Speaker 1: Now CNA 938 rewind. Our top story today takes our
Speaker 1: focus to the war in Ukraine. You might have seen
Speaker 1: over the weekend that public row at the White House
Speaker 1: between US President Donald Trump and his VP JD Vance
Speaker 1: and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Speaker 1: It's apparent that the rift between the US and Ukraine
Speaker 1: is growing, fueling uncertainty about American support for the war-torn country.
Speaker 1: Yet in spite of all that, Mr. Trump has played
Speaker 1: down reports that he would cut aid to Ukraine.
Speaker 1: He also said that the possibility of a minerals deal
Speaker 1: was not dead yet. At the same time, Mr. Zelinsky
Speaker 1: now appears to be ramping up pressure on his European allies.
Speaker 1: European leaders seem to agree that the war should end soon.
Speaker 1: But can't seem to guarantee peace without Washington's help. They're
Speaker 1: also divided on how to end the war. So where
Speaker 1: could all this see Ukraine and Russia head to? Let's
Speaker 1: ask Graham Gale. He is professor emeritus for government and
Speaker 1: international relations.
Speaker 1: at the University of Sydney. Good to have you back,
Speaker 1: Professor Gill. Now, US President Donald Trump is suggesting that
Speaker 1: his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky, quote, won't be around very
Speaker 1: long if he does not agree to a deal with Russia.
Speaker 1: Is this really an existential crisis for President Zelensky? Does
Speaker 1: the Ukrainian leader have any leverage in negotiations at all?
Speaker 2: Well, he doesn't have a great deal of leverage because
Speaker 2: Ukraine is overwhelmingly dependent upon support by the West for
Speaker 2: its uh for its continuation of the war effort.
Speaker 2: And Zelensky's problem domestically is that he's associated with this
Speaker 2: idea of war to a victorious end. If you look
Speaker 2: at at what Zelensky has been saying over the last
Speaker 2: 3 years, it's actually changed fundamentally, uh, over the last
Speaker 2: 6 months or so. Initially he was saying war to
Speaker 2: a victorious end, which means getting back all of the
Speaker 2: territories that existed as part of Ukraine prior to 2014.
Speaker 2: Now he's talking about the need to establish Ukraine with
Speaker 2: a strong position to negotiate with Russia, so that he
Speaker 2: actually accepts what the Europeans publicly don't seem to accept
Speaker 2: but which Donald Trump does accept, and that is that
Speaker 2: if the trajectory of the war goes on the way
Speaker 2: it is, and it's likely to, Russia has won and
Speaker 2: Ukraine has lost, and that means that that,
Speaker 2: Zelensky realizes that negotiations are coming up, but what he
Speaker 2: wants is strong support on his side, preferably by the
Speaker 2: Americans and certainly by the, by the Europeans. So, so
Speaker 2: Zelensky's really got very little, little, uh, wiggle room here
Speaker 2: at all, I think.
Speaker 1: Professor, we can see that Mr. Trump's priority is to
Speaker 1: end the war at any cost, uh, and he wants
Speaker 1: it done now, doesn't want to prolong it for years,
Speaker 1: but what is complicated. What is Mr. Trump not appreciating
Speaker 1: about this?
Speaker 2: Well, I think he doesn't appreciate that if there's going
Speaker 2: to be a uh an effective and long-term peace, it's
Speaker 2: got to be negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. Not between
Speaker 2: Russia and America, not between Europe and and uh Ukraine,
Speaker 2: which is what the Europeans seem to think it's all about,
Speaker 2: but it's got to be between Russia and Ukraine, and
Speaker 2: only those two countries can,
Speaker 2: Make agreements which they will both hopefully then uh abide
Speaker 2: by into the future. Any agreements that are made between
Speaker 2: Russia and America, for example, or Russia and Europe, why
Speaker 2: should Ukraine, uh, agree to go along with them? Why
Speaker 2: should it abide by them in the future? I mean,
Speaker 2: it's really got to be resolved between the two countries.
Speaker 2: And it really doesn't matter what Trump says in terms
Speaker 2: of uh of minerals or troops or or or anything else,
Speaker 2: in a sense it doesn't change that basic issue. It's
Speaker 2: agreement between Kiev and Moscow that's crucial, not between Moscow
Speaker 2: and Washington.
Speaker 1: Well, uh, the two sides didn't sign that minerals deal, uh,
Speaker 1: that was really played up by Donald Trump during the
Speaker 1: White House meeting. Uh, rather tense meeting, I should say. Now, Mr.
