This is Balance of Power live from
Washington DC.
>> From Bloomberg's Washington DC studios
to our TV and radio audiences worldwide,
welcome to Balance of Power. Alongside
Tyler Kendall, I'm Michael Shepard.
Tonight, the White House ramping up the
pressure for a bilateral summit between
Russian President Putin and Ukrainian
President Zalinski.
>> President Trump calling for the leaders
to meet as he pushes for an end to the
war in Ukraine, denying any potential
role of the US military in the conflict
and laying out expectations for Zilinski
when it comes to relinquishing territory
to Russia. All that and more when we
speak with former ambassador to Ukraine,
William Taylor. Up ahead,
>> plus the developing news from the White
House when it comes to Intel. Commerce
Secretary Howard Lutnik confirming a
Bloomberg News scoop. The government is
in talks to acquire an equity stake in
the company. We'll have the market
reaction coming up next.
>> And sleeping on the floor, the Texas
legislature.
>> I am not free to leave. I've asked. In
fact, they've locked the door. They said
I am not permitted to leave this floor
tonight. Uh, so I am in for tonight. Uh,
and I am not allowed to leave. Um, my
will is just as strong as theirs and
it's time that we stand up to the
bullies.
>> That's the step a Democratic state
lawmaker took in Texas in protest after
refusing Republican demands for a law
enforcement effort es escort as the
redistricting fight in the state
escalates following the return of
Democrats. But we begin tonight with the
latest from the White House as we get
word that the president not only called
Vladimir Putin after yesterday's summit
with President Zalinski, but also
Hungary's Victor Orban as well. The call
between both men came at the behest of
European leaders as Trump fielded
questions on Ukraine's potential
membership in the EU. Meanwhile, we have
new reporting tonight on Europe's push
for a package of security guarantees for
Ukraine as soon as this week as leaders
tries to seize on President Trump's
backing. Joining us now with more is
Bloomberg's Wendy Benjaminson, who joins
us live from world headquarters in New
York. Uh Wendy, people familiar with the
matter tell us that this package of
security guarantees could come together
as soon as this week. What do we know
about what's actually being discussed
here in principle when it comes to this
critical part of these negotiations?
>> Right, Tyler? So, the security
guarantees would be ways to prevent
something like this from ever happening
again. And while um UK and French forces
um may indeed be on the ground in
Ukraine if this all works out as a
peacekeeping force, uh President Trump
has said that there we there will be no
American boots on the ground, but we
could provide tactical support, logistic
support, intelligence support, things
like that. So um but that's of course if
this all happens. I mean, there's uh
there is Trump has said today that he's
set up this meeting between Putin and
Zalinski and the Kremlin's like, well,
we're open to maybe talking, but you
know, we don't know that it we have
we're not going to say it's going to
happen yet. So, it's all up in the air
how all these pieces are going to come
together even as the White House
presents it as a package wrapped up in
an ice bow.
Wendy, we are seeing the European uh
leaders who were with Trump yesterday
here in Washington moving with speed to
try to get something locked in on
security guarantees. Are they trying to
lock in President Donald Trump on this?
>> They probably are, Mike. That makes a
lot of sense. Um, you know what's been
really interesting about the last couple
of days is to see how much different the
approach is that the European leaders
and Zalinsky are taking to Donald Trump
than at least the European leaders did
in his first term. There is no, if you
remember that famous picture of Angela
Merkel wagging her finger at Trump in a
famous photo of a G7 meeting. They were
they, you know, they flattered him. They
came to the White House. They sat in
chairs while he sat behind the resolute
desk and Voodimir Zilinsky was very
gracious, you know, with Donald Trump
and and in return they got Donald Trump
being nicer and more obliging to their
ideas. Um so these are all things that
could be in the works and I think the
security guarantees um probably will
happen. It's just a matter of getting
Putin to the table and somehow in a
face-to-face meeting with Putin and
Zilinski, these two working out a peace
deal, which may happen. It It seems a
little far-fetched as Russia continues
to bomb Ukraine even today.
>> All right, Bloomberg's Wendy
Benjaminson, we thank you so much as
always for your coverage. And joining us
now for more insight on what's next when
it comes to this ongoing conflict is
William Taylor. He's the former US
ambassador to Ukraine and former charged
day affairs to Ukraine under the first
Trump administration. Ambassador Taylor,
thank you so much for being here and I
want to pick up on this conversation
when it comes to the future of security
guarantees because we know today there
was a gathering of European leaders and
people familiar tell us here at
Bloomberg News that they focused on a
plan to send British and French troops
to Ukraine as part of any potential
peace deal. I would love to get your
insight here on what is realistic to
expect from the US when it comes to
security guarantees and will it be
enough to deter Vladimir Putin?
I
>> think the answer to the last question,
Tyler, is yes. But you asked what could
the Americans bring to this coalition of
the willing that the French and the
British are leading. But by the way,
it's about 30 nations. Um, so the the
coalition of the will of the willing is
pretty broad and and as pretty much
economic power and probably a a fair
amount of military power, but there are
some things that the Americans can
provide um that most of the Europeans
don't have. Um, President Trump actually
mentioned one of them called air cover.
