Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The President announcing yesterday that the US will dramatically increased
weapons supplies to European allies, with those countries then sending
arms to Ukraine. The US will sell around ten billion
dollars in weapons to NATO in the first wave. This
is a seismic policy shift from Trump, who originally refuse
to side with Ukraine and until very recently insisted he
would only supply defensive weapons so as not to escalate
(00:20):
the war.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Trump also saying that he was giving Russia fifty days
to make a deal or else Phase one hundred percent
secondary tariff, referring to a plan to impose tariffs on
countries like China and India that buy Russian oil. Joining
US now on the KWA Common Spirit Health Hotline to
talk more about it is professor of form Policy at
Colorado State University. It's Peter Harris. Professor Harris, thank you
so much for your time this morning.
Speaker 3 (00:43):
Thanks to having me. Good morning.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
Let's talk a little.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Bit first about the history of this. Is the idea
of European nations purchasing American weapons and then transferring them
to a country in need, in this case Ukraine. Is
is this a new concept or have we seen this
happen before.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
We've seen it before. The European members of NATO have
transferred weapons to Ukraine to help Ukraine in its defensive
war against Russia. But the problem is they're running out
and some of the weapons, like these Patriot batteries, which
are basically defensive weapons that can be used to shoot
(01:21):
down missiles and shoot down planes, the Europeans don't have
too many of those, and they certainly can't manufacture them themselves,
so they need the United States to supply them. The
United States has been supplying those under President Biden and
under President Trump, but there was a lot of uncertainty
about whether or not the supplies would continue. President Trump
(01:44):
had paused and then restarted transfers a few times over
the past few months, and this announcement seems to be
a turning point where he's really thrown his weight behind
the idea that yes, and can be given to European
mamams and mayto who will then be able to follow
them on to Ukraine.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Professor, why the shift? Do you think the president finally
understands that Russian and Putin are not honest brokers and
actors in the situation.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
Yeah, I think it is a shift, and that's the
first thing that we should acknowledge. The first few months
of his administration, as you said, President Trump was really
reluctant to really get behind Ukraine as an ally and
a partner. I really wanted to use the weight of
the White House and the way of the United States
(02:34):
to broker a peace. And he thought he could position
himself somewhere between Ukraine and Russia as a way to
bring them together. And it does seem from his remarks
that he's concluded that he can't trust President Putin, that
the Russian leader is just simply intent on more and
more aggression and war and death and killing, and he's
decided to now aside with Kiev. It could be because
(03:00):
allies in Europe have had success in convincing him. It
could be that the President feels cheated and humiliated by Putin.
Or it could be this divide, this split, this battle
that's been playing out inside the administration. It's just been
won now by one side, and that is the side
(03:21):
of people, the group of people inside the White House
who've been arguing all along, but in America's best interest
for Ukraine to triumph over Russia and the US should
do out in its power to help that happen.
Speaker 2 (03:35):
President Trump continued to say, well, it was Putin who
was not giving his side of the deal when it
came to these negotiations. I think he said something along
the lines of we've had several times now where we've
been close to a negotiation and he's always pulled back.
Is the dynamic of this is the President starting to
overestimate really his ability to negotiate when it comes to
(03:56):
these high profile relationships like Russia.
Speaker 3 (03:59):
I think has been overestimating his ability to bring peace
to Ukraine. That I think that's true. It's a very
difficult war to end. You know, war was basically end
when both sides believe they can no longer gain from fighting.
It's not enough for one side to want to stop
(04:19):
the war. Both sides have to believe that they no
longer had anything to gain from fighting. And Ukraine would
end the war you know today if it could, but
it can't because Russia is intent on continuing its war
of aggression. And what really needs to be done is
Russia needs to be convinced that it no longer has
(04:40):
anything to gain from fighting, and in fact, ending the
war would result in a much better outcome for Moscow
and President Trump if he wants to end the war,
he needs to do something to make that happen. I mean,
he thought he could do it through talks alone, but
I think what he's come to realize is is the
only thing that was convinced President Putin and this war
(05:04):
is the prospect of losing it really badly. And that's
why it seems to have turned to these arms transfers.
The shift of policy.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Professor, I know that the European Allies and NATO has
been more invested than maybe what they're getting credit for
in the war, but does this even make them more
so invested in that realizing Ukraine's that their doorstep, and
if Russia would encroach beyond Ukraine, there's polland other countries.
Do you think that, if you, for lack of a
better term, does that put more skin in the game
from their perspective in trying to see this war end.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
They definitely have a lot more skin in the game
than the United States, and we should be honest about that. So,
I mean, President Trump is really trying to make it
clear the European Allies will be paying for these weapons,
even though the United States will manufacture them and then
send them to Europe and then onto Ukraine. Only European
allies who will pay for them, And I think I
(06:00):
think that's the right approach. The war in Ukraine effects
countries in Eastern Europe but also Central and Western Europe
much much more than it does people in what I say, Colorado,
and so it's right the European allies are the ones
who step up and foot the bill for some of
(06:20):
these defensive weapons that Ukraine badly needs. So I think
it's a good partnership. You know, the Europeans, they do
have skin in the game, and they do have the
financial resources to contribute, and it's right that they do contribute.
