi Arabia where Ukraine agreed to an
immediate thirty day seasefare and the United States would immediately
lift the pause on intelligence sharing and resume security assistance
(03:38):
to Ukraine. What do you think this particular statement means
for the future negotiations?
Speaker 2 (03:45):
Not a lot. As you know, the Ukrainian president, Volodomir Zelenski,
he got his arms twisted by President Trump and said, Okay,
I agree no conditions, a thirty day absolute cease fire.
I'll do it. That's fine. I'll go do the rarer
mineral deal with you. I'll do that. That's fine. Basically,
so whatever you say, mister Trump. But Putin hasn't said that.
(04:07):
Putin has said, you know, if you want me to
go into a ceasefire, there are certain preconditions I want
you to meet. I'll give you the list. And he
never stopped firing, and he's not agreed to a cease fire.
And my contention is that he can be made to
do so, but that will require that President Trump also
twist his arm, and I do think that's possible. I
(04:29):
think President Trump had it just to use a Trumpian phrase,
he's got the cards to play. He just got to
play them. He'd rather not perhaps he'd rather just be
all very smooth and cooperative. It's not going to be
you have to twist Putin's arm if you want to
get a ceasefire, and that would be a reasonably good thing.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
I think it's clear that right now we don't have
his attention. He thinks he can just keep moving forward
on his own terms and that somehow will crumble in
the face of his tenacity.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
He's very good at that. He wouldn't be in power
for more than twenty years in that country if that's
not the case. He is a retired or former KGB
lieutenant colonel. He knows what he is doing, and he
is saying, and not truthfully, my economy's fine. I'm not
really worried. I've got plenty of ammunition, and he is
getting ammunition, munitions from North Korea. He's getting missiles from Tehran.
(05:23):
He's getting due use technology from China. There are reputable
economic and military analysts who would say that his economy
is suffering badly, that he doesn't have enough bodies to
grow on the front line and try to pave over
inches of Ukraine. He might actually like a ceasefire to
build up his forces to rearm, to regroup, but he
(05:44):
doesn't want Ukraine doing the same thing. And if there's
a ceasefire, that's exactly what Ukraine needs to do. It
needs to get heavily rearmed. It needs to establish deterran
capabilities it didn't have three years ago, largely because Biden
and before him. While AAMA didn't want to give Ukraine
lethal weapons, Trump did, including javelins, anti tank weapons, and
(06:06):
we want Ukraine to become what is called these days
a porcupine. Hard difficult for a predator to digest well.
Speaker 1 (06:14):
Trump at times seems to be too soft on Putin,
both in cutting off the second natural guess pipeline and
in providing the javelins, which may have been the key
weapon that stopped the initial Russian offensive. The Putin probably
doesn't regard Trump as a patsy or immediate ally, but
he's going to shove him and see how far he
(06:36):
can shove him.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
Yes, he's very good at that. Steve Whitcoff was made
envoy and has met with Putin and then went on
Tucker Carlson's show. A lot of what Witkoff said struck
me as well. He's getting, how to say, played by
Vladimir Putin when he says things like I think Putin
is satisfied with the territory he has, and aren't those
really Russian territories anyway, Well, he's not satisfied. We know
(07:02):
that about him. I can talk to you about reason
about the evidence we have, but it's substantial farthest being
Russian territories. That can only be said to be the
case based on what almost everybody, including the Institute for
the Study of War would say are sham referendums that
took place in those areas, plus Russians being moved in
and Ukrainians either fleeing or otherwise moving out. My cards
(07:23):
on the table, I would like to see Putin defeated
in this. I would like to see Ukraine regain sovereign
independence through all of its borders. I don't think that's
likely at this point, but I think if President Trump
can get a ceasefire along the current lines of control,
that means like twenty percent eighteen percent really of Ukraine
(07:44):
would be taken over by Russia, the eastern portion and Crimea,
which was taken in two thousand and fourteen by Russia,
and you freeze the conflict. That's probably good enough at
this point, as good as you're going to get. Keep
in mind, frozen conflicts can last a long time. North
Korea and South Korea are not at peace. It's a
frozen conflict. And South Korea has done very well in
(08:07):
the meantime, and North Korea is a terrible place. And
that's fifty three years that we've had a frozen conflict.
Of course, kept frozen, not least by what are now
about twenty eight thousand American troops in South Korea.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
The pattern there, it seems to me, is exactly what
Putin doesn't want. She makes pretty clear at one point
the Ukraine's not allowed to have foreign armies on the soil,
but the Ukraine's not allowed to rebuild its military, et cetera.
It's kind of like, will allow the baby lamb to
lay there for a while until we think it's time
to eat it.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
That's exactly right, and I think there Trump has to
get a little bit tough with them and say that's
not the way it's going to be. The Europeans have
been stepping up in the sense that the British and
the French have said we can send in peacekeepers. I
think Trump should take that as a victory for him.
He's been demanding since his last term that Europeans take
more responsibility. They're making an effort. Good for them, Let
(09:00):
them do that. We have about half a dozen nations
who have written to the European Commission Lafia, Lithuania, Poland
others saying let's expedite Ukraine's admission to the European Union. Wow,
good for them. That's also very helpful. Well, if we
have to understand about Putin, and let me say this
as somebody who's been studying this for a rather long time.
I first went to Russia when I was a teenager
(09:23):
in nineteen sixty nine. I've been there as a foreign
exchange student in Soviet times. I've been there as a journalist.
I was also an election observer in Ukraine at its
most recent elections. I feel like I've been a Putinologist
for the past twenty years. So let me tell you
who he is and what he wants. He sees himself
as the Tsar and his mission as the Tsar, and
(09:43):
I understand this is to restore the Russian Empire and
to be the czar and to restore the Russian Empire.
What does that mean? You must be the Tsar and
I'm using Russian phraseology here, the Tsar of all the Russias.
What does all the Russias mean, well, it means Russia.
It means russ translates its white Russia. It means Ukrain
(10:03):
translates its frontier of Russia. That's essential. But then you
want whatever else you can get, including the Baltic states,
which you'll remember, and this is interesting in this regard
nineteen forty the Baltics Exitstonia, Latvia, Lithuania. The Soviet Union
took them over. The US never recognized that, and they
were vassal states for a very long time until the
(10:25):
Soviet Union fell. Belarus is now a vassal state of Russia.
