August 15, 2025 • 13 mins
Feature in this edition of The Armstrong & Getty Extra Large Podcast...
Justin Logan from The Cato Institute joins Jack & Joe to talk about the Trump/Putin summit in Alaska hours before touchdown in Anchorage.
Stupid Should Hurt: https://www.armstrongandgetty.com/
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 (00:00):
It doesn't look like it's even going to work on paper.
But imagine trying to force those huge movements of population
or militaries in the real world in potentially a continuing
battlefield zone. That's the reality of the idea of territorial swaps.
Already flat out rejects it here by Ukraine a tough
(00:21):
political ask, an impossible military ask, you might argue, and
that really leads people so anxious here that at the
bedrock of these talks potentially it's territorial swaps, and that
is impractical and unsellable. Here, what possibly could Trump emerge
from that meeting with.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
That's CNN's reporting yesterday. I've heard a lot of different
reporting and a lot of different angles, of course, because
this came together really fast, and we have no idea
how it's going to go, really even what the topic
matter is going to be.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Let's discuss with Justin Logan, director of Defense and Foreign
Policy Studies at the Cato Institute. Justin's he might differ
somewhat from ours, but he has at least an idea
from judging from his recent piece of how a settlement
might look. At the title of the piece, is the
key to success at Trump putin Alaska summit on Ukraine.
(01:14):
Low expectations, Justin Logan joins us. Now, Justin, how are you, sir?
Speaker 4 (01:18):
Just fine, good morning.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Low expectations, I think is absolutely an appropriate stance, as
we don't see much overlap at all between Putin's goals
for the territory of Ukraine and Ukraine's certainly.
Speaker 4 (01:37):
Yeah, I mean, the underlying and unhappy, unfortunate act of
the matter is that Russia is in a relatively stronger
position on the battlefield than Ukraine is, and that makes
Russia both more willing to continue the conflict and as
willing to compromise diplomatically. So Trump has a very difficult
(01:57):
task here, which is to see whether a peace can
be produced that isn't disastrous from Ukraine's point of view,
and that you know, as I said the piece, we
should have low expectations. Even incremental shifts would be welcome
at this point.
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Yeah. Well, that seems like one of the problems I've
been saying for the last couple of days is a
Ukraine is horrified with the status quo. Putin's okay with
the status quo. He'd be fine with continuing prosecuting the
war the way he is, So a nothing burger would
be good from his standpoint, How do you get around that?
Speaker 4 (02:34):
No, that's exactly right. And you know, the Ukrainians have said,
you know, look, our constitution commits us to pursue NATO membership,
which isn't going to happen, and prohibits us from seating
any territory, including Crimea, which has already happened. So they're
sort of using this sort of legalistic argumentation to dig
(02:55):
in on a position that just isn't going to happen.
So I don't fault them for that. It makes a
lot of sense to me that they should look as
unwilling to compromise as possible in the hopes of getting
a compromised that again is a total disaster. But on paper, yeah,
this thing isn't really going to go very far, very fast,
if it goes anywhere.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
One question we've been banding back and forth is whether
Europe will, as I put it earlier, find at least
one of its testicles and assert itself as a party
that truly has a strong interest in stability or not.
How do you see NATO slash Europe's involvement in this
latest chapter.
Speaker 4 (03:32):
Yeah, I mean they are also digging in and not
showing much flexibility. But I think the question is, you know,
Europe needs to you know, to maybe I'll avoid your metaphor,
but it needs to sort of it needs to sort
of back its diplomacy with force. Right the ultimasio in
international relations is military power, and Europe is short still
(03:56):
to this day on military power, despite its declaration that
it's going to spend going to half percent of GDP
on defense by twenty thirty five. It needs to spend more,
and it needs to spend better if it wants more voice.
And I think that that's the sort of crucial disconnect
that Prump is looking pair, which is that you know,
(04:16):
if Europe wants more, say, it needs more power, and
that is an enduring problem for both, particularly for the Europeans,
but also it might view for the Americans if the
Americans want to hand over European security to Europe, which
I think would be a good thing to do. You
need to contact together, and it's making noises about doing so,
(04:38):
but not to my not not enough to my satisfaction.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
So you don't do a lot of testical metaphors, zeric cato,
nothing radio, You know, this might end up being a
lesson in real politic for a lot of us. This
whole thing because Lindsey Graham saying on the Sunday shows that, look,
Ukraine isn't gonna you know, get back every bit of
(05:03):
their land and Putin's not going to Kiev. But which
I think those things are true. But what I don't
know where this goes.
