This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: We begin today’s show with Russia and Ukraine. On Wednesday, President Trump spoke by phone with Russian President Vladimir Putin for 90 minutes about ending the war in Ukraine. Trump said they agreed to meet soon and immediately to begin negotiations to end the war. Trump then held a separate call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. After the swearing-in ceremony for the new director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, Trump spoke to reporters in the Oval Office.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I’ll be dealing with President Putin, largely on the phone, and we ultimately expect to meet. In fact, we expect that he’ll come here and I’ll go there, and we’re going to meet also probably in Saudi Arabia the first time. We’ll meet in Saudi Arabia, see if we can get something done. But we want to end that war. That war is a disaster. It’s a really bloody, horrible war.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: President Trump also addressed questions from reporters about whether Ukraine was being sidelined.
REPORTER 1: Are you freezing out President Zelensky of this process a bit? Isn’t there a danger of that?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: No, I don’t think so, as long as he’s there, but, you know, at some point you’re going to have to have elections, too. You’re going to have to have an election.
REPORTER 2: Putin says he wants security assurances, Mr. President. What does that look like?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: In terms of what?
REPORTER 2: If the war were to end, he says he wants guarantees of security.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We’ll see what that means. We have — I think when the war ends, one thing he was very strong about, he wants — if it ends, he wants it to end. And that’s President Putin said that. He wants it to end. He doesn’t want to end it and then go back to fighting six months later. We talked about the possibility — I mentioned it — of a ceasefire so we can stop the killing. And I think we’ll probably end up at some point getting a ceasefire in the not-too-distant future.
REPORTER 3: Do you view Ukraine as an equal member of the peace process?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Say it. What?
REPORTER 3: Do you view Ukraine as an equal member of this peace process?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Umm, it’s an interesting question. I think they have to make peace. Their people are being killed, and I think they have to make peace.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: President Trump’s phone call with Putin came as U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth spoke at a NATO meeting in Brussels, where he said a return to Ukraine’s prewar borders is, quote, “unrealistic.” Hegseth also ruled out Ukraine’s future membership in NATO.
DEFENSE SECRETARY PETE HEGSETH: As the war approaches its third anniversary, our message is clear: The bloodshed must stop, and this war must end. … We want, like you, a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine. But we must start by recognizing that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective. Chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause more suffering. … That said, the United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement. Instead, any security guarantee must be backed by capable European and non-European troops. If these troops are deployed as peacekeepers to Ukraine at any point, they should be deployed as part of a non-NATO mission. … To be clear, as part of any security guarantee, there will not be U.S. troops deployed to Ukraine.
AMY GOODMAN: This comes as Germany and other European nations have rejected any peace talks with Moscow that do not include Kyiv.
Meanwhile, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has traveled to Kyiv to discuss a Trump proposal for Ukraine to give the U.S. access to its natural resources in exchange for continued U.S. military assistance. According to the State Department, Trump’s envoy to Russia and Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, will travel to Germany and Ukraine in the coming days to, quote, “engage with allies and partners across Europe who are willing to work with the United States to end Russia’s war against Ukraine,” unquote.
For more, we’re joined by Katrina vanden Heuvel, Russia expert and publisher of The Nation magazine.
Massive developments in this last 24 hours, Katrina. Is this the beginning of the end of the war in Ukraine? And can you talk about the significance of Trump’s call, 90 minutes, with President Putin, his first, at least we know publicly, with him since he became president? Also spoke with Zelensky and says his first talks will be Russia and the United States in Saudi Arabia.
KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: This is a monumental shift, Amy, for the — let’s begin with the fact that Russia launched this war of aggression. But from there on, this is a monumental shift, that, for example, the U.S. is not going to back Ukraine going into NATO. I think the defense secretary saying that has laid down a line that is in opposition to what we’ve seen for the last several — 17 years. That’s huge. I think the fact that the sides are talking is critical, because for too long it’s been a militarized relationship. It’s all been about Zelensky’s weapons and then the Russian weapons. Both countries are war-weary. The soldiers are demoralized. You’re entering a period of mud in coming out of the winter.
I do think the key will be the security apparatus or the security framework that will be discussed. The Europeans — Macron the other day called for 150,000 security forces or peacekeeping forces. That seems very unrealistic. I think a lot will depend on what kind of security architecture emerges to keep Ukraine sovereign, free. There are elections that will be held, and that is mandated by the Ukrainian Constitution. And Zelensky has declared martial law.
