This week, Vadimir Zalinski launched an
industrialcale charm offensive as he and
Europe's political elite descended on
the White House in order to discuss the
next steps in efforts to force Russia to
contemplate peace. The man hosting those
talks, Donald Trump, claimed afterwards
that a meeting between Mr. Zalinski and
his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin,
was closer than ever.
>> We're going to have a meeting. I think
we if everything works out well today,
we'll have a trilad and I think there
will be a reasonable chance of ending
the war when we do that.
>> A claim that the Kremlin has largely
played down. The West is hardly on the
same page either with America rejecting
Europe's insistence that a ceasefire in
Ukraine is necessary to pave the way for
meaningful negotiations. But Washington
did soften its position on the
contribution it would be willing to make
to security guarantees for Ukraine in
the event of a pause in the fighting.
So, is this simply token diplomacy or is
momentum beginning to shift in attempts
to bring the conflict to a close? We'll
be answering your questions on that and
more with our expert panel.
>> I'm James Waterhouse and I'm Steve
Rosenberg.
>> And I'm Jamie Kimar Si. Welcome to
Ukraine. Ukraine cast from BBC News.
[Music]
>> Well, we have to start with the fact
that we have you here in the studio,
Steve. Uh although actually even before
that, an amazing piece of news that I
gleaned just before we started this
recording. This is the first time you,
our Moscow correspondent, our Russia
editor, has actually met our Kiev
correspondent James Waterhouse in how
how many years have you been covering
this?
>> Well, three and a half years. Not as
long as Steve, but
>> I I'm so pleased to meet you after all
this time. I sent you an email when you
got your job.
>> You did? Yeah. and you sent me really
you send me lovely messages just sending
your best wishes and you know and you've
got your own challenges but it's it was
always deeply appreciated at the time of
getting them.
>> Cheers. It's great to be on the city
with you.
>> Well, if only it was so easy to get
Russia and Ukraine together to talk to
shake hands but it's lovely to have you
and Steve just perhaps tell us why
you're in London passing through. We of
course heard and saw you in Alaska not
so long ago.
>> Yeah, I'm not sure where I am actually.
what time it is or what day it is cuz um
uh we flew to Alaska uh for the summit
and then um we flew back and uh and I'm
here but my luggage got lost on the way.
Um anyway um that was an amazing
experience. I'm in Alaska very surprise
summit um a surprise press conference
that wasn't a press conference of the
two presidents Putin and Trump. Um and
I'm not quite sure where we are after
all of that. Are we any closer to peace?
Doesn't look like it.
>> Well, that's what we're going to be
discussing today. And James, of course,
you were covering uh from from Brussels,
I think the the Washington meeting, the
summit, call it what you will, with
President Zilinsky and of course all
those other other European leaders. So,
let's get straight to the first question
this week. It's from Ian and he says,
"What has changed after the recent
Alaska and Washington meetings? Still no
peace deal. Apparently Vladimir Putin
still believes he can win on the
battlefield. What has changed if
anything? James,
>> I was reflecting on this and I think the
difficult answer is not very much. It is
our job, isn't it, to try and glean some
kind of insight and you know Donald
Trump will say give his view regularly
and that view will often change. Donald
Trump perhaps changed his position on
the question of security guarantees for
Ukraine. that collective military
assurance that the West, including
America, would step in if the war uh was
to start again, if Vladimir Putin had
another go down the line. But we don't
quite know what that means. He's ruled
out boots on the ground. The he has
talked about air support, is that the
sharing of intelligence? Is that
providing ammunition? We still don't yet
know and nothing yet has been promised.
But that is something Europe and Ukraine
have been desperate for because it is
still widely accepted that collectively
as a continent, Europe isn't enough
um alongside the Ukrainian military to
for example stop a concentration of
Russian troops along an enormous vast
front line. At the moment there are huge
question marks and gaping gaps in detail
as to how the West could act as a backs
stop. So Ukraine could finally live as
an independent country. So there I do
think there has broadly been a shift,
but you know, I've been in Berlin, been
in Brussels, watching Zalinski just try
to rally support and insert Europe in
the conversation. And actually, I think
Europe has finally got itself in the
conversation by getting to the White
House.