Already in two thousand and eight, Putin took two provinces
away from neighboring Georgia, which was also part of the
Soviet Empire and before that part of the Russian Empire.
Nineteen thirty nine, the Soviet Union tried to drag Finland
back into the Russian Empire. At the end of the day,
(10:46):
the Russians got ten percent of Villain's territory, but Finland
never gave up its independence, and two years ago he
joined NATO. So that's what's going on. Putin is a
man in his seventies. He has more money than he
can ever spend. He gets to kill his enemies, his
critics with impunity. He has a girlfriend half his age.
She's a rhythmic gymnast. I don't really know what that means,
(11:06):
but it sounds intriguing. And he wants to be a
czar in the mold of maybe Alexander the Great, maybe
Ivan the Terrible.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
His self image was either Peter the Great.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Peter the Great established what became known as Leningrad now Petersburg.
Again that was very much looking westward because it was
a westward capital. The most important influence on Putin is
a political philosopher by the name of Alexander Dugan, who
is a Eurasianist, and his theory, his belief is that
Russia is not a European power, never was. It's a
(11:40):
Eurasian power, much more aligned with, for example, China than
with Europe. And he said the European values and American values, tolerance, freedom,
those are not Russian values, never were. Should not be
seen as that we should not be looking west or
going west. We're something very different. Hates America. I got
quote from him on that this is an important point. Yes,
(12:02):
Dugan sees America and Europe is degenerate. And there are
some of the Americans who are right of center people
you and I know who think because we also think
this too much generously in America and Europe. Therefore, Dugan
and therefore Putin, they're kind of on our side. They're
traditional values and Christians. It's not true. It's not true. Yes,
(12:23):
we may agree with them that we shouldn't have boys
playing volleyballs on girls team, but Ali Kamani thinks that too,
I'm sure, as does Kim Jong Lun. That doesn't make
them our allies.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
To build on that. It's interesting that Soldier needs them.
Maybe the greatest Russian writer of the last century, after
leaving the Zola Union, coming to live in Vermont writing
his extraordinary series on the Russian Revolution, finally goes back
home because in fact, he sort of would agree. The
(13:10):
West is not Russia. The West is this kind of
degenerate place where people have no discipline, no order, no structure,
no sense of the mystery of life. I don't think
he'd approve a Putent, but I think that he would
have some reverence for a Czar like structured environment.
Speaker 2 (13:27):
I think that's exactly right. What you've expressed is a
nuanced understanding, and I fear there are some of our friends,
and not least in this administration, who don't have quite
that nuanced understanding of why. I mean. I liked Sosis
and as a writer, I got to meet him one
time when I was studying Russian actually in Vermont. There's
a Russian school at Norwich University up there that I
(13:49):
spent a summer. It was a very interesting thing to do.
But yes, this goes beyond to take a very antagonistic
and hostile attitude towards America and the West. You know,
if you ask yourself, and I really do believe there
is this axis of aggressors between Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and Pyanyang.
What do they have in common. It's not ideology. It's
(14:10):
really hostility towards America and the West and the desire
to displace America as the pre eminent world power and
to have a new world order. And they talk about
this a new world order that they lead and America
becomes a has been empire.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
But there's a different part of this, which is, while
they may not be a European country, I really question
in the long run their capacity to truly be allied
to China simply because of the underlying mythical sense of
the Mongol yoke and the degree to which still almost
(14:45):
a thousand years later, the experience of the Mongols was
so horrifying destroyed Kiov Moscow rises only because it's in
the middle of the forest and not worth the Mongol's effort.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Very important point, and let me talk about this just
one second. You're right, and that's traditionally the way the
Russians sought anybody from Asia. But Dugan kind of takes
the attitude, No, we do have Mongol roots in part,
and we should be proud of that. The whole concept
of the Russian Empire that arose immediately following the Mongol Empire,
(15:18):
the idea of cons They really replicated that the czar
was sort of a long Mongol alliance.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
This is true too.
Speaker 2 (15:25):
Over the long run, Russian and China are not in
good alliance. At some point, the leader in Beijing is
going to look north and say, the Russians don't have
many people, they have a lot of resources. I have
many people in many resources. Why is Vladivostok Russian? And
what does Vladivostok mean? Vlad has in Vladimir means conqueror,
(15:47):
Vastok means East, Vladivostok means conqueror of the East. But
that's long term. Right now, the Russians are getting use
technology from China, but also giving China various technological help
where they can, making China a stronger power and reducing
the delta between Chinese power and Russian power. That would
not appear to be in their interest, but I think
(16:09):
Putin thinks I have to do what I have to
do now, and we'll worry about what happens twenty thirty,
forty years from now later. Some people say, well, it's
only a transactional alliance. It is, but it's more than that,
because again they want the United States displaced in the world.
And just one more point about world order. It's a
funny phrase, for sure, but there always is a world
(16:32):
order of some sort. Like a fish not being aware
of water. Most Americans not aware of what the world
order is, and the world order since the end of
World War Two has been one in which America has
essentially dominated with a light hand, but dominated trying to
use international law on that sort of thing, rather than
just saying we make the rules. Beijing Moscow, Tehran, Pianyang.
(16:53):
They all see that and they want to displace it.
And what the way they say is we need a
multipolar world. Isn't that fairer? And that appeals to a
lot of people on the left. You have multipolar world,
not you know, American hegemony. Oh, America is imperialists who
know America needs to be the premianive power in the
world because if it's not a very bad power like
that in Beijing will become Communist Party of China is
(17:15):
the most powerful communist party in the world if they
end up dominant. Can we really say we won the
Cold War or was there just a hiatus after a
particularly important battle.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Yeah, we won the subsidiary fight. Putin who also learned
some lessons from Gorbachev, one of which I think was
that killing your opponents is better than losing control.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
And that's a lesson from Stalin, right. Stalin part of
his success was he didn't just kill his enemies. He
killed those who might someday become his enemies. Why take
a chance?
