Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is very important that the United States gives such
song signal and is ready for security guarantee.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
President Trump says that he's begun arranging a meeting with
Ukrainian President Zolensky and Russian President Putin after a summit
on Monday with Zelensky and European leaders, Trump said that
he discussed the plan with Putin in a call during
his negotiations with the European leaders.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
Lencia condemning Russia's latest strikes across Ukraine it killed at
least ten people, saying the Kremlin intends to humiliate diplomatic
efforts and underscores why reliable security guarantees are required. Former
professor at the US Naval War College and expert on
Russia and current writer for The Atlantic It's Tom Nicholsey
joins us now in the KOA Common Spirit Health hotline. Tom,
good morning, before we get into what is transpired as
(00:42):
of yesterday, with your expertise in Russia and the old USSR,
what does this current administration seem to be potentially missing
or misunderstanding and we're not getting right and dealing with
someone like Vladimir Putin?
Speaker 3 (00:55):
Well, good morning. I think the thing that the president
is thing that's most important is not understanding that. For Putin,
this is a very emotional issue. It's found up in
his youth and first part of his life growing up
in the Soviet Union, his sense of Russian nationalism. He
(01:16):
can't really conceive of Ukrainians as a separate people. To him,
they're just part of the Empire. They're just they're little Russians,
and that he believes they should be ruled over from
the Kremlin and not an independent country. And he's believed
that for thirty years at least, since the beginning of
the existence of Ukraine. When Putin talks about root causes
(01:38):
of this war, that's one of them, that Ukraine even
exists as an independent state. And I think the President
just sees this as just another land deal that if
you give this, you take that, you find an acceptable price,
you kind of hagg all sit at the table, that
everything works out. And international diplomacy isn't like trying to
buy a block of apartments or negotiate down the payments
(02:04):
on a casino. It's a very different kind of process
with different people. And I think that unfortunately, the White
House just doesn't understand any of that. Because all of
this process is being driven by Donald Trump's needs that
he wants to be a peacemaker, he wants to show
that he can get a deal. He wants that Nobel
Peace Prize that he keeps talking about, and those are
(02:26):
things that really aren't relevant to Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that Ukraine and Russia
would both need to quote make some concessions and that
quote obviously land would be a part of that conversation.
Is he right in saying that, I mean, will both
sides have to lose in the end to end this war?
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Well, it's sad to see what Marco Rubio has become,
because I think the Marco Rubio of ten years ago
would have been channeling the ghost of Ronald Reagan here
and pointing out, as he did at the time when
this war began, that Russia is the aggressor, and to
even cast it in those terms, well, you know, each
(03:05):
side's got to give a little, they got to lose
a little, really ignores the reality here that Russia invaded
its neighbor in a way and started a war in
a way that we haven't seen since Hitler in nineteen
thirty nine. This is the biggest war in Europe since
World War Two, and the idea that somehow, well, you know,
(03:30):
if the Ukrainians would just be a little less you know,
if the Ukrainians would be a little more surrendery, you
know that this could end. I mean, it's true when
the President says Ukraine could end this tomorrow. Well, any
country that's been invaded could end it tomorrow by simply
waving a white flag and surrendering what Putin wants, his
(03:51):
territory that doesn't belong to him. Now, with that said,
a ceasefire, at least a temporary measure is probably an end,
and even accepts one ends with Russian troops sitting on
territory that isn't theirs. But that's because of the unpleasant
facts on the ground, not because Ukraine needs to give
or negotiate. They simply have no control over that. But
(04:15):
I don't think that that ought to be the precondition
for negotiations, and I think it's unfortunate that the President
keeps pushing the Ukrainians in that direction.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
I'll say this, everybody wants this to end with less
death and less killing and destruction and the like. But
Tom are you somewhat surprised? After mid I am with
a certain sect of Americans and or some in the
administration that are so easily willing to give another countries.