>> Well, there's actually a second part to
Ian's question. Maybe I'll put this one
to you to you, Steve. The Russian media
has been dismissive of Trump's
peacemaking efforts. My question is,
what do ordinary Russians make of the
European and US peace brokering?
>> I think uh those Russians who watch um
state television and believe the
narrative uh of state television that
the obstacle to peace is NATO, America,
Ukraine. people who believe that
um believe that uh efforts are underway
by the west to um prevent peace in
Ukraine. Uh and
those that that concerns people who
actually believe that. However, you
know, when you speak to Russians on the
street, and we do that all the time, um
most people we speak to just want this
to be over, right? They just want the
war to be over. um because more and more
people in Russia are being affected by
it. You know, more and more people that
we talk to have got husbands or sons or
brothers who um who are fighting uh in
Ukraine. So, it's affecting more and
more people. And interestingly, the
latest polling, and you have to be a bit
cautious about opinion polls and surveys
in Russia at the moment, but the latest
polling suggests that more and more
people want a negotiated settlement
rather than a continuation of the war,
which is quite interesting. Just to pick
up on what you're saying there about
more and more people have relatives
fighting and getting injured and dying.
Where do things stand at the moment?
Because you know there has been this the
narrative is that uh President Putin can
carry on fighting pretty much as long as
he wants. But I mean how difficult are
the Russians finding it to to get
soldiers? Is there is there
conscription? What what's what's going
on?
>> No, there isn't conscription. um people
uh the Russian government is still
throwing lots of money, big sums of
money at this and inviting volunteers to
sign up and go and fight. And when you
sort of drive around Moscow, you see the
billboards or drive around any Russian
city, there are big billboards offering
huge sums of money uh to people who are
willing to, you know, go to the sign up
military uh sign up office and sign up
for for this war. Um, so as long as
there's money, um, I think there will be
people who are willing to to go and
fight.
>> Can I ask about the motivation side?
Because I see the Ukrainian side where
you've got a clear motivation to defend
your country, you know, against the
oppressor, but when you talk to soldiers
on the Ukrainian side, I'm so curious
into what your average Russian soldiers
motivation is because there are guys
that say they just keep coming. They are
fighting hard for the territory we lose.
And I just wonder, you know, it's easier
to defend, isn't it? What about the
conqueror trying to kind of push forward
in that sense?
>> It's a really interesting question. I
mean, I'm sure there are some people uh
amongst the Russian soldiers who believe
they are doing the right thing, right?
Because the Russian government is
selling this uh as the defense of the
motherland. Even though Russia has
invaded Ukraine, uh Russians are being
told they are uh fighting in the
interests of Russia and in interests of
the Russian people. uh but the financial
aspect is a key one here because as I
say huge sums of money are being given
to people who couldn't have dreamt about
earning s such such money so I think
some people are driven maybe by ide
ideology and the belief in the
motherland other people uh it's more
financial well we we've mentioned
security guarantees already and we've
actually heard from someone called Ian
already but at the risk of sounding like
a broken record here's another question
about security guarantees from another
Ian
this time one who's in Scotland. And Ian
says this, Ian, Ukraine was given
security guarantees in the '90s when it
decommissioned Soviet nuclear weapons.