Speaker 1 (17:45):
What did he say at one point that one death
is a tragedy, a million deaths as a statistic. That's
exactly what he said and of course he's a Georgian,
so further proof that the original Empire included the country
of Georgia.
Speaker 2 (17:58):
Very unusual for there to be Zar or communist leaders
who were not actually Russian, but he was one of
the great exceptions to that. Absolutely for sure.
Speaker 1 (18:07):
And I suspect Putin admires him.
Speaker 2 (18:09):
I think we know that he does. I don't think
Putin's a communist again, he's more along the lines of
Alexander Dugan in terms of Eurasianism and Russia's soul.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
I think he admires his use of power.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
He absolutely admires his use of power. And by the way,
that keep in mind, one of the things, not all,
one of the reasons why Ukrainians do not want to
be ruled by the Kremlin is what Stalin did to
them in the nineteen thirties by imposing a famine on them,
a man made famine made by Stalin that killed at
least three million Ukrainians, was particularly directed at what they
(18:44):
call the kula ki, which means what they would call
the rich peasants. What is a rich peasant. It's a
farmer who does well because he works hard, and they
stole all the grain from them and left them to die.
Is a wonderful movie I always recommended called Mister Jones,
which had a journalist who goes there and manages to
break free of his minder. As a journalist, you always
get a minder in Russia and go to the Ukraine
(19:06):
and see for himself that the famine is taking place, which,
sadly the New York Times at that point was not reporting.
Speaker 1 (19:13):
The description in that movie of the Western reporters gathering
together to protect Stalin. Make sure that none of them
reported accurately.
Speaker 2 (19:23):
In the townhouse of Walter Duranti, who was the New
York Times correspondent who won a Pulitzer Prize for his
distorted reporting on Stalin.
Speaker 1 (19:31):
I'd say it's one of the three times that The
New York Times has won Pulitzer Prizes for being totally dishonest,
none of which have ever been returned, of course. But
let me go back to Putin and Ukraine. It seems
to me that what Putin's trying for us is a
little bit like a great bluff and poker is he'd
be happy to have a temporary ceasefire while he rebuilt
his forces. Well, Ukraine was blocked from doing anything to
(19:54):
strengthen itself. Under those circumstances, he wouldn't mind having a seasefare.
But they're very clear that bringing in the British of
the French, strengthening the Ukrainian military, doing anything which enabled
Ukraine to survive, would in fact be totally unacceptable. Which
is not a taste fire. It's a surrender negotiation, that's right.
Speaker 2 (20:15):
And that's where Trump will have to get tough and
have to say, I understand what you want, Bladdy, I
get it, but you got to understand my economy is
about thirtain size and signs of yours, and I can
do devastating things to the Russian economy if I want to,
I cut off your oil sales to Europe, even to China.
I can do that with secondary sanctions, and you're going
to be in big trouble and you don't want that.
(20:35):
I'm not angry with you, Flattie, but you know, don't
make me angry. We're going to do this my way, okay.
And then if you do it my way, you know,
all kinds of good things canna happen for you, all
kinds you know. I can bring it back into the
G seven and come the GA I can lift sanctions.
I don't want to twist your arm, but I'm going
to twist your arm if you make me so. This
is an independent country, it's a member of the UN.
(20:55):
We recognize it, we had an embassy there. You can
keep the land you have. Know I may not recognize it,
but you can keep it. But no more than that. Okay,
no more than that. And let's stop the killing. And
we're gonna do it my way. And if we, as
an independent country want to sell arms to Ukraine, maybe
the Europeans pay for it. We can do that. You
don't tell us now. If the British want to send
(21:16):
troops in there as peacekeepers, they can get to do that.
It's not your land where you're occupying, but it'll be
along the line. Be cooperative. But you got to understand.
I twisted Zelenski's arm real hard. I want to be fair,
but I'm going to twist yours too if you don't
come along with me on this really hard.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
One of the interesting challenges of the Trump presidency is
going to be this moment of coming to grips with
the fact that he has to get Putin's attention. Somebody
sent me a know, which I thought was really insightful.
That said, one of Putin's great achievements is he is
guaranteed the remilitarization of Germany. Yeah, and they said to me,
(22:09):
you would think after nineteen fourteen and nineteen forty one,
this would not be a.
Speaker 2 (22:14):
Good idea, not be a good idea, And the idea
of Finland and Sweden, who have always said, well, we're neutral,
we're neutral joining NATO, that's not what he had on
is to do list because now there are NATO members
on Russian borders where there were not before. This is
not a success now. I would say that Trump understands
that and is trying very hard not to humiliate Putin
(22:36):
because he doesn't want Putin overthrown. He doesn't want to
deal with whatever might come next. He'd rather he just
get along with Putin and give Putin the opportunity to say,
to the hyper hypernationalists, who are many who might threaten him,
he's very good at protecting himself, say, look, Russia is
bigger now than it was when I came into office.
I've got some land. I kind of showed them, I've
(22:57):
got part of Georgia, I've got part of Ukraine, Belarus.
If I want to make Belarus part of the Russian Federation,
I can do so as well. So you know I
haven't done so bad. Let's take a rest and see
Trump's in office for what four years? After that? Who knows,
maybe we get some softy and I can move again.
Don't forget. Putin never moved against none of his neighbors
(23:18):
while Trump was in office for the first four years,
and they were all softies. Two thousand and eight he
moves into Georgia. What does Obama do in two thousand
and nine, Oh, let's have a reset. It's fine, we
forgive you, we can get along. Let's talk about things
we can cooperate on. The reset was a total total farce.
And then what happens twenty fourteen? He invades Crimea and
(23:42):
annext is it? And then in twenty twenty two, what
does Biden say, if this is only a minor incursion, Eh,
it's okay. Just make it minor so that I don't
have to get upset with it. And he didn't make
it minor. He sent his tanks heading for Kiev, and
as you pointed out, the javelins sent by Trump helped
prevent one of the reasons those tanks didn't arrive at
(24:04):
their destination where their mission was to take over the capital,
kill the president, and install a puppet government.