Um, US air forces air capabilities um
are are massive. uh that could be
brought to bear and you don't need to
have American boots on the ground as
they say. You don't need American
soldiers or airmen on the ground to
provide that kind of air support and air
cover um using the United States Air
Force. Um they can fly out of Poland or
fly out of Romania or fly out of
Germany. Indeed, we've seen they can fly
out of United States. And so so there's
a lot that we can bring to bear, the
Americans can bring to bear on to
contribute um to the coalition willing
that the Brits and the French are
leading um that that that don't require
this stuff doesn't require boots on the
ground.
>> Ambassador Taylor, another sensitive
question in this of course is land. And
following yesterday's multilateral
meeting, German Chancellor Frederick
Murs discussed the possibility of
Ukraine seeding territory as part of a
peace deal. Let's have a quick listen.
The one aspect which has not been
discussed today is that Ukraine should
not be forced to seed any territories.
Russia's demand that Kiev give up
Donbash region is comparable to put in
perspective to a proposal that the US
give up Florida. is our Florida.
>> Ambassador Taylor, we're hearing a
different tune from uh Donald Trump and
Vladimir Putin when it comes to land uh
at least from Frederick Murs. But what
advice would you give to Zalinski when
it comes to this whole question of
territory? Will he ultimately have to
make some concessions and would you
recommend that?
>> No. No, I would not recommend it and
he's not going to have to make them. Um
yeah, Putin wants that. Um and Putin
probably put that in Donald Trump's ear
in Anchorage last week. Um but um
President Trump just brought those ideas
back. I don't think he's figured out yet
what he would what President Trump would
recommend. But in terms of recommending
to President Zalinsky, no one needs to
do that. President Linsky knows exactly
what he needs to do and it's of a piece.
It is perfectly consistent with what
Ukrainians want. that is they want the
end of the war. They want this war to
stop. They're tired. They've been
fighting for three and a half years.
They've been fighting for 127 1272 days.
1273 days um and they want it to end.
But they do not want to give up
territory. But there's a key distinction
here. The Ukrainians grudgingly accept,
Michael, that the Russians are in 19% of
their country. and they grudge the
Ukrainians grudgingly accept that
they're not the Ukrainians are not going
to push them out push the Russians out
of that 19% militarily anytime soon. So
even though they're not willing to give
up territory and give up claim to that
territory, legal claim to that
territory, they are willing to
acknowledge de facto that the Russians
are there. And that's a big difference.
And that's also and President Zilinski
is going to make exactly that point, I'm
sure. And that's what the the German
chancellor is talking about as well.
President that the reason it wasn't
talked about yesterday is because
they're not going to tell Zalinski to
give up territory.
The Florida analogy is a good one. Um,
so so that it wasn't talked about
yesterday. Um, Putin may want it, but
the Europeans don't, the Ukrainians
don't, and we shouldn't.
Well, something else that Ukraine wants,
we know, is membership when it comes to
the European Union, for example. And we
had mentioned at the top of the show
that President Trump held a phone call
with Victor Orban about why the
Hungarian prime minister is trying to
block Ukraine from joining that that uh
political and and economic block as
well. Do you see a viable path here for
Ukraine when it comes to EU membership?
If we know already, allies have said
that NATO membership, for example, is
going to be off the table.
>> Well, first of all, NATO membership is
not off the table. Um, it may be off the
table today, Tyler, but it's not off the
table. I mean, you ask the Ukrainians,
ask most Europeans, um, if it's still
viable, and they say yes, it should
happen at some point, but there are some
Europeans um, and there are some
Americans who would say it's not on the
table right now. So, that's that's
number one. on EU that that train is on
the way. That ship is sailing. Um they
are uh the Ukrainians are well on the
way to the EU. Um and I'd be very
interested to know what the conversation
was between Trump and and Orban. Orban
has been a thorn in the side of the
Ukrainians. Um but the EU is the right
destination for Ukraine. They are ready
to go there. They're working on it.
There's a lot of work, as you all know
very well, what it takes to get into the
EU, but the Ukrainians know that and
they're working on hard and most
Europeans, with the possible exception
of the guy you're showing on the screen
there, Mr. Orban, um are are fully
supportive. The Ukrainians have a big
have a big stake and the Europeans have
a big stake. So, I think that's uh I
think that's that train is moving.
Ambassador
Taylor, in the minute we have left, what
do you see as happening in terms of this
bilateral meeting between Vladimir
Vladimir Putin and Wimir Zalinski? Do
you see it actually happening? Will
Putin accept this idea? And is it a good
idea for them to meet without say a
third party as perhaps a chaperon?