Speaker 4 (05:13):
Yeah, I mean Lindsey Graham grappling with reality is progress
in international politics anyway. I mean, the bare facts of
the matter is, we're not going back to twenty fourteen. Unfortunately,
it would be great if Ukraine, you know, regain all territory,
if the international community recognizes as being part of Ukraine.
(05:34):
But in politics is a brutal business leader. Putin is,
you know, someone who reveals that every day he gets
out of bed in the morning. And so we have
to maximize what is sort of the art of the possible,
if you will, you know, what can we produce it?
And I think look to you know revealed, you know,
I thought that this was going to go way worse,
(05:56):
way quicker for Ukraine. So they have been heroic, right,
they have defended their territory. Right, I think, no, one,
you know, to talk about the realities that Vladimir Putin
has to grapple with. He's not going to take all
of Ukraine. He's not going to take most of Ukraine.
Ukraine is going to come out of this as a sovereign,
autonomous country. And you know, so there's all these things
that need to be haggled over. You know, Putin wants
(06:18):
to put I think, unreasonable limits on Ukraine's armed forces.
It's not going to join NATO. So we're revealing truths
through the course of this thing, and one hopes, you know,
I hope I'm wrong. I hope that you know, there's
more progress made today than I suspect, and we get
closer to a settlement of this conflict that leaves a
(06:39):
Ukraine that is a sovereign, functioning country on Russia's border.
Speaker 3 (06:44):
We're talking to Justin Logan, director of Defense and Foreign
Policy Studies at the Cato Institute. Justin, if you were
to advise Donald Jay or any other leader about negotiating
with Putin, especially sitting down with Putin to negotiate, what
would you tell him about Putin and his methods?
Speaker 4 (07:04):
Well, I mean, you know, if you read the newspaper.
I mean, it's all sort of there in black and white, right.
He doesn't need any sort of Putin whisper to say
this is a brutal guy who really means business and
really cares deeply about Ukraine's international orientation. Certainly, he's revealed
that he's willing to pay extremely high costs to influence
(07:26):
the sort of future orientation of Ukraine. And you know,
one again sort of brutal reality is, you know, we
were all worried about escalation. We were all worried about
the potential of nuclear escalation or escalation outside Ukraine's borders.
And part of the reason that that hasn't come to
the fore is the fact that Putin has been gradually,
slowly brutally winning the conflict. And so we need to
(07:49):
internalize he is revealed in the breach that he's willing
to pay enormous costs to influence the settlement of this conflict.
And we've revealed, under President Joe Biden and under President
Trump that we're not willing to go to the mattresses
and fight Russia in Ukraine over Ukraine. So that's going
to be the sort of starting point of understanding what
(08:10):
we should do. And you know, to be honest, we've
used a lot of economic leverage, a lot of sanctions
and it hasn't worked if you define work as it
caused to change his mind and leave Ukraine. So again,
I hate to be the sort of dark cloud here,
but it's you know, playing the type. I guess. You know,
(08:32):
we need to realize that we have limited leverage to
produce a maximally good outcome for Ukraine from this thing.
So we're very much in the realm of third best,
fourth best, or as I might put it, least worst outcomes.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
Well, first of all, if you're dealing with Putney, don't
stand next to any open windows. Secondly, I love I
love dealing in reality. I mean, there's no advantage to
ever not dealing in reality. So well, if the reality
Putin is going to end up being rewarded for having
invaded a smaller country and getting to keep the land
(09:09):
because the rest of the world's not willing to, uh,
you know, put up the fight to stop him, what
how do you deal with Taiwan and China? What's how
do you make that not send the message to China
that here now it's your turn.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
Yeah, I mean it's you don't want to be a
small country bordering a larger, more powerful country if you
can avoid it, and unfortunately neither Ukraine nor Taiwan can
avoid that. So the question then becomes what do you
do optimally to make yourself look like And this is
a Taiwan metaphor that think tanks works use all the
(09:43):
time like a porcupine. Right, Porcupines don't get attacked because
they're bristling with quills that are likely to get their
hooks into you, and it hurts. It's not a pleasant experience.
And so Taiwan, I think, you know, there's there are
more things that Taiwan needs to do better for itself.