Speaker 1 (24:11):
Now that we are where we are, if you were
the National Security Advisor, which today would be a little
bit more challenging than three days ago, but if you
ended up with that, what would your strategic implementation list
be for bringing enough pain to putin that you had
his attention.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
We've actually begun this work at FDD and we're putting
together a memorial exactly those lines. What it specifies are
exactly the economic sanctions necessary, including secondary sanctions to strangle
the Russian economy, and let Putin know that these are
the sanctions we are going to implement if we don't
(24:50):
get your cooperation. In addition to that, again, I would
say you were to go further, but also important, here
are the weapons we're going to supply. The flow of
weapons will be greater again the Europeans can pay for it,
or there's three hundred billion dollars in Russian assets in
Europe that are frozen that could be confiscated. I would
make the case. Others have. Neil Ferguson, a historian, has
(25:12):
that money should be used for rearmament and reparations in Ukraine,
and that can be done as well. And that would
make it so that any morning that Putin wakes up
and the Kremlin looks out and things, let's invade Ukraine,
he thinks today's not a good day for that. That's
essentially and again we're going to put together exactly that memo,
and we do intend to give it to the National
Security Advisor and say consider this. If this is threatened,
(25:34):
I think Putin caves and if he doesn't do it,
and then Putin will certainly have to cave because if
he can't sell oil, Look, he doesn't make enough on
vodka and fur hats to support his military. It's got
to be oil. And we can stop the flow of
oil through sanctions.
Speaker 1 (25:50):
You know, it's astonishing that the Europeans buy more from
Russia and oil than they give to Ukraine.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
Right away, that tells you that stops immediately and at
the point where the Europeans will say, okay, we get that.
It helps that the US under Trump is talking about
and creating energy dominance here at home through fracking, through LNG,
through LNG sales natural gas. Now that's happening. We can
give other possibilities to the Europeans so they don't need
(26:19):
to depend on the oil and gas coming from Russia anymore.
And they would like us to sit down with them.
You're going to cut that off immediately. That's the low
hanging fruit you're buying. No more oil and gas from
them will get you other things. This is going into
spring and summer. It's a little bit better that Europeans
have made terrible mistakes Germans closing down nuclear power facilities.
They ended up buying coal from South Africa. A lot
(26:41):
of problems with the Europeans. I understand why people like JD.
Vans are so skeptical about the Europeans at this point.
I do understand, but I don't want to myself. I
think you agree, but tell me if you don't. I
don't want to give up on them as allies. I
want to make them better allies. I think Trump is
kind of doing that by saying you have to contribute
meaning fully to the collective defense of the West. You
(27:03):
cannot expect us as an entitlement, to take care of
you while you do whatever the hell you want. I
believe that we should have allies, but they can do
more than they're doing, but they're doing better, a little better.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
Just to sort of wrap up for a second, if
you had to guess, do you think it is likely
that six months from now will have some kind of
a stable sease fire.
Speaker 2 (27:24):
It all depends on President Trump. There are a lot
of people who think he likes admires Putin too much.
I think that Steve Whitcoff sounded how shall I say,
credulous in his dealings with him on many levels, saying
Putin's not such a bad guy. Putin prayed for Trump
when Trump was shot, He went to his priests and
(27:44):
cares about his friend. I just found that kind of goible.
If Trump will pressure Putin properly, then I think we
will end up with exactly what you say, a ceasefire
and a frozen conflict, and that's the way it'll be
for a while, and that would be a good thing.
But if not, if Putin gets to push everybody around,
and for whatever reason, Trump doesn't push back, then this
(28:06):
war will go on and it'll get worse in various ways.
And I can't tell you all the ways that it
could unfold.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
I have always admired your leadership at the Foundation for
Devins and Monks. I frankly admire your personal leadership and
your personal commitment to the survival of freedom, and Cliff,
I just want to thank you for joining me. I
want our listeners to know that they can visit the
Foundation for Defensive Democracy's website at FDD dot org, and
(28:35):
we're going to put both your website and the movie
on our show page. Thank you so much for being
with us.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
My pleasure always great to be with you, Newton. I've
admired you and been your friend, I hope for many years.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
Thank you to my guest, Cliffmay you can get a
link to Foundation for Defensive Democracies on our show page
at newtworld dot com. Newtworld is produced by English three
sixty and iHeartMedia. Our executive producer is Guernsey Sloan. Our
researcher is Rachel Peterson. The artwork for the show was
created by Steve Penley. Special thanks to the team at
(29:12):
Ginglishtree sixty. If you've been enjoying Newtsworld, I hope you'll
go to Apple Podcasts and both rate us with five
stars and give us a review so others can learn
what it's all about. Right now, listeners of Newtsworld can
sign up for my three free weekly columns at gingishtree
sixty dot com slash newsletter. I'm Newt Gingrich. This is
(29:33):
Newsworld
On this episode of Newts World. The recent ceasefire negotiations
between Ukraine and Russia, led by the Trump administration, have
challenged the traditional way we negotiate with our allies and adversaries.
President Trump's Special envoy, Steve Whitcoff, has visited Moscow met
with Putin about what it would take to agree to
a ceasefire. Putin presented a list of demands. Appears some
(00:29):
progress may have been made in a phone call between
Trump and Putin. They agreed to quote an energy and
infrastructure ceasefire which may or may not be actually being
held here to discuss when negotiations stand with the potential
Ukraine Russia seasfire. I'm really pleased to welcome back my
guest and good friend, one of the most knowledgeable people
(00:50):
and one of the most active people on foreign policy
and the survival of America, Cliff May, founder and President
of the Foundation for Defensive Democracies. His recent hop ed
Trump's Ukraine diplomacy faces Putin test was featured in The
Washington Times on March eighteenth. I must say I also
sent it out to everybody I have on accent on
(01:12):
true social Cliff, welcome and thank you. For joining me
again on News World.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Thanks Nu, it always great to be with you.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
Before we get into specifics, would you just take a
minute to tell our listeners what is the Foundation for
Defensive Democracies.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Yeah, it's a think tank that was set up just
after the attacks of nine to eleven oh one. The
reason is called the Foundation for Defense of Democracies was
based on the idea that democratic societies, free nations are
under threat. And in two thousand and one, two thousand
and two, we thought that threat was mostly from non
state actors, from it Islamists and Jihattists. Those were new
(01:58):
words back then. Is worse than that today. In two
thousand and one, everybody kind of thought Russia would be,
you know, like become like Poland, it would become more European,
more liberal, more moderate. That's not happened over the more
than twenty years that Putin's been in power. And in
two thousand and one, you remember Knut, we gave most
Favored Nation status to communists China brought them into the
(02:20):
wto again they can say to be generous. The great
experiment there was. Once China became wealthier thanks to us,
it would become more modern, more liberal more of a
friend that also didn't happen, and instead what you have
now is at access of aggressors Shijinping in Beijing, Vadimir
Putin in Moscow, Ali Kameni and Tehran, and Kim Jongan
(02:42):
in Pianyang, North Korea, and they threatened the United States
and other democratic, free societies. That's kind of what we
concentrate on.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
Well, and you have a team of experts who were
collectively remarkable and many of them very knowledgeable with practical
experience in the field.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Yes, I mean it's a monthly crew of former academics,
former spies, former government officials, a few inkstainted wretches like myself.