It's up to Ukraine, obviously, but to be willing to
give up Ukraine's land, who again was invaded by Russia.
(04:47):
And I always ask, just politely, well what if Russia
invaded Alaska? Should we just give them the land to
keep the peace and prevent the killing? And I get
quizzical looks, and maybe it's an apples to lugnuts comparison,
But are you are you somewhat curious, especially those that
are Reagan acolytes, or say they are, that are willing to,
for lack of a better term, capitulate and say, yeah,
I just give them the land to stop the fighting.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
Well, the words you're looking for, Marty is appeasement. And yeah,
I am kind of surprised by it that Americans very blithely,
you know, simply say well we should give them. You know,
Americans who have no idea where the don Bass is
or where Luhansk is. I mean, I've been to Ukraine,
have been to those cities. You know, the idea that
(05:29):
somehow we should just treat them like pokerchips in a
game where the money isn't ours. I mean, this is
not you know, these are not parts of other people's
countries that are ours to give. And yeah, I mean
it's not. Just imagine if twenty percent, right, not twenty
percent of Ukraine is occupied by Russia. Imagine twenty percent
of the United States being occupied by an invader and
(05:51):
somebody saying, you know, you, guys in Washington, you need
to kind of get over it and just accept that
you're going to have to lose some land here. Americans
would never accept that for themselves, and I think it's
the height of arrogance to insist on it for other people.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
After the meetings we saw the past couple of days,
now President Trump says he's arranging a meeting between Zelenski
and Putin. What's the likelihood of that meeting taking place,
and the likelihood of the outcome of that meeting, the.
Speaker 3 (06:17):
Outcome of a meeting between Zelenski and Putin alone, it's
probably pretty low. Nobody really has an interest in doing that.
I'm sure Putin agreed to it, and the Europeans supported
it because it kicks the can down the road, Putin
gets more time to conduct his war, and the Europeans
get to stop Trump, which is why they all rush
(06:37):
to Washington, by the way, to stop Trump from making
a very bad deal, or insisting that does Olenski make
a very bad deal. So now everybody's focused on, well,
we have to get these two guys together sometime down
the road. And I'm sure Putin shrugged his shoulders and
he said, yeah, sure, I'll meet in a room alone
with the guy Who've been trying to kill for three years.
(06:58):
He has no incentive not to say say that. But
that means that all this just drags out longer, and
Putin gets to continue his war longer. But it also
means Ukraine lives to fight another day, and hopefully the
Ukraine the Europeans will fill that time with weapons and
whatever sanctions they can muster and maybe stiffen Trump's spine
(07:18):
just a little bit.
Speaker 1 (07:19):
The final question is, I know it's a crystal ball question, Tom,
but how does this end? How much longer does this go?
Speaker 3 (07:26):
It may not end, It may go on forever until
Putin is dead and hour out of office. Somehow, Putin
is very emotionally personally and emotionally invested in this war.
He launched it with almost no input from anybody else
in Moscow while he was bunkered under Moscow during COVID nineteen,
(07:49):
and he's simply not going to give this up. He's invested.
There's too much sunk cost here. If there's a cease
fire in the short term, it means she's that Russians
will be sitting on Ukrainian territory, the Ukraine will constantly
be under threat of renewed hostilities because Putin's simply not
(08:09):
going to give this up. So I think we're looking
at an ongoing slog and a frozen conflict. If President
Trump can pull this off. By the way, let me
just say, if he can pull this off and create
some kind of unconditional ceasefire that brings peace to Ukraine,
I'll be the first to applaud it. But I think,
given especially given his comments and his behavior over the
(08:31):
past few days, I don't think anything like that's going
to happen.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Unfortunately, writer for The Atlantic it's Tom Nichols,
This is very important that the United States gives such
song signal and is ready for security guarantee.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
President Trump says that he's begun arranging a meeting with
Ukrainian President Zolensky and Russian President Putin after a summit
on Monday with Zelensky and European leaders, Trump said that
he discussed the plan with Putin in a call during
his negotiations with the European leaders.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
Lencia condemning Russia's latest strikes across Ukraine it killed at
least ten people, saying the Kremlin intends to humiliate diplomatic
efforts and underscores why reliable security guarantees are required. Former
professor at the US Naval War College and expert on
Russia and current writer for The Atlantic It's Tom Nicholsey
joins us now in the KOA Common Spirit Health hotline. Tom,
good morning, before we get into what is transpired as
(00:42):
of yesterday, with your expertise in Russia and the old USSR,
what does this current administration seem to be potentially missing
or misunderstanding and we're not getting right and dealing with
someone like Vladimir Putin?