>> On your first question, Michael, Putin
doesn't want to end this war. Putin
wants to drag it out. uh he wants to
keep pounding the Ukrainians until they
give up. They're never going to give up,
but he's going to keep pounding until
he's forced to come to the table for a
ceasefire. So, no, I don't think he's
eager. I don't think he's has any
intentions of coming to a bilateral
meeting. He may say something on the
phone to President Trump um to tell
President Trump that he's willing to do
it, but all the official story coming
out of Moscow is that they're going to
up the level of their delegation to
these talks. The right now the
delegation is very low. was a deputy
minister of culture. So they're they're
not serious about these negotiations and
and Putin is not either. Putin wants all
of Ukraine and he wants to pound them
until he gets that.
William Taylor, former US ambassador to
Ukraine. Thank you. Coming up, we
continue our conversation on the
potential next steps for the war in
Ukraine with Kurt Vulker, former US
special representative for Ukraine.
Negotiations in the first Trump
administration up ahead. But first, how
President Donald Trump's tariff policy
is impacting the global economy. We'll
discuss that with Adam Posen of the
Peterson Institute for International
Economics next on Balance of Power on
Bloomberg TV and Radio.
[Music]
I think Chair Pal's in a tough spot
going into Friday because uh we got a
long way to go until we have that that
September meeting. On top of that, he
has the political pressure on the back
of his neck he's been dealing with with
some time. Uh so he can't lean one way
or another. I think what we're seeing is
sort of the culmination of the consumer
kind of settling in, rate stabilizing,
and people realizing, hey, you know
what, we may be very close to the
bottom. the big box retailers, home
improvement stores, those that had the
capability brought a lot of inventory
and going through that level of
inventory has not yielded the pass
through to consumers that some have
seen, but it'll come.
Some voices today on Bloomberg
Surveillance discussing the
temperamental state of the US economy.
Even after solid earnings from a major
retailer, a route in tech stocks dragged
down gains across the indexes. For a
closer look into where things stand, we
turn to power moves with Bloomberg's
Roma Bostic, who joins us live from
world headquarters in New York. Roma,
really, other than Intel and its gains
on the day, we didn't see much love
across the tech sector. What happened
across the market?
>> No, tech was the big lagard, which is a
rarity as of late these days. Of course,
when you look at the big gains that this
market has made off of those April lows,
and quite frankly, on a year-to- date
basis, it has been all about big tech.
And more importantly, it has been all
about Nvidia. That stock has been on a
tear, but a little bit of a pullback
today. It was one of the biggest lagards
in the market today. Both in terms on a
percentage basis, but more importantly
on its contribution to the market. And
this comes ahead of its earnings report,
which comes a week from tomorrow. Nvidia
dropping below some of its key moving
averages, particularly it short-term
moving averages. And that's important
because this is a stock that has been
fueled not just by its corporate
fundamentals, but by momentum in this
market. And if the momentum turns, that
could spell bad news for Nvidia. And
more importantly, it could spell bad
news for the broader market. But as you
pointed out, not all tech was lower on
the day. One of the few bright spots,
and get this, Mike, Intel. In fact,
Intel is actually the best performing
stock in the S&P 500, not just today,
but for the month of August so far. And
this is a huge turnaround. Intel has
been one of the biggest laggers in the
tech space and one of the biggest
laggers overall. A lot of concerns about
its future. a lot of concerns about its
CEO, but a big ratification of its
strategy and more importantly a big
ratification of its future when
SoftBank, this is a behemoth fund run by
Mashioce Sun, said that it would commit
a $2 billion investment into the
company. Some encouraging words also
coming out of the Trump administration,
including Howard Lutnik confirming the
potential for an investment, a potential
stake uh in that company by the United
States government. All providing a big
lift to the stock. You see the shares
rallying more than 6% on the day.
>> Well, remain as we heard at the top of
the segment, traders are also getting
ready ahead of Friday when Fed chair
Jerome Powell is going to give his
annual remarks at the Kansas City Fed's
annual economic symposium. What's been
the Treasury market reaction leading up
to this as we wait for any sort of clues
about a September rate cut?
>> Uh the reaction is they're cutting. You
remember like in the old campaigns when
we talk about drill baby drill. Well,
it's cut, baby cut right now in this
market. Pretty much every trader out
there right now is betting that the Fed
will reduce interest rates at its
meeting in midepptember and again before
the year is out. Now, the Jackson Hole
speech by JP Pal on Friday is going to
be key because this is really going to
be his last big opportunity to
communicate if he chooses to what the
Fed might do next ahead of that
September meeting. Now, there is a risk
here. As we know, J. Pal is not always
forthcoming about what the Fed might do.
He could go into that speech on Friday,
ratify what the market has priced in
that yes indeed, the Fed will cut rates.
He could also throw cold water in that,
citing some of the inflation data that
shows inflation is still sticky. Or
Tyler, he might do what he normally
does, and that's just dodge the question
altogether.
>> All right, a lot to look out for.
Bloomberg's Roma Bostic, we thank you as
always for your coverage and insight.
Joining us now here in our Washington
bureau for a bigger look at this bigger
look at the larger global economic
impacts of say President Trump's tariffs
which we know are impacting how the Fed
is informing its monetary policy is Adam
Posen. He's the president of the
Economics. Adam, thanks so much for
being here. And I want to start just
there. I want to zone in here on
tariffs, including some big news that we
got today with President Trump really
stunning the logistics industry. He
widened his steel and aluminum tariffs.