As you know, I used to be a foreign correspondent
for the New York Times and other publications during better days.
I would say.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Better days for them too.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
Yeah, they've unfortunately gone off the rails almost as much
as the rest of the planet. So on March eleventh,
the United States and Ukraine released a joint statement after
a meeting in Saudi Arabia where Ukraine agreed to an
immediate thirty day seasefare and the United States would immediately
lift the pause on intelligence sharing and resume security assistance
(03:38):
to Ukraine. What do you think this particular statement means
for the future negotiations?
Speaker 2 (03:45):
Not a lot. As you know, the Ukrainian president, Volodomir Zelenski,
he got his arms twisted by President Trump and said, Okay,
I agree no conditions, a thirty day absolute cease fire.
I'll do it. That's fine. I'll go do the rarer
mineral deal with you. I'll do that. That's fine. Basically,
so whatever you say, mister Trump. But Putin hasn't said that.
(04:07):
Putin has said, you know, if you want me to
go into a ceasefire, there are certain preconditions I want
you to meet. I'll give you the list. And he
never stopped firing, and he's not agreed to a cease fire.
And my contention is that he can be made to
do so, but that will require that President Trump also
twist his arm, and I do think that's possible. I
(04:29):
think President Trump had it just to use a Trumpian phrase,
he's got the cards to play. He just got to
play them. He'd rather not perhaps he'd rather just be
all very smooth and cooperative. It's not going to be
you have to twist Putin's arm if you want to
get a ceasefire, and that would be a reasonably good thing.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
I think it's clear that right now we don't have
his attention. He thinks he can just keep moving forward
on his own terms and that somehow will crumble in
the face of his tenacity.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
He's very good at that. He wouldn't be in power
for more than twenty years in that country if that's
not the case. He is a retired or former KGB
lieutenant colonel. He knows what he is doing, and he
is saying, and not truthfully, my economy's fine. I'm not
really worried. I've got plenty of ammunition, and he is
getting ammunition, munitions from North Korea. He's getting missiles from Tehran.
(05:23):
He's getting due use technology from China. There are reputable
economic and military analysts who would say that his economy
is suffering badly, that he doesn't have enough bodies to
grow on the front line and try to pave over
inches of Ukraine. He might actually like a ceasefire to
build up his forces to rearm, to regroup, but he
(05:44):
doesn't want Ukraine doing the same thing. And if there's
a ceasefire, that's exactly what Ukraine needs to do. It
needs to get heavily rearmed. It needs to establish deterran
capabilities it didn't have three years ago, largely because Biden
and before him. While AAMA didn't want to give Ukraine
lethal weapons, Trump did, including javelins, anti tank weapons, and
(06:06):
we want Ukraine to become what is called these days
a porcupine. Hard difficult for a predator to digest well.
Speaker 1 (06:14):
Trump at times seems to be too soft on Putin,
both in cutting off the second natural guess pipeline and
in providing the javelins, which may have been the key
weapon that stopped the initial Russian offensive. The Putin probably
doesn't regard Trump as a patsy or immediate ally, but
he's going to shove him and see how far he
(06:36):
can shove him.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
Yes, he's very good at that. Steve Whitcoff was made
envoy and has met with Putin and then went on
Tucker Carlson's show. A lot of what Witkoff said struck
me as well. He's getting, how to say, played by
Vladimir Putin when he says things like I think Putin
is satisfied with the territory he has, and aren't those
really Russian territories anyway, Well, he's not satisfied. We know
(07:02):
that about him. I can talk to you about reason
about the evidence we have, but it's substantial farthest being
Russian territories. That can only be said to be the
case based on what almost everybody, including the Institute for
the Study of War would say are sham referendums that
took place in those areas, plus Russians being moved in
and Ukrainians either fleeing or otherwise moving out. My cards
(07:23):
on the table, I would like to see Putin defeated
in this. I would like to see Ukraine regain sovereign
independence through all of its borders. I don't think that's
likely at this point, but I think if President Trump
can get a ceasefire along the current lines of control,
that means like twenty percent eighteen percent really of Ukraine
(07:44):
would be taken over by Russia, the eastern portion and Crimea,
which was taken in two thousand and fourteen by Russia,
and you freeze the conflict. That's probably good enough at
this point, as good as you're going to get. Keep
in mind, frozen conflicts can last a long time. North
Korea and South Korea are not at peace. It's a
frozen conflict. And South Korea has done very well in
(08:07):
the meantime, and North Korea is a terrible place. And
that's fifty three years that we've had a frozen conflict.
Of course, kept frozen, not least by what are now
about twenty eight thousand American troops in South Korea.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
The pattern there, it seems to me, is exactly what
Putin doesn't want. She makes pretty clear at one point
the Ukraine's not allowed to have foreign armies on the soil,
but the Ukraine's not allowed to rebuild its military, et cetera.
It's kind of like, will allow the baby lamb to
lay there for a while until we think it's time
to eat it.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
That's exactly right, and I think there Trump has to
get a little bit tough with them and say that's
not the way it's going to be. The Europeans have
been stepping up in the sense that the British and
the French have said we can send in peacekeepers. I
think Trump should take that as a victory for him.