Then there are things that the US military needs to
do on behalf of Taiwan, which is to say, if
(10:05):
the balloon goes up God forbid in Taiwan, it will
take the US military, in optimal scenarios four or five
six days to really meaningfully get into the fight. And
Taiwan has been so negligent with its own defense, spending
about two percent of GDP art defense not spending it
well that it may all be over, but the crime
(10:25):
by the time we were to get there, So I
think that from a Taiwan point of view, Taiwan needs
to engage in asymmetric defense. It needs to do is
another hokey metaphore that we think tank Doork's use a
small number of things at great scale, So it needs
to prevent China from getting a lodgment that it could
(10:45):
flow troops onto, and without getting too boringly into the
weeds here. It hasn't been doing a great job of that,
So I would love to see Taiwan focus its military
less on big ticket items that China is likely to
be able to pick off early in a con and
do things that really again turn it into a porcupine
that China can't swallow.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
Be a better porcupine. So final question for Justin Logan.
Justin back to the Russia Ukraine US thing, what are
the chances that Putin comes to the table with a
grand bargain in capitals that Ukraine is merely a part
of to tempt Donald J. Trump into some sort of
historical Arctic minerals arms control package.
Speaker 4 (11:29):
That's a good question. I hate to make predictions. It
seems unlikely to me. Putin was sort of signaling yesterday
that he might be willing to talk about arms control,
which is a sort of weird non response to what
the summit is supposed to be about. So I think
it's possible that he brings things to the table that
(11:50):
don't pertain to Ukraine, because, as we sort of established
earlier in the call, he's kind of sort of okay
with this test quo in Ukraine, and I think it's
a real question of whether Trump and the people Trump
brings with him are willing to bite on that, or
whether they bring things back around to finding some sort
of diplomatic resolution to the war in Ukraine.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
Justin Logan of the Cato Institute, fabulous conversation. Justin, we
thank you. It's been far too long since we've talked.
We will verbally abuse our staff for letting that happen.
Thank you so much for the time.
Speaker 4 (12:22):
It's a great pleasure. Have a good week. I guess
thank you you too. Man.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
That was a snap back to reality. It's so easy,
speaking for myself, to let your wishes be your the
father of your thoughts with things right. Trump has that land.
Is anybody willing to push him off of it? No
show of hands? No, okay, Well, then let's just concede
that deed gets that land. It's gonna happen, right, Yeah, yeah,
(12:47):
it's I don't know when it was. It might have
been about a decade ago that it occurred to me
the term disillusioned ought to be a positive, not a negative.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
What good are your illusions doing you? Especially in important stuff?
I mean, your illusion is that you're handsome and chicks digya.
That's fine, Okay, me too, right anyway, Armstrong and Getty
It doesn't look like it's even going to work on paper.
But imagine trying to force those huge movements of population
or militaries in the real world in potentially a continuing
battlefield zone. That's the reality of the idea of territorial swaps.
Already flat out rejects it here by Ukraine a tough
(00:21):
political ask, an impossible military ask, you might argue, and
that really leads people so anxious here that at the
bedrock of these talks potentially it's territorial swaps, and that
is impractical and unsellable. Here, what possibly could Trump emerge
from that meeting with.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
That's CNN's reporting yesterday. I've heard a lot of different
reporting and a lot of different angles, of course, because
this came together really fast, and we have no idea
how it's going to go, really even what the topic
matter is going to be.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Let's discuss with Justin Logan, director of Defense and Foreign
Policy Studies at the Cato Institute. Justin's he might differ
somewhat from ours, but he has at least an idea
from judging from his recent piece of how a settlement
might look. At the title of the piece, is the
key to success at Trump putin Alaska summit on Ukraine.
(01:14):
Low expectations, Justin Logan joins us. Now, Justin, how are you, sir?
Speaker 4 (01:18):
Just fine, good morning.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Low expectations, I think is absolutely an appropriate stance, as
we don't see much overlap at all between Putin's goals
for the territory of Ukraine and Ukraine's certainly.
Speaker 4 (01:37):
Yeah, I mean, the underlying and unhappy, unfortunate act of
the matter is that Russia is in a relatively stronger
position on the battlefield than Ukraine is, and that makes
Russia both more willing to continue the conflict and as
willing to compromise diplomatically. So Trump has a very difficult
(01:57):
task here, which is to see whether a peace can
be produced that isn't disastrous from Ukraine's point of view,
and that you know, as I said the piece, we
should have low expectations. Even incremental shifts would be welcome
at this point.
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Yeah. Well, that seems like one of the problems I've
been saying for the last couple of days is a
Ukraine is horrified with the status quo. Putin's okay with
the status quo. He'd be fine with continuing prosecuting the
war the way he is, So a nothing burger would
be good from his standpoint, How do you get around that?