It's expanded to now 400 consumer
products. I'm talking about uh things
like motorcycles and table wear. From
your perspective, how does this
demonstrate to us just how wide reaching
his tariff policies are when you think
about these tariffs in particular being
enacted under section 232 on the basis
of national security concerns?
>> Thank you, Tyler, for having me. And
you're right, there is a bigger picture
here. I mean, directly this is going to
contribute to inflation. It's going to
make things more expensive for other
businesses, more expensive for
consumers. And if it doesn't get passed
through fully to inflation, it'll draw
down profits and margins for the
companies. But the bigger picture is one
of governance problems both domestically
and internationally that the president
has declared emergencies and the
emergencies don't necessarily tie to
what the law says. I mean, there's no
way that steel flatear is a national
security issue. Even if a million
Chinese picked up steel knives, it would
still not be a national security issue
as the law reads. And so Congress has
abdicated what should be a fundamentally
congressional right to set tax policy in
tariffs or taxes. And also because he's
doing it through emergency powers
instead of congressional hearings. It's
all very uncertain. So in the previous
leadup you were talking about your
colleague Bostik was talking about um
Intel. You know, it shouldn't be a
matter of daytoday whether a president
or a secretary of commerce says this is
a good stock to buy like he did about
various companies including Tesla in one
point. It shouldn't be the US government
saying that. But finally,
internationally, it's it's there is no
endgame here because he's basically told
a bunch of countries, not just China,
that in the end he'll set tariffs
whatever they're going to be. if you
retaliate, we're going to escalate and I
can change them at any time. And so at
that point, in a way that wasn't true
under Trump Juan or under Biden, both of
whom did do tariffs, um I think other
countries and investors start throwing
up their hands.
>> Adam, we see the tariffs and you just
brought up Intel, too, as part of a
larger piece of this Trump shift when it
comes to the global economy. And that's
something that you addressed in a
foreign affairs piece out just this
week. Can you talk about what the
consequences are going to be of this
rewriting of the global economic
paradigm led by Donald Trump?
>> Thank you, Michael. I appreciate you're
mentioning that. Um, we published, it
came out today in foreign affairs a
piece called the new economic geography.
I shouldn't say we. It's my
responsibility. It's my piece. Um, and
the basic point is when we focus very
narrowly on tariffs uh or on bilateral
trade balances as the Trump
administration does, you don't see the
full picture. The full picture is that
the US was basically the insurance
provider to global business, to foreign
governments, even China, but especially
our allies, uh, terms of shipping
defense, in terms of getting money in
and out of dollars, um, in terms of
enforcing laws, in terms of intellectual
property and standards, all these
things. And the US government collected
premium for this. uh we had lower
interest rates. We had more than our
fair share of inward investment. We had
more influence than other countries in
setting standards. Um and the Trump
people have decided that no, we were
getting ripped off. This was a bad deal
and we're just going to push hard and
we're going to move from being an
insurer to being an extractor. Um we're
going to crunch down what coverage we
offer. We're going to massively increase
the premium and we're just going to keep
charging till we can't get any more out.
And people like Secretary Basant or
others in the administration will say
this is just a rebalancing. This is just
if they accept the insurance analogy,
they're just repricing it. My view is
and we're already starting to see this
is people are going to choose to
self-insure or go to other insurers, not
rely on the US when they're doing this.
There are some countries like Japan or
Mexico that have no choice. But even
there, the households, the investors
will change. And then other countries
that do have a choice like East Asia,
parts of Europe, they're going to shift.
And we're already seeing that in weaker
dollar. We're already seeing that in
higher interest rates on US treasuries.
We're already seeing that in some of
these um investment decisions that
countries are making. So you get the big
ticket Intel announcement that you
rightly reported on, but then you don't
see all the things where China or Europe
gets the opportunities in Indonesia or
Turkey that the US used to. In just our
final minute that we have left with you,
I want to zone in on China because this
has of course been a really big focal
point of the administration as you've
been outlining. So what is the number
one path here that the White House could
take to remain competitive with China
but also make sure that there aren't
these sort of consequences that you're
outlining?
>> Well, the irony Tyler of what they're
doing in my view is China's actually
going to be the least aren't the least
affected. Whereas it's our allies like
Japan, UK, Mexico, Canada that are going
to be worst hit. And so what I've argued
in the past is you want for one of a
better term a suction not sanctioned
approach with China. Instead of trying
to keep them down, you try and make it
attractive for things to leave China,
ideas, people, investment, and that puts
pressure on the Chinese regime and it
benefits us instead of trying to bottle
them up and making them mad at us.
Adam Posen, president of the Peterson
Institute for International Economics.