He's been demanding since his last term that Europeans take
more responsibility. They're making an effort. Good for them, Let
(09:00):
them do that. We have about half a dozen nations
who have written to the European Commission Lafia, Lithuania, Poland
others saying let's expedite Ukraine's admission to the European Union. Wow,
good for them. That's also very helpful. Well, if we
have to understand about Putin, and let me say this
as somebody who's been studying this for a rather long time.
I first went to Russia when I was a teenager
(09:23):
in nineteen sixty nine. I've been there as a foreign
exchange student in Soviet times. I've been there as a journalist.
I was also an election observer in Ukraine at its
most recent elections. I feel like I've been a Putinologist
for the past twenty years. So let me tell you
who he is and what he wants. He sees himself
as the Tsar and his mission as the Tsar, and
(09:43):
I understand this is to restore the Russian Empire and
to be the czar and to restore the Russian Empire.
What does that mean? You must be the Tsar and
I'm using Russian phraseology here, the Tsar of all the Russias.
What does all the Russias mean, well, it means Russia.
It means russ translates its white Russia. It means Ukrain
(10:03):
translates its frontier of Russia. That's essential. But then you
want whatever else you can get, including the Baltic states,
which you'll remember, and this is interesting in this regard
nineteen forty the Baltics Exitstonia, Latvia, Lithuania. The Soviet Union
took them over. The US never recognized that, and they
were vassal states for a very long time until the
(10:25):
Soviet Union fell. Belarus is now a vassal state of Russia.
Already in two thousand and eight, Putin took two provinces
away from neighboring Georgia, which was also part of the
Soviet Empire and before that part of the Russian Empire.
Nineteen thirty nine, the Soviet Union tried to drag Finland
back into the Russian Empire. At the end of the day,
(10:46):
the Russians got ten percent of Villain's territory, but Finland
never gave up its independence, and two years ago he
joined NATO. So that's what's going on. Putin is a
man in his seventies. He has more money than he
can ever spend. He gets to kill his enemies, his
critics with impunity. He has a girlfriend half his age.
She's a rhythmic gymnast. I don't really know what that means,
(11:06):
but it sounds intriguing. And he wants to be a
czar in the mold of maybe Alexander the Great, maybe
Ivan the Terrible.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
His self image was either Peter the Great.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Peter the Great established what became known as Leningrad now Petersburg.
Again that was very much looking westward because it was
a westward capital. The most important influence on Putin is
a political philosopher by the name of Alexander Dugan, who
is a Eurasianist, and his theory, his belief is that
Russia is not a European power, never was. It's a
(11:40):
Eurasian power, much more aligned with, for example, China than
with Europe. And he said the European values and American values, tolerance, freedom,
those are not Russian values, never were. Should not be
seen as that we should not be looking west or
going west. We're something very different. Hates America. I got
quote from him on that this is an important point. Yes,
(12:02):
Dugan sees America and Europe is degenerate. And there are
some of the Americans who are right of center people
you and I know who think because we also think
this too much generously in America and Europe. Therefore, Dugan
and therefore Putin, they're kind of on our side. They're
traditional values and Christians. It's not true. It's not true. Yes,
(12:23):
we may agree with them that we shouldn't have boys
playing volleyballs on girls team, but Ali Kamani thinks that too,
I'm sure, as does Kim Jong Lun. That doesn't make
them our allies.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
To build on that. It's interesting that Soldier needs them.
Maybe the greatest Russian writer of the last century, after
leaving the Zola Union, coming to live in Vermont writing
his extraordinary series on the Russian Revolution, finally goes back
home because in fact, he sort of would agree. The
(13:10):
West is not Russia. The West is this kind of
degenerate place where people have no discipline, no order, no structure,
no sense of the mystery of life. I don't think
he'd approve a Putent, but I think that he would
have some reverence for a Czar like structured environment.
Speaker 2 (13:27):
I think that's exactly right. What you've expressed is a
nuanced understanding, and I fear there are some of our friends,
and not least in this administration, who don't have quite
that nuanced understanding of why. I mean. I liked Sosis
and as a writer, I got to meet him one
time when I was studying Russian actually in Vermont. There's
a Russian school at Norwich University up there that I
(13:49):
spent a summer. It was a very interesting thing to do.
But yes, this goes beyond to take a very antagonistic
and hostile attitude towards America and the West. You know,
if you ask yourself, and I really do believe there
is this axis of aggressors between Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and Pyanyang.
What do they have in common. It's not ideology. It's
(14:10):
really hostility towards America and the West and the desire
to displace America as the pre eminent world power and
to have a new world order. And they talk about
this a new world order that they lead and America
becomes a has been empire.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
But there's a different part of this, which is, while
they may not be a European country, I really question
in the long run their capacity to truly be allied
to China simply because of the underlying mythical sense of
the Mongol yoke and the degree to which still almost
(14:45):
a thousand years later, the experience of the Mongols was
so horrifying destroyed Kiov Moscow rises only because it's in
the middle of the forest and not worth the Mongol's effort.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Very important point, and let me talk about this just
one second. You're right, and that's traditionally the way the
Russians sought anybody from Asia. But Dugan kind of takes
the attitude, No, we do have Mongol roots in part,
and we should be proud of that. The whole concept
of the Russian Empire that arose immediately following the Mongol Empire,
(15:18):
the idea of cons They really replicated that the czar
was sort of a long Mongol alliance.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
This is true too.
Speaker 2 (15:25):
Over the long run, Russian and China are not in
good alliance. At some point, the leader in Beijing is
going to look north and say, the Russians don't have
many people, they have a lot of resources. I have
many people in many resources. Why is Vladivostok Russian? And
what does Vladivostok mean? Vlad has in Vladimir means conqueror,
(15:47):
Vastok means East, Vladivostok means conqueror of the East. But
that's long term. Right now, the Russians are getting use
technology from China, but also giving China various technological help
where they can, making China a stronger power and reducing
the delta between Chinese power and Russian power. That would
not appear to be in their interest, but I think
(16:09):
Putin thinks I have to do what I have to
do now, and we'll worry about what happens twenty thirty,
forty years from now later. Some people say, well, it's
only a transactional alliance. It is, but it's more than that,
because again they want the United States displaced in the world.