What confidence can they have in
guarantees given by today's Western
politicians who may not last as long as
Putin? James,
>> Ukraine has next to little confidence
that there will be a westernbacked deal
that will ensure their long-term
security. And they point to ever since
it's it voted overwhelmingly to be an
independent country after the collapse
of the Soviet Union. There has been, you
know, as you say, the the Budapest
memorandum, they they had one of the
world's biggest collection nuclear
missiles. They gave that up. The likes
of the US, Russia, um France, I think
that they they signed this deal saying
we'll recognize your borders in exchange
for handing these over. We all know
what's happened since. You've got the
outbreak of the war in 2014 where the
West decided to sanction Russia, the
Obama administration, but not Putin
himself or his inner circle. Um they
tried to bring Ukraine and Russia to the
table. There was appeasement. There were
attempted ceasefires that failed time
and time again. All the while um Russia
held on of uh held on to Crimea. Its
proxies kept waging a war in the east of
Ukraine. Uh and little changed. And here
we are again with all of this dialogue,
but the bypassing of a ceasefire now
that's now not going to happen that
Ukraine desperately wants
where some kind of deal will be thrashed
out overseen by a president who is still
clearly reluctant to bring out the
American stick on the Russian president.
He is still keen to cut a deal. He is
still viewing this clearly as
transactional. So there is there is very
little belief at the moment that a
lasting peace can be delivered.
>> Yeah. And I guess you brought up the
history in previous American presidents
Joe Biden as you say Barack Obama he he
stayed away. He let the Europeans do the
negotiation the Minsk Accords. It wasn't
the Americans involved in that. And Joe
Biden of course was very keen to say you
know we we can't push this too far. We
don't want a nuclear war.
>> Yeah. and and you know it what the you
know Biden administration signed off for
Ukraine in a military sense hu huge
amounts but it's the way it was
delivered which is a source of
frustration it was almost like this
tiptoeing where it started you know
military hospitals helmets ammunition
missiles tanks F-16 fighter jets over
the course of 2 years until until he
left office and if you're Ukraine and
you're weathering a full-scale invasion
with uh against your much bigger
neighbor with more men with an industry
that is geared towards fighting this
war. Um they there's been a huge
frustration. I remember when Trump
retook office there was actually there
were some kind of voices of optimism in
key of saying well look you know
something had to change. The current
trajectory for us was not good. Perhaps
you know Trump in his impatience for
peace might actually step in and produce
something meaningful. But, you know,
it's it's become so convoluted and he's
now seemingly accepting the complexities
of this war, but how he compels Russia
to put the brakes on. I remember you,
Steve, right at the beginning of the
invasion. No, you said Putin doesn't
have a reverse gear.
>> And that has proved to be the case,
hasn't it?
>> That's right. I The Putin mobile doesn't
have a reverse gear. It's going in one
direction. and uh he isn't intending to
stop, you know.
>> Well, that brings us on to the the
person inside that mobile because uh as
I'm sure you can imagine, lots of
interest in the man who is very much
back on the world stage on the stage in
America this week, Vladimir Putin. Let's
hear our next question.
>> Hi, Ukraine cast. Rita from London here.
I often hear that the one thing that
might make Putin reconsider his actions
in Ukraine is by imposing severe
economic sanctions on Russia. But how
are we so sure this would actually work?
He's crushed all political opposition in
Russia, so there probably wouldn't be
any protests. He likely wouldn't suffer
personally or financially because he's
so wealthy. And he clearly doesn't seem
to care about Russians quality of life
considering how many he sent to war and
how many have died at war. At this
point, it seems like invading Ukraine is
an existential issue for him and almost
bordering on being irrational. So, why
would economic sanctions, no matter how
crippling they are, change any of this?
>> Sanctions, we've heard a lot about them.
A lot of them have been imposed. I've
lost count of the number of rounds of EU
sanctions have been imposed. Gentlemen,
what are your thoughts on sanctions?
>> I mean, it's a good question from Rita.
I mean, existential. It is existential
for Putin. and he never loses never
misses a moment an opportunity to point
out that Russia has survived thousands
and thousands and thousands of
international sanctions that have been
imposed over the last 3 years. Um that
does not mean however that the Russian
economy is in a good state. It is
creaking. There are major problems right
the budget deficit is widening. Uh
revenues from oil and gas are falling.
many branches of industry are
approaching uh recession. So these are
huge problems and um to wage a war you
need money, you need resources and yes
uh this is a priority for the Russian
government and they will they will find
money but it's getting harder. So um if
you know on paper if um for example
India China were not to buy uh Russian
oil in theory that would be a a major
blow to the Russian economy.