Thank you. Coming up, a Texas Democrat
opted to spend the night in the state
legislature rather than allow a law
enforcement officer to shadow her. We'll
bring you the details in this latest
development in the state's redistricting
battle. But first, President Trump is
hoping to finalize a trilateral meeting
with Putin and Zalinski. We'll discuss
that with Kurt Vulker, former US special
representative for Ukraine negotiations
in the first.
This is Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV
and radio. Alongside Tyler Kendall, I'm
Mike Shepard. We'll have more on
President Trump's effort to broker a
peace deal between Russia and Ukraine
coming up. But first, here are some of
the other stories we're watching in
today's Power Brief. Republican
governors from Louisiana, Mississippi,
Tennessee, West Virginia, South
Carolina, and Ohio have all pledged to
send 1,000 National Guard troops to
patrol Washington DC. That's addition to
that's in addition to the 800 DC
National Guard members already deployed
in the nation's capital. White House
press secretary Caroline Levit discussed
coordination of the troops earlier
today.
>> This inter agency team is meeting and
talking daily. In fact, there's a
meeting taking place right now in the
West Wing uh with members of the inter
agency task force to continue to discuss
not just the National Guard deployment,
but also how we can continue to remove
public safety threats off of the streets
of Washington.
>> The surge comes despite Justice
Department data released in January
showing total violent crime in
Washington is at a 30-year low. Plus,
President Trump plans to name Missouri
Attorney General Andrew Bailey to serve
as co-put director of the FBI. It's
considered an unusual appointment that
will place him at an equal rank as
current FBI Deputy Director Dan Bonino.
The news was first reported by Fox News
and later confirmed by both Bonino and
FBI Director Kash Patel on social media.
Bonjino is a former right-wing radio
host who in recent weeks has publicly
clashed with Attorney General Pam Bondi
over the release of the Epstein files,
leading to widespread speculation over
his future tenure at the agency.
>> And visitors to the US arriving on
student visas plunged 28% in July.
That's the biggest year-over-year
monthly drop so far this year. The
declines were most pronounced from Asia,
the largest international education
market, as the Trump administration's
immigration policies created bottlenecks
and uncertainty for students. US
universities have already warned that
firsttime foreign student enrollment on
campuses is projected to fall by about
30% this fall, potentially costing the
education sector $2.6 billion in tuition
revenue. And yesterday, European leaders
gathered at the White House for a
historic multilateral meeting. Here's
some of what they had to say about their
hopes to end the war in Ukraine.
>> We need to stop this war to stop Russia
and we need support American and
European partners. We will do our best
uh for this.
>> 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. the coalition
of willing uh countries, that's 30
countries already working together on
security guarantees, will now work with
the US on those guarantees.
>> My hope is that the United States do the
most possible because that's what will
allow us to alleiate the burden on
Europe and that the United States also
confirm its commitments because that was
a big question mark.
Now for the latest on President Trump's
effort to end the war in Ukraine
following yesterday's impromptu White
House summit, we turn to Bloomberg's
Eric Martin, who joins us live here in
our Washington bureau. Eric, it's good
to see you. And in fact, we actually
have already gotten some breaking news
in the last few moments. The chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Kaine,
tells Fox News he's going to meet with
his European counterparts. This includes
Germany, the UK, France. potentially a
sign of movement here as the US is
trying to show progress towards uh
getting some sort of deal over the
finish line. And part of this
conversation was a Bloomberg News scoop
uh today that I know that you've been
following. People familiar telling us
that President Trump actually held a
phone call with Victor Orban, the
Hungarian prime minister. What do we
know about uh what President Trump is
doing up to this point to try to get
some more progress going to get Ukraine
the sort of security guarantees that
it's asking for?
>> That's right, Tyler. Absolutely fabulous
scoop today from our colleagues Alex
Wickham, Katherine Lucy, and just
fascinating, right? This information
coming out. First, we had yesterday the
surprise. We started to hear about and
then confirmed it uh from uh the White
House and from sources yesterday
afternoon that Trump took this
extraordinary break from his meeting
with European leaders to go call
Vladimir Putin, which a call that the
Kremlin said lasted for 40 minutes. And
now this information from this Bloomberg
scoop that after the Putin call, he left
and called Victor Orban, one of his
strongest allies in Europe, somebody who
has been to Mara Lago, somebody who in
many ways served as the inspiration or
the model, many people think, for the
Make America Great Again, for the MAGA
movement. He's been in office since
2010, so preceded Donald Trump by uh
more than a half decade. And this is
just fascinating. He is calling Victor
Orban and asking him about a request, a
long-standing request from EU members
for Orban to drop his opposition to
Ukraine joining the European Union. To
which we saw some response today from
Orban saying that EU membership in and
of itself would not provide any security
guarantees. Of course, the EU is an
economic union but doesn't have a shared
army. NATO is the security alliance. But
still fascinating that President Trump
would take this step at the urging of
his European counterparts to go and call
Orban. Ju just extraordinary.