And just one more point about world order. It's a
funny phrase, for sure, but there always is a world
(16:32):
order of some sort. Like a fish not being aware
of water. Most Americans not aware of what the world
order is, and the world order since the end of
World War Two has been one in which America has
essentially dominated with a light hand, but dominated trying to
use international law on that sort of thing, rather than
just saying we make the rules. Beijing Moscow, Tehran, Pianyang.
(16:53):
They all see that and they want to displace it.
And what the way they say is we need a
multipolar world. Isn't that fairer? And that appeals to a
lot of people on the left. You have multipolar world,
not you know, American hegemony. Oh, America is imperialists who
know America needs to be the premianive power in the
world because if it's not a very bad power like
that in Beijing will become Communist Party of China is
(17:15):
the most powerful communist party in the world if they
end up dominant. Can we really say we won the
Cold War or was there just a hiatus after a
particularly important battle.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Yeah, we won the subsidiary fight. Putin who also learned
some lessons from Gorbachev, one of which I think was
that killing your opponents is better than losing control.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
And that's a lesson from Stalin, right. Stalin part of
his success was he didn't just kill his enemies. He
killed those who might someday become his enemies. Why take
a chance?
Speaker 1 (17:45):
What did he say at one point that one death
is a tragedy, a million deaths as a statistic. That's
exactly what he said and of course he's a Georgian,
so further proof that the original Empire included the country
of Georgia.
Speaker 2 (17:58):
Very unusual for there to be Zar or communist leaders
who were not actually Russian, but he was one of
the great exceptions to that. Absolutely for sure.
Speaker 1 (18:07):
And I suspect Putin admires him.
Speaker 2 (18:09):
I think we know that he does. I don't think
Putin's a communist again, he's more along the lines of
Alexander Dugan in terms of Eurasianism and Russia's soul.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
I think he admires his use of power.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
He absolutely admires his use of power. And by the way,
that keep in mind, one of the things, not all,
one of the reasons why Ukrainians do not want to
be ruled by the Kremlin is what Stalin did to
them in the nineteen thirties by imposing a famine on them,
a man made famine made by Stalin that killed at
least three million Ukrainians, was particularly directed at what they
(18:44):
call the kula ki, which means what they would call
the rich peasants. What is a rich peasant. It's a
farmer who does well because he works hard, and they
stole all the grain from them and left them to die.
Is a wonderful movie I always recommended called Mister Jones,
which had a journalist who goes there and manages to
break free of his minder. As a journalist, you always
get a minder in Russia and go to the Ukraine
(19:06):
and see for himself that the famine is taking place, which,
sadly the New York Times at that point was not reporting.
Speaker 1 (19:13):
The description in that movie of the Western reporters gathering
together to protect Stalin. Make sure that none of them
reported accurately.
Speaker 2 (19:23):
In the townhouse of Walter Duranti, who was the New
York Times correspondent who won a Pulitzer Prize for his
distorted reporting on Stalin.
Speaker 1 (19:31):
I'd say it's one of the three times that The
New York Times has won Pulitzer Prizes for being totally dishonest,
none of which have ever been returned, of course. But
let me go back to Putin and Ukraine. It seems
to me that what Putin's trying for us is a
little bit like a great bluff and poker is he'd
be happy to have a temporary ceasefire while he rebuilt
his forces. Well, Ukraine was blocked from doing anything to
(19:54):
strengthen itself. Under those circumstances, he wouldn't mind having a seasefare.
But they're very clear that bringing in the British of
the French, strengthening the Ukrainian military, doing anything which enabled
Ukraine to survive, would in fact be totally unacceptable. Which
is not a taste fire. It's a surrender negotiation, that's right.
Speaker 2 (20:15):
And that's where Trump will have to get tough and
have to say, I understand what you want, Bladdy, I
get it, but you got to understand my economy is
about thirtain size and signs of yours, and I can
do devastating things to the Russian economy if I want to,
I cut off your oil sales to Europe, even to China.
I can do that with secondary sanctions, and you're going
to be in big trouble and you don't want that.
(20:35):
I'm not angry with you, Flattie, but you know, don't
make me angry. We're going to do this my way, okay.
And then if you do it my way, you know,
all kinds of good things canna happen for you, all
kinds you know. I can bring it back into the
G seven and come the GA I can lift sanctions.
I don't want to twist your arm, but I'm going
to twist your arm if you make me so. This
is an independent country, it's a member of the UN.
(20:55):
We recognize it, we had an embassy there. You can
keep the land you have. Know I may not recognize it,
but you can keep it. But no more than that. Okay,
no more than that. And let's stop the killing. And
we're gonna do it my way. And if we, as
an independent country want to sell arms to Ukraine, maybe
the Europeans pay for it. We can do that. You
don't tell us now. If the British want to send
(21:16):
troops in there as peacekeepers, they can get to do that.
It's not your land where you're occupying, but it'll be
along the line. Be cooperative. But you got to understand.
I twisted Zelenski's arm real hard. I want to be fair,
but I'm going to twist yours too if you don't
come along with me on this really hard.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
One of the interesting challenges of the Trump presidency is
going to be this moment of coming to grips with
the fact that he has to get Putin's attention. Somebody
sent me a know, which I thought was really insightful.
That said, one of Putin's great achievements is he is
guaranteed the remilitarization of Germany. Yeah, and they said to me,
(22:09):
you would think after nineteen fourteen and nineteen forty one,
this would not be a.
Speaker 2 (22:14):
Good idea, not be a good idea, And the idea
of Finland and Sweden, who have always said, well, we're neutral,
we're neutral joining NATO, that's not what he had on
is to do list because now there are NATO members
on Russian borders where there were not before. This is
not a success now. I would say that Trump understands
that and is trying very hard not to humiliate Putin
(22:36):
because he doesn't want Putin overthrown. He doesn't want to
deal with whatever might come next. He'd rather he just
get along with Putin and give Putin the opportunity to say,
to the hyper hypernationalists, who are many who might threaten him,
he's very good at protecting himself, say, look, Russia is
bigger now than it was when I came into office.