And the United States, on its part, has got the
industrial and the technological capacity to make these weapons. And
(06:41):
it's right that the United States does its part. So
together the Europeans and Americans can give the Ukrainian n
forces something they really need. But I think it's good
that President Trump has managed to get an agreement from
the European allies in NATO that they will contribute. This
pretty has these financial sums.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Professor of Foreign Policy at csu it's Peter Harris Professor Harris,
thank you so much for your time. As always,
The President announcing yesterday that the US will dramatically increased
weapons supplies to European allies, with those countries then sending
arms to Ukraine. The US will sell around ten billion
dollars in weapons to NATO in the first wave. This
is a seismic policy shift from Trump, who originally refuse
to side with Ukraine and until very recently insisted he
would only supply defensive weapons so as not to escalate
(00:20):
the war.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Trump also saying that he was giving Russia fifty days
to make a deal or else Phase one hundred percent
secondary tariff, referring to a plan to impose tariffs on
countries like China and India that buy Russian oil. Joining
US now on the KWA Common Spirit Health Hotline to
talk more about it is professor of form Policy at
Colorado State University. It's Peter Harris. Professor Harris, thank you
so much for your time this morning.
Speaker 3 (00:43):
Thanks to having me. Good morning.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
Let's talk a little.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Bit first about the history of this. Is the idea
of European nations purchasing American weapons and then transferring them
to a country in need, in this case Ukraine. Is
is this a new concept or have we seen this
happen before.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
We've seen it before. The European members of NATO have
transferred weapons to Ukraine to help Ukraine in its defensive
war against Russia. But the problem is they're running out
and some of the weapons, like these Patriot batteries, which
are basically defensive weapons that can be used to shoot
(01:21):
down missiles and shoot down planes, the Europeans don't have
too many of those, and they certainly can't manufacture them themselves,
so they need the United States to supply them. The
United States has been supplying those under President Biden and
under President Trump, but there was a lot of uncertainty
about whether or not the supplies would continue. President Trump
(01:44):
had paused and then restarted transfers a few times over
the past few months, and this announcement seems to be
a turning point where he's really thrown his weight behind
the idea that yes, and can be given to European
mamams and mayto who will then be able to follow
them on to Ukraine.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Professor, why the shift? Do you think the president finally
understands that Russian and Putin are not honest brokers and
actors in the situation.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
Yeah, I think it is a shift, and that's the
first thing that we should acknowledge. The first few months
of his administration, as you said, President Trump was really
reluctant to really get behind Ukraine as an ally and
a partner. I really wanted to use the weight of
the White House and the way of the United States
(02:34):
to broker a peace. And he thought he could position
himself somewhere between Ukraine and Russia as a way to
bring them together. And it does seem from his remarks
that he's concluded that he can't trust President Putin, that
the Russian leader is just simply intent on more and
more aggression and war and death and killing, and he's
decided to now aside with Kiev. It could be because
(03:00):
allies in Europe have had success in convincing him. It
could be that the President feels cheated and humiliated by Putin.
Or it could be this divide, this split, this battle
that's been playing out inside the administration. It's just been
won now by one side, and that is the side
(03:21):
of people, the group of people inside the White House
who've been arguing all along, but in America's best interest
for Ukraine to triumph over Russia and the US should
do out in its power to help that happen.
Speaker 2 (03:35):
President Trump continued to say, well, it was Putin who
was not giving his side of the deal when it
came to these negotiations. I think he said something along
the lines of we've had several times now where we've
been close to a negotiation and he's always pulled back.
Is the dynamic of this is the President starting to
overestimate really his ability to negotiate when it comes to
(03:56):
these high profile relationships like Russia.
Speaker 3 (03:59):
I think has been overestimating his ability to bring peace
to Ukraine. That I think that's true. It's a very
difficult war to end. You know, war was basically end
when both sides believe they can no longer gain from fighting.
It's not enough for one side to want to stop
(04:19):
the war. Both sides have to believe that they no
longer had anything to gain from fighting. And Ukraine would
end the war you know today if it could, but
it can't because Russia is intent on continuing its war
of aggression. And what really needs to be done is
Russia needs to be convinced that it no longer has
(04:40):
anything to gain from fighting, and in fact, ending the
war would result in a much better outcome for Moscow
and President Trump if he wants to end the war,
he needs to do something to make that happen. I mean,
he thought he could do it through talks alone, but
I think what he's come to realize is is the
only thing that was convinced President Putin and this war
(05:04):
is the prospect of losing it really badly. And that's
why it seems to have turned to these arms transfers.
The shift of policy.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Professor, I know that the European Allies and NATO has
been more invested than maybe what they're getting credit for
in the war, but does this even make them more
so invested in that realizing Ukraine's that their doorstep, and
if Russia would encroach beyond Ukraine, there's polland other countries.
Do you think that, if you, for lack of a
better term, does that put more skin in the game
from their perspective in trying to see this war end.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
They definitely have a lot more skin in the game
than the United States, and we should be honest about that. So,
I mean, President Trump is really trying to make it
clear the European Allies will be paying for these weapons,
even though the United States will manufacture them and then
send them to Europe and then onto Ukraine. Only European
allies who will pay for them, And I think I
(06:00):
think that's the right approach. The war in Ukraine effects
countries in Eastern Europe but also Central and Western Europe
much much more than it does people in what I say, Colorado,
and so it's right the European allies are the ones
who step up and foot the bill for some of
(06:20):
these defensive weapons that Ukraine badly needs. So I think
it's a good partnership. You know, the Europeans, they do
have skin in the game, and they do have the
financial resources to contribute, and it's right that they do contribute.
And the United States, on its part, has got the
industrial and the technological capacity to make these weapons. And
(06:41):
it's right that the United States does its part. So
together the Europeans and Americans can give the Ukrainian n
forces something they really need. But I think it's good
that President Trump has managed to get an agreement from
the European allies in NATO that they will contribute. This
pretty has these financial sums.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Professor of Foreign Policy at csu it's Peter Harris Professor Harris,
thank you so much for your time. As always,
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.