>> Bloomberg's Eric Martin. Thank you. For
more, we want to bring in Kurt Vulkar,
former US ambassador to NATO and former
US special representative for Ukraine
negotiations in the first Trump
administration. Uh, Ambassador, we're
seeing some headlines roll in courtesy
of Fox that uh, military representatives
from the US and uh, some European
countries are going to be meeting to
discuss further steps on these security
guarantees. Based on your experience,
what are the necessary ingredients and
elements uh, to ensure that these
guarantees provide uh, enough safety and
security for Ukraine in the long run?
Well, there are just some very basic
questions here. I I think the key thing
for the European leaders and President
Trump to decide is what is the purpose
of this force? What is the mission? Uh I
think that that mission should be to
provide help Ukraine develop sufficient
defense capability that Putin is
deterred from t attacking again. So a
deterrence through developing Ukrainian
forces that I think should be the
mission. But there are other ways to
slice that. One of them is to provide
enough force themselves that they deter
Putin. But if that's the case, you need
to answer the question, well, what if
Putin does attack? Do they then join a
fight against Russia? So, how do you do
that? Uh, so and then what is the role
of the US in this? Is the US going to be
on the ground with Europeans or are we
just going to provide enabling support
like intelligence, access to satellites,
logistics, maybe help with air defense,
maybe help with air support if they're
attacked. So there's just a lot of
mission questions that need to be
addressed. Once you get the mission down
and you understand what the role is,
then you can start talking about who
contributes, what size force do you
need, what are the components to that.
And one of the things I would stress
that's going to be on the European
minds, whether it's on our our chairman
of the joint chief's mind or not, I
don't know. But I know the Europeans
will be wanting to make sure that
whatever we do with Ukraine on security
guarantees and assurances is going to
mesh easily with what NATO already does.
We don't want to create two different
systems of security in Europe. So even
if Ukraine's not a member, we want this
to be seamless.
>> Right. And Ambassador, to build off
this, I'd love to get your thoughts on
how we should be measuring progress
here. Because as you're outlining, there
are a lot of different threads here that
we could be watching. And we heard
President Trump yesterday, for example,
saying that he could be in favor of a
ceasefire, but for example, he doesn't
think that at this point it's necessary.
So when we are looking at the strategy
here on trying to accomplish the end
goal of ending the war, how should we be
measuring progress towards that goal?
>> Right. It reminds me uh if you ever see
those those videos on your social media
of sheep dogs hurting sheep. They they
run around this way and they bark and
then they run around the other way and
they bark and they just keep running
around. And that's what it looks like
President Trump is doing with Putin and
Zalinsky and the Europeans is he's
trying to get a negotiation going where
everybody is doing the same thing,
talking the same thing, and you end up
with an outcome at some point. And I
don't think he's particular about what
that outcome is, but he he really wants
to get it so you have an end to the
fighting, peace in Europe, and then you
can get on with business again. I think
that's what he's trying to do. So, one
day he's flattering Vladimir Putin. The
next day he's in lock step with our
European allies. Then you're going to
have a difficulty in finding a meeting
venue. Putin's going to try to then roll
up road or put in place roadblocks to
actually meeting with Zalinski. more
fighting is going to go on and he's just
gonna keep President Trump is just going
to keep trying to herd all of these
sheep together.
>> Uh, Ambassador, what happens if
President Trump is ultimately
disappointed by Vladimir Putin here and
Putin does not agree to a meeting? What
happens then? We haven't heard the
president talk as much lately of
sanctions or consequences for Russia or
its leader. Will that re-enter the
conversation? It's going to have to at
some point. Uh I saw Marco Rubio uh in
the media over the weekend and he was
expressing the administration's view
that if you impose sanctions now that uh
that's going to drive Putin away and
make a negotiated end to the war further
out in time, 6 n 12 months. That is the
exact opposite of saying last week that
it was the threat of sanctions that
brought Putin to the table. And indeed,
I think the former uh sorry, the latter
is correct. Putin responds to pressure.
And when he doesn't feel any pressure,
he plays games. So in this case, we're
going to have to actually turn the
screws on Russia's oil and gas revenue
to get Putin to get serious about a
ceasefire and about ending the war. And
as far as a ceasefire goes, you it was
President Trump who originally said, "We
got to have a ceasefire now." and he
convinced President Zalinsky of Ukraine
to go along with that. Even though
Russia occupies 20% of Ukrainian
territory. Now that he ran into a stone
wall with Putin, President Trump has
flipped it and said, "Okay, let's not do
a ceasefire. Let's do a full peace
agreement." Uh that's going to be very
elusive as well. And I think later this
year, and we're talking a few months
from now, if we keep the pressure on
Putin, we'll end up back where we were
of just wanting to get a ceasefire in
place.
Can we also ambassador just get a more
global scope here? The bigger picture
when we are talking about foreign
alliances. We had mentioned our
Bloomberg News scoop with President
Trump directly calling up Victor Orban
about potentially the future of Ukraine
in the European Union. How are we seeing
these alliances shift uh coming up to
this week with now all these European
leaders descending on Washington trying
to get some sort of progress made?
>> Right. Well, one of the the good things
about President Trump here is that he is
completely tactical. So, if the
Europeans are coming to him and saying,
"We have a problem with Orban in doing
what we need to do to back up Ukraine."