Speaker 4 (02:34):
No, that's exactly right. And you know, the Ukrainians have said,
you know, look, our constitution commits us to pursue NATO membership,
which isn't going to happen, and prohibits us from seating
any territory, including Crimea, which has already happened. So they're
sort of using this sort of legalistic argumentation to dig
(02:55):
in on a position that just isn't going to happen.
So I don't fault them for that. It makes a
lot of sense to me that they should look as
unwilling to compromise as possible in the hopes of getting
a compromised that again is a total disaster. But on paper, yeah,
this thing isn't really going to go very far, very fast,
if it goes anywhere.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
One question we've been banding back and forth is whether
Europe will, as I put it earlier, find at least
one of its testicles and assert itself as a party
that truly has a strong interest in stability or not.
How do you see NATO slash Europe's involvement in this
latest chapter.
Speaker 4 (03:32):
Yeah, I mean they are also digging in and not
showing much flexibility. But I think the question is, you know,
Europe needs to you know, to maybe I'll avoid your metaphor,
but it needs to sort of it needs to sort
of back its diplomacy with force. Right the ultimasio in
international relations is military power, and Europe is short still
(03:56):
to this day on military power, despite its declaration that
it's going to spend going to half percent of GDP
on defense by twenty thirty five. It needs to spend more,
and it needs to spend better if it wants more voice.
And I think that that's the sort of crucial disconnect
that Prump is looking pair, which is that you know,
(04:16):
if Europe wants more, say, it needs more power, and
that is an enduring problem for both, particularly for the Europeans,
but also it might view for the Americans if the
Americans want to hand over European security to Europe, which
I think would be a good thing to do. You
need to contact together, and it's making noises about doing so,
(04:38):
but not to my not not enough to my satisfaction.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
So you don't do a lot of testical metaphors, zeric cato,
nothing radio, You know, this might end up being a
lesson in real politic for a lot of us. This
whole thing because Lindsey Graham saying on the Sunday shows that, look,
Ukraine isn't gonna you know, get back every bit of
(05:03):
their land and Putin's not going to Kiev. But which
I think those things are true. But what I don't
know where this goes.
Speaker 4 (05:13):
Yeah, I mean Lindsey Graham grappling with reality is progress
in international politics anyway. I mean, the bare facts of
the matter is, we're not going back to twenty fourteen. Unfortunately,
it would be great if Ukraine, you know, regain all territory,
if the international community recognizes as being part of Ukraine.
(05:34):
But in politics is a brutal business leader. Putin is,
you know, someone who reveals that every day he gets
out of bed in the morning. And so we have
to maximize what is sort of the art of the possible,
if you will, you know, what can we produce it?
And I think look to you know revealed, you know,
I thought that this was going to go way worse,
(05:56):
way quicker for Ukraine. So they have been heroic, right,
they have defended their territory. Right, I think, no, one,
you know, to talk about the realities that Vladimir Putin
has to grapple with. He's not going to take all
of Ukraine. He's not going to take most of Ukraine.
Ukraine is going to come out of this as a sovereign,
autonomous country. And you know, so there's all these things
that need to be haggled over. You know, Putin wants
(06:18):
to put I think, unreasonable limits on Ukraine's armed forces.
It's not going to join NATO. So we're revealing truths
through the course of this thing, and one hopes, you know,
I hope I'm wrong. I hope that you know, there's
more progress made today than I suspect, and we get
closer to a settlement of this conflict that leaves a
(06:39):
Ukraine that is a sovereign, functioning country on Russia's border.
Speaker 3 (06:44):
We're talking to Justin Logan, director of Defense and Foreign
Policy Studies at the Cato Institute. Justin, if you were
to advise Donald Jay or any other leader about negotiating
with Putin, especially sitting down with Putin to negotiate, what
would you tell him about Putin and his methods?
Speaker 4 (07:04):
Well, I mean, you know, if you read the newspaper.
I mean, it's all sort of there in black and white, right.
He doesn't need any sort of Putin whisper to say
this is a brutal guy who really means business and
really cares deeply about Ukraine's international orientation. Certainly, he's revealed
that he's willing to pay extremely high costs to influence
(07:26):
the sort of future orientation of Ukraine. And you know,
one again sort of brutal reality is, you know, we
were all worried about escalation. We were all worried about
the potential of nuclear escalation or escalation outside Ukraine's borders.
And part of the reason that that hasn't come to
the fore is the fact that Putin has been gradually,
slowly brutally winning the conflict. And so we need to
(07:49):
internalize he is revealed in the breach that he's willing
to pay enormous costs to influence the settlement of this conflict.