But in the end, what we’re witnessing is — and, listen, I mean, Trump — I don’t need to tell you how I feel about Trump, how The Nation feels about Trump, but there is an importance in what he is beginning to do, which is open up a process to end a war, to move toward ceasefire. And I think that is to be welcomed, because the war is impoverishing Ukraine. The question also will be, with a country, Ukraine, that has some of the vast reserves of titanium and uranium, how those will be allocated to reconstruct a ravaged country, Ukraine, what role Russia will play. There are many, many questions. But the important thing is to get to a table — round, square, oval — and to begin to discuss, talk, talk, talk, jaw, jaw, jaw.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Katrina, if you could say — you know, these comments that Hegseth made and that Trump has reiterated, namely that — as you mentioned, that NATO membership for Ukraine is ruled out, also that a return to pre-2014 borders is not realistic — so, insofar as what we know of Ukraine’s demands, is there any likelihood within the negotiations, given what’s already been said, that concessions can be made?
KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: Yeah, I mean, I think the membership in the EU, which triggered this crisis in 2014, could be put back on the table. That’s one element. I do think that the reconstruction, the role Russia may play in helping fund reconstruction, is something important. I do think that Crimea and elements of the Donbas region may be put sort of de jure free, but possibly also negotiated into. That’s very tricky, the border there, the contact line. We may see a kind of armistice situation that we saw after the Korean War, so it’s left there. The trick is not to leave situations on the ground that can trigger, retrigger conflict.
The NATO issue, I think, is critical, because I don’t know if people know, but it is basically a military-industrial complex lobbying operation. Members of NATO have to buy U.S. weapons. There’s an interoperability clause. In the same way, these security conferences that Hegseth is at or was going to, these are military-industrial complex lobbying parties. So, again, I come back to the fact, as much as can be demilitarized in the future regarding the security architecture of Ukraine will be helpful and important for the future of the region.
I know there’s a narrative that, if let alone, Russia will go into the Baltics, will ravage Europe. Russia could barely beat Ukraine, a small country. It’s an anguish and horrible to watch what’s happened, launched by Russia. We’re three years on the anniversary. But the ability to talk and find a resolution, I think, can mitigate some of the fears of countries, which really have played a role in the debate to the exclusion of those who argue that Russia is not an expansionist power. I know that will lead many to shriek, but it can barely take on Ukraine. It can’t pay the pensions of thousands of people in other countries.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, absolutely, Katrina, but how, then, would you imagine that Russia could play a role somehow in the reconstruction of Ukraine, given its circumstances?
KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: Well, there is a term that we’ve all learned in the last weeks: “oligarchs.” I mean, you know, there’s a lot of money in Russia that could be used. But the extractive foreign policy of Donald Trump is well suited for this moment, because, again, the minerals, which Mr. Zelensky has offered as part of a reconstruction effort. They’ve already had — Penny Pritzker was the reconstruction czar — Governor Pritzker’s sister — and she brought in Blackstone, BlackRock, our oligarchs, to help fund the reconstruction. The World Bank estimates it’s going to be at least a trillion. And we know what happens when countries walk away. We’ve walked away from Afghanistan. We walked away from other countries. So, I think there’s a moral and political and security need to find resources for reconstruction.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you comment on the prisoner exchange, the teacher, Fogel, American teacher, after three-and-a-half years in prison in Russia, being returned in exchange for Alexander Vinnik, a cryptocurrency guy who was convicted? He’s going back to Russia. And then you’ve got Belarus involved with three prisoners released, one of them American, one of them working for an American media outlet, and also the sort of passing references to Saudi Arabia being involved with that, not to mention it being the place where Trump will meet with Putin for the first part of the negotiation with — over the ending of the war in Ukraine, though European countries are saying they wouldn’t negotiate unless Ukraine was involved from the beginning.
KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: So, the first question, Amy, this is classic Cold War tit for tat. It’s like the film, Bridge of Spies. I mean, exchange of prisoners has been a longtime scenario. We’ve seen it. And, you know, what also happens, seriously, is obviously the repression of journalists, the arrest of journalists, the foreign agent. All of this — war is not good for progressive, dissenting people. I mean, it used to be said you went on — you became a dissident when you went on pension, but I think the dissenting community of Russia has been suppressed, not simply by the war, but by Putin’s politics.
Saudi Arabia — I gasped when I heard that they might meet in Saudi Arabia, the home of the oligarchical vision. I suspect they’ll do Moscow-Washington in the end. But, you know, it reminds of how this war could have been averted. It could have been ended in March, April 2022, when there were substantive discussions in Istanbul. And there has been denial, but there’s also been acknowledgment that Victoria Nuland, who was in the State Department — the State Department — and Boris Johnson, who’s Boris Johnson, came in and upended it, sabotaged the possibility back then. So they should take that to their grave.
AMY GOODMAN: Katrina vanden Heuvel, we thank you so much for being with us, publisher of The Nation magazine.
KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: Thank you.
AMY GOODMAN: Next up, “Elon Musk’s Business Empire Scores Benefits Under Trump Shake-Up.” We’ll speak with three-time Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times reporter Eric Lipton about the billions Musk has to gain as he fires thousands and slashes the federal budget. Back in 30 seconds.