Well, Trump wants to end the war in
Ukraine and he needs Europe to help. So,
he just goes and picks up the phone and
talks to Orban and say, "Help out u help
get Ukraine into the European Union."
But I also saw that he offered that
maybe Hungary could be the place where
we host a trilateral meeting with
Zalinski, Putin, and Trump. Well, that's
not going to go over very well with the
Ukrainians because Budapest is where we
had that famous 1994 summit meeting. We
agreed on the Budapest memorandum to
assure Ukraine sovereignty and
territorial integrity. And it was Russia
and the United States and the UK. And of
course, that agreement meant nothing
once it was tested by Putin's first
invasion of Ukraine.
>> All right, Kurt Vulkar, former US
ambassador to NATO and former US special
under the first Trump administration. We
thank you so much for joining Bloomberg.
And coming up, Texas Democrats were
asked to sign what's being called a
permission slip in order to leave the
chamber floor last night after lawmakers
fled the state to block a redistricting
effort. We'll bring you those details
and discuss that next with our political
panel on Balance of Power on Bloomberg
TV and radio.
Those
members present today for whom arrest
warrants were issued on Friday should
proceed to room 2W25 in the back hall to
sign a written form acknowledging that
you're being released into the custody
of a designated DPS officer on the
condition you will return to the chamber
at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday. When we
adjourn today, the doors to this chamber
shall remain locked and only those
members with appropriate permission may
leave.
That was Texas State House Speaker
Dustin Burroughs on the floor Monday
upon the return of a group of Democrats
who fled the state in protest of
Republican redistricting efforts.
Speaker Burroughs said those Democrats
could not leave the chamber unless they
signed an agreement to allow 24-hour
surveillance by Department of Public
Safety officers. One Democrat refused to
sign what she called a permission slip
and opted to spend the night locked in
the House chamber. her co her colleagues
responded to all of the news just a
short time ago.
>> We knew what was ahead of us. What we
didn't know is that we were going to be
arrested in mass when he directed the
sergeant-at-arms to lock the chambers
and not let us exit. And then we were
basically put up against the wall and
said, not literally, but figuratively
put up against the wall and said, "No
one's allowed to leave unless they
basically sign a piece of paper
consenting to moving custody is what I
call it. We are not criminals. We are
states men and women. We are elected
just like those people are."
>> Bloomberg's Joe Loveinger joins us now
with the latest from Dallas. He covers
all things Texas for us here at
Bloomberg. Joe, it's good to see you and
thanks for joining. Can you bring us up
to speed here? How did we get to this
point with lawmakers now sleeping in the
chambers because it's our understanding
that that lawmaker is actually still
there, still hasn't left.
>> That's right. So, thank you so much for
having me. And we've had a really busy
couple of weeks in the Texas
legislature. So, at the beginning of
August, a group of Texas Democrats, a
little over 50 of them, actually left
the state. And they did that in order to
deny what's called a quorum. Um and that
make made sure that no votes could be
held in the Texas House. So they had
been gone for about two weeks and then
they finally returned yesterday. Um but
in order to ensure that they don't bolt
again, uh House Speaker Burroughs, as
you showed, um made them sign permission
slips to um allow Texas Department of
Public Safety officers to track them
24/7 and make sure that they do not
leave the state again. So, as you can
see on your screen, just this hour, we
had eight other legislators now come and
tear up their permission slips, and they
are planning on joining uh
Representative Kier on the floor
overnight again. Um, you know, she
tweeted out photos last night with a a
sleep mask and and a bonnet, and um, you
know, she told me earlier today she's
planning on staying as long as it takes
until that DPS coverage is removed.
>> Bloomberg's Joe Loveing, thank you.
Joining us now with their reaction to
this story and more is this evening's
political panel. Bloomberg Politics
contributor and Democratic strategist
Adam Hajj, managing director of Bully
Pulpit International, alongside
Republican strategist Britney Martinez,
executive director of Principles First.
Uh Britney, I want to turn to you. Of
course, this is escalating. And is this
the kind of look that Republicans will
want even as they are pursuing uh the
potential gain of five seats in the
House where right now they have a very
tight majority.
>> As I was watching that clip just now,
the first thing that came to mind was
this is a really bad look for
Republicans. So no, I don't think this
is a good look uh for Republicans at
all. And there was a point when they
could have said this is a bad look on
Democrats. They've left the state.
They're keeping us from doing business.
But now you are kind of chastising them
as though they're children. these are
duly elected state legislators and you
are treating them as though they are
criminals almost wanting to surveil them
for 24 hours a day. Uh I think this is a
bad look for Republicans and I think
that we have to get back to basics when
it comes to the constitution and what it
looks like to do a census that which
which triggers uh redistricting. Well,
Adam, let's bring you in here, too, and
get your thoughts more broadly on this
idea of redistricting because there are
razor thin margins in the House as we
lead up to 2026. How politically charged
of an issue is this going to be for both
sides of the aisle when you think about
how California, for example, is looking
into their own redistricting efforts?