>> Yeah. I mean you know I think India's
got another couple of weeks hasn't it?
>> Yes. The only concrete steps Donald
Trump has taken is to give the green
light for Europe and Ukraine to buy US
weaponry. not to simply be given it in
the name of what is right or wrong. Um
they just have the permission to buy it
now, but even then we don't know what
what's coming through air defense
systems, but that is the only step taken
in Ukraine's favor. And on the subject
of the secondary tariffs, the Russian
press uh is full of articles pointing
out that if Donald Trump went through
with this threat of uh imposing
secondary tariffs on China and India for
buying uh Russian oil, that would damage
America's economy. So I think there's a
confidence in Moscow that this is an
empty threat.
>> Well, well, can we move on to another
question because it is about trade
between Russia and the United States. Hi
Ukraine Cra, it's Andy McQuiston from
Suffukk.
After the summit, Putin addressed the
press and said that there was a growth
in trade between America and Russia of
20% since Trump Trump's administration
came into power. Is that correct? And
that seems a long way away from
increasing tariffs and reducing trade
with Russia. Thank you,
>> Steve. Well, I can't confirm the
figures, but I mean if if it is 20%, it
starts from a very low base because
trade between Russia and um America went
right down, you know, after the war. So,
>> context. Yeah,
>> absolutely. So, even 20% on not very
much. isn't a great deal but no it it is
a fact that you know America has been
buying continuing to buy fertilizer from
Russia um palladium um uranium that
hasn't stopped and actually India has
pointed out that that's double standards
right because on the one hand uh the
Trump administration wants India to stop
buying Russian oil in theory uh but
India points out well you America are
buying all these other things from
Russia
Yeah. I mean interesting that it is
something that Putin wants to talk up
though.
>> Absolutely. Absolutely. And of course
Vladimir Putin knows that Donald Trump
is a businessman. He loves talking about
deals. So he may well have mentioned
this 20% uh thinking that it would make
a good impression on uh on President
Trump.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I suppose that
brings us to that the whole way that
Vladimir Putin approached that summit
and the way he's approached the
relationship with Donald Trump.
Absolutely. If you look back over the
last few months, there have been many
occasions when um the Kremlin has
pointed out that Russia and America can
do great business together. You know,
there are lots of deals to be done. Um
cooperation in the Arctic, cooperation
in in in Siberia. I remember when
Vladimir Putin a few months ago went
went on TV late at night um gave a
little interview uh clearly designed to
send a message to to President Trump
that you know Moscow and Washington
could really make a lot of money
together you know
>> and just on that point again I just want
to ask Steve a question but like I heard
the argument in NATO military circles
that for Putin to meet Zilinski he
clearly doesn't want to do that he's
he's proving relationships with
Washington but he would only do that the
argument was if Russia's interests were
furthered sufficiently from discussions
in Alaska, if actually he was getting
the assurances or concessions he wanted,
then sure, I'd sit down with Zilinski.
But you have no idea.
>> Absolutely. I mean, Vladimir Putin has
said the conditions have to be right for
him to meet uh President Zilinski. And I
think what he means by conditions have
to be right is yes, that he gets
everything he wants. Uh
>> but would would that meeting in itself
be a concession from Putin if it
happened?
>> Well, it depends what document was
signed at the end of it. Right. I think
Vladimir Putin would be happy to sit
down with uh President Zilinski if
President Zilinski signed Ukraine's
capitulation for example.
>> Right. So a small a small concession
from him would be the meeting if there
was a big concession on the other side.
>> That's right. That's right. And at the
moment we've heard the Americans talking
about um talking up the idea of a
Zidenski Putin meeting. We haven't heard
the Russians talking about that. All
we've heard from Moscow is that some
agreement was reached to raise the um
the status of the delegates at the next
direct talks between Ukraine and Russia.