And we've revealed, under President Joe Biden and under President
Trump that we're not willing to go to the mattresses
and fight Russia in Ukraine over Ukraine. So that's going
to be the sort of starting point of understanding what
(08:10):
we should do. And you know, to be honest, we've
used a lot of economic leverage, a lot of sanctions
and it hasn't worked if you define work as it
caused to change his mind and leave Ukraine. So again,
I hate to be the sort of dark cloud here,
but it's you know, playing the type. I guess. You know,
(08:32):
we need to realize that we have limited leverage to
produce a maximally good outcome for Ukraine from this thing.
So we're very much in the realm of third best,
fourth best, or as I might put it, least worst outcomes.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
Well, first of all, if you're dealing with Putney, don't
stand next to any open windows. Secondly, I love I
love dealing in reality. I mean, there's no advantage to
ever not dealing in reality. So well, if the reality
Putin is going to end up being rewarded for having
invaded a smaller country and getting to keep the land
(09:09):
because the rest of the world's not willing to, uh,
you know, put up the fight to stop him, what
how do you deal with Taiwan and China? What's how
do you make that not send the message to China
that here now it's your turn.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
Yeah, I mean it's you don't want to be a
small country bordering a larger, more powerful country if you
can avoid it, and unfortunately neither Ukraine nor Taiwan can
avoid that. So the question then becomes what do you
do optimally to make yourself look like And this is
a Taiwan metaphor that think tanks works use all the
(09:43):
time like a porcupine. Right, Porcupines don't get attacked because
they're bristling with quills that are likely to get their
hooks into you, and it hurts. It's not a pleasant experience.
And so Taiwan, I think, you know, there's there are
more things that Taiwan needs to do better for itself.
Then there are things that the US military needs to
do on behalf of Taiwan, which is to say, if
(10:05):
the balloon goes up God forbid in Taiwan, it will
take the US military, in optimal scenarios four or five
six days to really meaningfully get into the fight. And
Taiwan has been so negligent with its own defense, spending
about two percent of GDP art defense not spending it
well that it may all be over, but the crime
(10:25):
by the time we were to get there, So I
think that from a Taiwan point of view, Taiwan needs
to engage in asymmetric defense. It needs to do is
another hokey metaphore that we think tank Doork's use a
small number of things at great scale, So it needs
to prevent China from getting a lodgment that it could
(10:45):
flow troops onto, and without getting too boringly into the
weeds here. It hasn't been doing a great job of that,
So I would love to see Taiwan focus its military
less on big ticket items that China is likely to
be able to pick off early in a con and
do things that really again turn it into a porcupine
that China can't swallow.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
Be a better porcupine. So final question for Justin Logan.
Justin back to the Russia Ukraine US thing, what are
the chances that Putin comes to the table with a
grand bargain in capitals that Ukraine is merely a part
of to tempt Donald J. Trump into some sort of
historical Arctic minerals arms control package.
Speaker 4 (11:29):
That's a good question. I hate to make predictions. It
seems unlikely to me. Putin was sort of signaling yesterday
that he might be willing to talk about arms control,
which is a sort of weird non response to what
the summit is supposed to be about. So I think
it's possible that he brings things to the table that
(11:50):
don't pertain to Ukraine, because, as we sort of established
earlier in the call, he's kind of sort of okay
with this test quo in Ukraine, and I think it's
a real question of whether Trump and the people Trump
brings with him are willing to bite on that, or
whether they bring things back around to finding some sort
of diplomatic resolution to the war in Ukraine.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
Justin Logan of the Cato Institute, fabulous conversation. Justin, we
thank you. It's been far too long since we've talked.
We will verbally abuse our staff for letting that happen.
Thank you so much for the time.
Speaker 4 (12:22):
It's a great pleasure. Have a good week. I guess
thank you you too. Man.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
That was a snap back to reality. It's so easy,
speaking for myself, to let your wishes be your the
father of your thoughts with things right. Trump has that land.
Is anybody willing to push him off of it? No
show of hands? No, okay, Well, then let's just concede
that deed gets that land. It's gonna happen, right, Yeah, yeah,
(12:47):
it's I don't know when it was. It might have
been about a decade ago that it occurred to me
the term disillusioned ought to be a positive, not a negative.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
What good are your illusions doing you? Especially in important stuff?
I mean, your illusion is that you're handsome and chicks digya.
That's fine, Okay, me too, right anyway, Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
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!