Speaker 3 (00:55):
Well, good morning. I think the thing that the president
is thing that's most important is not understanding that. For Putin,
this is a very emotional issue. It's found up in
his youth and first part of his life growing up
in the Soviet Union, his sense of Russian nationalism. He
(01:16):
can't really conceive of Ukrainians as a separate people. To him,
they're just part of the Empire. They're just they're little Russians,
and that he believes they should be ruled over from
the Kremlin and not an independent country. And he's believed
that for thirty years at least, since the beginning of
the existence of Ukraine. When Putin talks about root causes
(01:38):
of this war, that's one of them, that Ukraine even
exists as an independent state. And I think the President
just sees this as just another land deal that if
you give this, you take that, you find an acceptable price,
you kind of hagg all sit at the table, that
everything works out. And international diplomacy isn't like trying to
buy a block of apartments or negotiate down the payments
(02:04):
on a casino. It's a very different kind of process
with different people. And I think that unfortunately, the White
House just doesn't understand any of that. Because all of
this process is being driven by Donald Trump's needs that
he wants to be a peacemaker, he wants to show
that he can get a deal. He wants that Nobel
Peace Prize that he keeps talking about, and those are
(02:26):
things that really aren't relevant to Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that Ukraine and Russia
would both need to quote make some concessions and that
quote obviously land would be a part of that conversation.
Is he right in saying that, I mean, will both
sides have to lose in the end to end this war?
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Well, it's sad to see what Marco Rubio has become,
because I think the Marco Rubio of ten years ago
would have been channeling the ghost of Ronald Reagan here
and pointing out, as he did at the time when
this war began, that Russia is the aggressor, and to
even cast it in those terms, well, you know, each
(03:05):
side's got to give a little, they got to lose
a little, really ignores the reality here that Russia invaded
its neighbor in a way and started a war in
a way that we haven't seen since Hitler in nineteen
thirty nine. This is the biggest war in Europe since
World War Two, and the idea that somehow, well, you know,
(03:30):
if the Ukrainians would just be a little less you know,
if the Ukrainians would be a little more surrendery, you
know that this could end. I mean, it's true when
the President says Ukraine could end this tomorrow. Well, any
country that's been invaded could end it tomorrow by simply
waving a white flag and surrendering what Putin wants, his
(03:51):
territory that doesn't belong to him. Now, with that said,
a ceasefire, at least a temporary measure is probably an end,
and even accepts one ends with Russian troops sitting on
territory that isn't theirs. But that's because of the unpleasant
facts on the ground, not because Ukraine needs to give
or negotiate. They simply have no control over that. But
(04:15):
I don't think that that ought to be the precondition
for negotiations, and I think it's unfortunate that the President
keeps pushing the Ukrainians in that direction.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
I'll say this, everybody wants this to end with less
death and less killing and destruction and the like. But
Tom are you somewhat surprised? After mid I am with
a certain sect of Americans and or some in the
administration that are so easily willing to give another countries.
It's up to Ukraine, obviously, but to be willing to
give up Ukraine's land, who again was invaded by Russia.