I've got some land. I kind of showed them, I've
(22:57):
got part of Georgia, I've got part of Ukraine, Belarus.
If I want to make Belarus part of the Russian Federation,
I can do so as well. So you know I
haven't done so bad. Let's take a rest and see
Trump's in office for what four years? After that? Who knows,
maybe we get some softy and I can move again.
Don't forget. Putin never moved against none of his neighbors
(23:18):
while Trump was in office for the first four years,
and they were all softies. Two thousand and eight he
moves into Georgia. What does Obama do in two thousand
and nine, Oh, let's have a reset. It's fine, we
forgive you, we can get along. Let's talk about things
we can cooperate on. The reset was a total total farce.
And then what happens twenty fourteen? He invades Crimea and
(23:42):
annext is it? And then in twenty twenty two, what
does Biden say, if this is only a minor incursion, Eh,
it's okay. Just make it minor so that I don't
have to get upset with it. And he didn't make
it minor. He sent his tanks heading for Kiev, and
as you pointed out, the javelins sent by Trump helped
prevent one of the reasons those tanks didn't arrive at
(24:04):
their destination where their mission was to take over the capital,
kill the president, and install a puppet government.
Speaker 1 (24:11):
Now that we are where we are, if you were
the National Security Advisor, which today would be a little
bit more challenging than three days ago, but if you
ended up with that, what would your strategic implementation list
be for bringing enough pain to putin that you had
his attention.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
We've actually begun this work at FDD and we're putting
together a memorial exactly those lines. What it specifies are
exactly the economic sanctions necessary, including secondary sanctions to strangle
the Russian economy, and let Putin know that these are
the sanctions we are going to implement if we don't
(24:50):
get your cooperation. In addition to that, again, I would
say you were to go further, but also important, here
are the weapons we're going to supply. The flow of
weapons will be greater again the Europeans can pay for it,
or there's three hundred billion dollars in Russian assets in
Europe that are frozen that could be confiscated. I would
make the case. Others have. Neil Ferguson, a historian, has
(25:12):
that money should be used for rearmament and reparations in Ukraine,
and that can be done as well. And that would
make it so that any morning that Putin wakes up
and the Kremlin looks out and things, let's invade Ukraine,
he thinks today's not a good day for that. That's
essentially and again we're going to put together exactly that memo,
and we do intend to give it to the National
Security Advisor and say consider this. If this is threatened,
(25:34):
I think Putin caves and if he doesn't do it,
and then Putin will certainly have to cave because if
he can't sell oil, Look, he doesn't make enough on
vodka and fur hats to support his military. It's got
to be oil. And we can stop the flow of
oil through sanctions.
Speaker 1 (25:50):
You know, it's astonishing that the Europeans buy more from
Russia and oil than they give to Ukraine.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
Right away, that tells you that stops immediately and at
the point where the Europeans will say, okay, we get that.
It helps that the US under Trump is talking about
and creating energy dominance here at home through fracking, through LNG,
through LNG sales natural gas. Now that's happening. We can
give other possibilities to the Europeans so they don't need
(26:19):
to depend on the oil and gas coming from Russia anymore.
And they would like us to sit down with them.
You're going to cut that off immediately. That's the low
hanging fruit you're buying. No more oil and gas from
them will get you other things. This is going into
spring and summer. It's a little bit better that Europeans
have made terrible mistakes Germans closing down nuclear power facilities.
They ended up buying coal from South Africa. A lot
(26:41):
of problems with the Europeans. I understand why people like JD.
Vans are so skeptical about the Europeans at this point.
I do understand, but I don't want to myself. I
think you agree, but tell me if you don't. I
don't want to give up on them as allies. I
want to make them better allies. I think Trump is
kind of doing that by saying you have to contribute
meaning fully to the collective defense of the West. You
(27:03):
cannot expect us as an entitlement, to take care of
you while you do whatever the hell you want. I
believe that we should have allies, but they can do
more than they're doing, but they're doing better, a little better.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
Just to sort of wrap up for a second, if
you had to guess, do you think it is likely
that six months from now will have some kind of
a stable sease fire.
Speaker 2 (27:24):
It all depends on President Trump. There are a lot
of people who think he likes admires Putin too much.
I think that Steve Whitcoff sounded how shall I say,
credulous in his dealings with him on many levels, saying
Putin's not such a bad guy. Putin prayed for Trump
when Trump was shot, He went to his priests and
(27:44):
cares about his friend. I just found that kind of goible.
If Trump will pressure Putin properly, then I think we
will end up with exactly what you say, a ceasefire
and a frozen conflict, and that's the way it'll be
for a while, and that would be a good thing.
But if not, if Putin gets to push everybody around,
and for whatever reason, Trump doesn't push back, then this
(28:06):
war will go on and it'll get worse in various ways.
And I can't tell you all the ways that it
could unfold.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
I have always admired your leadership at the Foundation for
Devins and Monks. I frankly admire your personal leadership and
your personal commitment to the survival of freedom, and Cliff,
I just want to thank you for joining me. I
want our listeners to know that they can visit the
Foundation for Defensive Democracy's website at FDD dot org, and
(28:35):
we're going to put both your website and the movie
on our show page. Thank you so much for being
with us.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
My pleasure always great to be with you, Newton. I've
admired you and been your friend, I hope for many years.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
Thank you to my guest, Cliffmay you can get a
link to Foundation for Defensive Democracies on our show page
at newtworld dot com. Newtworld is produced by English three
sixty and iHeartMedia. Our executive producer is Guernsey Sloan. Our
researcher is Rachel Peterson. The artwork for the show was
created by Steve Penley. Special thanks to the team at
(29:12):
Ginglishtree sixty. If you've been enjoying Newtsworld, I hope you'll
go to Apple Podcasts and both rate us with five
stars and give us a review so others can learn
what it's all about. Right now, listeners of Newtsworld can
sign up for my three free weekly columns at gingishtree
sixty dot com slash newsletter. I'm Newt Gingrich. This is
(29:33):
Newsworld
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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
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!