And that would be at the hands of
Democrats.
I think it's really important that we
take a step back and remember this all
started because the president in the
midst middle of his decade unprecedented
decided to call in a political favor to
governor Abbott in Texas to redraw the
lines. It's never been done. Now what
California and other states have have
said on the condition that Texas takes
action will act and that is a really
important distinction. What's really
going on here though is that the
president is very unpopular. That his
policies, whether they be tariffs, the
big beautiful bill, are underwater with
the voters. And so he's trying to rig
the game to make it so that he can pick
up seats and save their house majority
because they don't want the
accountability for the policies that
they put in place. That's what's really
going on here. And I think it's
important that what Democrats have done
is elevate the actions of the president
and the Republicans in Texas. It's now a
much more national issue and people are
proving and showing that they think it's
tremendously unfair and unpopular and I
think it's going to blow back on
Republicans in Texas and around the
country.
Britney, in California, Governor Gavin
Newsome is trying to rally support in
Silicon Valley behind his effort to
perhaps uh pursue a midcycle
redistricting. And yet, we have seen the
tech industry and many tech leaders
pivot toward Donald Trump. What sort of
uh love might he get for this idea in
that area?
>> Yeah, you know, I'm from California. I'm
not a big fan of the governor over
there. Uh, however, I can understand why
maybe some of these tech bros, for lack
of a better term, uh, want to be friends
with Trump. We've seen him kind of go
toe-to-toe with some of uh, the tech
industry leaders uh, in the past. And
even when we see Mark Zuckerberg, right,
when he was there at the inauguration, I
think that they've realized that if they
want to be able to succeed under the
Trump administration, they need to be
fairly friendly with him. And if that
means sort of going against uh, the
governor in this moment, I think that
might be what happens. Well, this is
some of the news when it comes to
domestic policy, but we also want to
make sure to get to foreign policy,
which has really been dominating the
headlines in recent days. And today
during the White House press brief
briefing, we heard from the press
secretary, Caroline Levit. She discussed
the prospect of a trilateral meeting
between President Trump, Putin, and
Zalinski. Uh let's take a listen and
we'll get your reaction on the other
side.
The president um has spoken to both
leaders about this and both leaders have
expressed a willingness to sit down with
each other. Um and so our national
security team will help both countries
do that. Ultimately the president has
always said that there are areas of
disagreement in this war that will have
to be discussed and decided upon by
these two countries. And so he wants
these two countries to engage in direct
diplomacy.
>> Adam, let's get your take here. But what
is the view when we have the White House
trying to show show some forward
progress here, say that there is going
to be some sort of meeting on the books
as we wait for more details on what
that's actually going to look like.
>> Look, I think that they're trying to
save face a little bit. Um they last
week the president rolled out the red
carpet in Alaska for for Putin and he
got nothing to show for it. He was
talking about a ceasefire for weeks,
talked about pressure and tariffs, and I
thought Ambassador Vulkar in the last uh
block laid it out pretty succinctly.
Vladimir Putin response to pressure,
giving him this gift of a meeting in
Russia didn't achieve any of the
president's objectives. And so they're
trying to figure out how they can keep
momentum going. If this ends in a
ceasefire, if this ends in less killing
for the Ukrainian people, that would be
fantastic. I think what Ukraine needs
are real security guarantees and real
commitments that Russia won't take any
more territory. They should give back
the territory they've already taken.
That will I'm sure will be part of the
negotiation. But I think bottom line,
what the president has tried to secure
is a ceasefire is an end to the killing.
And so far that hasn't held up. And I
think that's something that I think the
the broader public and the
administration uh needs to try to own
on.
Britney, in the 30 seconds or so that we
have left, how much political liability
is President Donald Trump potentially
creating him for himself here at home if
this effort to secure a peace doesn't
end up the way he wants.
>> I think plenty and I'll be quick. You
know, he said he was going to end the
war on day one. It's been eight months
that hasn't happened. Uh I feel like he
often cow toes to Putin and has been
somewhat of his lap dog. He criticized
Biden for being weak. I think he was,
but I also don't think the current
president is being very strong against
Putin. So, uh, I think he's going to
have a lot to show for or not show for
and, uh, get some blame there.
>> All right,
>> thank you.
>> Our political panel tonight, Adam Hodgej
and Britney Martinez. We thank you both.
A lot of big updates here today, Mike,
including what some of these security
guarantees could look like as our own
Bloomberg News reporting says that our
European allies are starting to work on
this idea of getting boots on the
ground. And we want to hear what emerges
from these discussions between military
officials from the US and the European
Union uh shape up to be because that
will be very consequential for these
security guarantees that we've been
talking about all week, Tyler.
>> Right. Exactly. We'll be covering it
throughout the week. And to learn more
about everything you heard tonight, make
sure to check out the Washington edition
newsletter on the terminal and online.
>> Thanks for joining us on Balance of
Power. This is Bloomberg. Tyler Kendall
and I will be back here tomorrow. We'll
see you then.