So perhaps a ministerial level, but no
mention yet of
>> shouldn't be for the cameras said Levol.
>> That's right. They want That's not for
the cameras.
>> Not for the cameras. That's right.
>> Well, I suppose there is a question
about which leaders would be in place if
this war were to to drag on for much
longer. And uh there there is the
possibility of course it could last much
longer and that is the subject of the
next question.
>> Hi Ukraine cast, it's Carrie from the
East of England. If Putin decided to
drag on the war in Ukraine for another 5
years, surely by that time there would
have to be free and independent
elections in Ukraine, or could Zinsky
stay president indefinitely for the
entirety of the war, no matter how long
that is? And would he want to anyway?
>> Question from Kerry there. And uh there
was a mention of elections, was there
not in the the White House meeting
between Zalinski and Put and Trump.
>> Yeah, there were. And I mean it was it
was almost making light of the repeated
Kremlin attempts to undermine Zalinsk's
legitimacy. Now in Ukraine elections are
on hold because of martial law that it
would be illegal to hold them. So
parliament would have to approve the
idea of of of relaxing martial law and
allowing them to take place. Then you've
got the practical difficulties. How on
earth do you hold free and fair
elections when a fifth of your country
is occupied where more of your country
comes under daily drone and missile
attacks or artillery fire if you're
close to the front line? How on earth do
you wonder to the ballot box uh and
express your democratic wish? Um so
there is there is that side of things.
Technically to answer the question for 5
years if the war went on elections would
not take place. I wonder I mean there is
a view a growing view that Zilinsky has
the appetite to keep going. He's only
been concentrating his power throughout
this war. But you know, Valeri Zelni,
General Zelusni, the former head of the
Ukrainian armed forces, given an office
job in London as the Ukrainian
ambassador, there are reports that he,
well, he's long been a touted as a
rival. But because of the existential
nature of Russia's invasion, Zilinsk's
staunchest political foes have said,
"Look, he's still our guy. He's still
our leader legitimately." I wonder you
would imagine that might change over the
next 5 years, but it's fraught with
practical difficulties even if the law
changes.
>> Although we did have that that sort of
outpouring of of public concern on the
streets a few weeks ago, didn't we about
the the attempt to uh to to bring
through changes when it came to
corruption?
>> Yes. But what we gleaned from that is
the control Zalinski still has for those
for reasons discussed on parliament. So
if the if the presidential office says
we want to you know change we bring in
this new bit of legislation or we want
to kind of bring this more into our
control for now MPs of all parties and
colors are playing ball. Um but that was
a you know that was that was a mistake
on his part but he still seems to have
that power.
>> And Steve if Zilinsky was in power for
another five years clearly that would
not be uh something that the Kremlin
would like to see.
Well, no. I mean, the Kremlin, you know,
certainly for the last couple of years,
there's been this concerted effort to
delegitimize him. You know, in all the
comments from Russian officials uh from
the Kremlin down, um they point out that
um President Zilinski's term in office
expired. Uh he's no longer legitimate
and this is rammed home from from
morning till night. Uh the conclusion is
from that that Vladimir Putin does not
want to be seen sitting down at the
negotiating table negotiating with
President Zilinski. As I say, he he he
would probably sit down and sign
something that he could present to the
Russian people as victory for Russia as
the capitulation of Ukraine. But to be
seen sitting as an equal negotiating
with the Ukrainian president, I don't
think um that's anything that uh he
wants to do. Steve, thanks so much.
Great to have you here with us. James,
great to have you back as ever. And uh
really happy to get you two guys
together. Still trying to get my head
around the fact that you hadn't actually
met in person until now. But uh thanks
for being here and thank you for
watching. We'll have another Q&A edition
of Ukraine Cast next week. But for now,
from all of us here, thanks very much
for watching.
>> Ukraine cast from BBC News.