(04:47):
And I always ask, just politely, well what if Russia
invaded Alaska? Should we just give them the land to
keep the peace and prevent the killing? And I get
quizzical looks, and maybe it's an apples to lugnuts comparison,
But are you are you somewhat curious, especially those that
are Reagan acolytes, or say they are, that are willing to,
for lack of a better term, capitulate and say, yeah,
I just give them the land to stop the fighting.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
Well, the words you're looking for, Marty is appeasement. And yeah,
I am kind of surprised by it that Americans very blithely,
you know, simply say well we should give them. You know,
Americans who have no idea where the don Bass is
or where Luhansk is. I mean, I've been to Ukraine,
have been to those cities. You know, the idea that
(05:29):
somehow we should just treat them like pokerchips in a
game where the money isn't ours. I mean, this is
not you know, these are not parts of other people's
countries that are ours to give. And yeah, I mean
it's not. Just imagine if twenty percent, right, not twenty
percent of Ukraine is occupied by Russia. Imagine twenty percent
of the United States being occupied by an invader and
(05:51):
somebody saying, you know, you, guys in Washington, you need
to kind of get over it and just accept that
you're going to have to lose some land here. Americans
would never accept that for themselves, and I think it's
the height of arrogance to insist on it for other people.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
After the meetings we saw the past couple of days,
now President Trump says he's arranging a meeting between Zelenski
and Putin. What's the likelihood of that meeting taking place,
and the likelihood of the outcome of that meeting, the.
Speaker 3 (06:17):
Outcome of a meeting between Zelenski and Putin alone, it's
probably pretty low. Nobody really has an interest in doing that.
I'm sure Putin agreed to it, and the Europeans supported
it because it kicks the can down the road, Putin
gets more time to conduct his war, and the Europeans
get to stop Trump, which is why they all rush
(06:37):
to Washington, by the way, to stop Trump from making
a very bad deal, or insisting that does Olenski make
a very bad deal. So now everybody's focused on, well,
we have to get these two guys together sometime down
the road. And I'm sure Putin shrugged his shoulders and
he said, yeah, sure, I'll meet in a room alone
with the guy Who've been trying to kill for three years.
(06:58):
He has no incentive not to say say that. But
that means that all this just drags out longer, and
Putin gets to continue his war longer. But it also
means Ukraine lives to fight another day, and hopefully the
Ukraine the Europeans will fill that time with weapons and
whatever sanctions they can muster and maybe stiffen Trump's spine
(07:18):
just a little bit.
Speaker 1 (07:19):
The final question is, I know it's a crystal ball question, Tom,
but how does this end? How much longer does this go?
Speaker 3 (07:26):
It may not end, It may go on forever until
Putin is dead and hour out of office. Somehow, Putin
is very emotionally personally and emotionally invested in this war.
He launched it with almost no input from anybody else
in Moscow while he was bunkered under Moscow during COVID nineteen,
(07:49):
and he's simply not going to give this up. He's invested.
There's too much sunk cost here. If there's a cease
fire in the short term, it means she's that Russians
will be sitting on Ukrainian territory, the Ukraine will constantly
be under threat of renewed hostilities because Putin's simply not
(08:09):
going to give this up. So I think we're looking
at an ongoing slog and a frozen conflict. If President
Trump can pull this off. By the way, let me
just say, if he can pull this off and create
some kind of unconditional ceasefire that brings peace to Ukraine,
I'll be the first to applaud it. But I think,
given especially given his comments and his behavior over the
(08:31):
past few days, I don't think anything like that's going
to happen.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Unfortunately, writer for The Atlantic it's Tom Nichols,
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.
Law & Order: Criminal Justice System - Season 1 & Season 2
Season Two Out Now! Law & Order: Criminal Justice System tells the real stories behind the landmark cases that have shaped how the most dangerous and influential criminals in America are prosecuted. In its second season, the series tackles the threat of terrorism in the United States. From the rise of extremist political groups in the 60s to domestic lone wolves in the modern day, we explore how organizations like the FBI and Joint Terrorism Take Force have evolved to fight back against a multitude of terrorist threats.
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