Speaker 1: Trump insists it's not off the table though, Professor. What
Speaker 1: might compel Mr. Zelensky now to sign this agreement, especially
Speaker 1: after those theatrics at the White House we saw last weekend.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, Zelensky must see that there's some advantage
Speaker 2: to Ukraine in in this. I'm not sure what the
Speaker 2: advantage is, and I'm not sure what the advantage to
Speaker 2: the US is either, because, I mean, Ukraine does not
Speaker 2: possess the, the critical minerals that are that that that
Speaker 2: the Americans were talking about originally, and their minerals economy
Speaker 2: or the mineral sector of the economy is is is
Speaker 2: relatively small. So,
Speaker 2: Why America is is talking about going in there is
Speaker 2: a bit sort of unclear to me. Why Zelensky would
Speaker 2: see it as being important is that he believes that
Speaker 2: it would then commit the US to defend Ukraine. And
Speaker 2: in some ways that might actually happen. But let's be clear, no,
Speaker 2: no American company is going to invest in Ukraine until
Speaker 2: they're certain that the war is over and B not
Speaker 2: gonna start again.
Speaker 2: So the whole minerals issue is really a second order one.
Speaker 2: You've got to get the, you've gotta get the war
Speaker 2: finished first before the minerals can actually come into play
Speaker 2: at all.
Speaker 1: Meanwhile, a remarkable show of mostly European unity on display
Speaker 1: in London, perhaps showing that Europe finally quote unquote woken up.
Speaker 1: How much of this scrambling can be attributed to Mr.
Speaker 1: Trump essentially headed for the exit from America's relationship with Europe?
Speaker 2: Well, I'm not sure whether the uh whether the Europeans
Speaker 2: have said anything differently and done anything differently to what
Speaker 2: they've been doing over the last couple of years. I mean,
Speaker 2: we've had these meetings before, they've finished with uh with
Speaker 2: grand statements and very little has come, has come from it. What's.
Speaker 2: Different about this is that all of a sudden they've
Speaker 2: realized that NATO might not be the, the rock solid,
Speaker 2: secure alliance that they, that they thought that it was.
Speaker 2: And therefore, what they're trying to do is to, in
Speaker 2: a sense, keep two balls in the air at once.
Speaker 2: One is to one is to continue to provide support
Speaker 2: for Ukraine.
Speaker 2: The other one is not to get offside with the
Speaker 2: US and it's not clear how those two things can be,
Speaker 2: can be um uh maintained continually.
Speaker 2: If Trump continues to take the attitude that he took
Speaker 2: to Ukraine that was evident in the Friday meeting.
Speaker 1: Still, as Europe steps up, they want to keep the
Speaker 1: US involved. France and the UK proposed a monthlong truce
Speaker 1: and a peace plan. Now what's the possibility of the
Speaker 1: US and the EU actually finding common ground on their
Speaker 1: approach to Ukraine?
Speaker 2: Well, they might find common ground, but uh uh it
Speaker 2: doesn't matter. I mean, what they've got to do is
Speaker 2: to get Russia to agree. It's all very well to
Speaker 2: say we're going to have, uh, we're going to put
Speaker 2: in a European force of peacekeepers when Russia has already
Speaker 2: said they're not going to accept the European force of peacekeepers.
Speaker 2: So what sort of world are the Europeans living in here?
Speaker 2: What they're, what they're assuming is that a peace can
Speaker 2: effectively be imposed by the US and Europe.
Speaker 2: And Ukraine, and it just won't work that way, particularly
Speaker 2: if it's correct that Russia is winning the war, and
Speaker 2: therefore Ukraine is the weaker of the two parties. If
Speaker 2: you look at it historically, the side that wins the
Speaker 2: war is the one that determines the terms of the peace.
Speaker 2: It's not the allies of the defeated party.
Speaker 2: So the, the Europeans, I think, are, are really caught here.
Speaker 2: I mean, I don't know whether they accept that uh
Speaker 2: that Ukraine is losing the war or has lost the
Speaker 2: war and they won't say it in public.
Speaker 2: Or whether they're so blind that they don't see that
Speaker 2: things are going against Ukraine. Personally, I think it's the
Speaker 2: first one. They know that that Ukraine is losing, but
Speaker 2: they can't say that in public because they would then
Speaker 2: lose face and their policies over the last three years
Speaker 2: would be shown to be a shambles and to be
Speaker 2: to be a failure. And so, I mean, I think the, the,
Speaker 2: the problem here for Ukraine is that not everybody is,
Speaker 2: On the Ukrainian side is working in the best interests
Speaker 2: of Ukraine. Best interests would be to stop the fighting
Speaker 2: now and to get some sort of a peace agreement,
Speaker 2: not to say we'll continue to give you more weapons
Speaker 2: to continue the
Speaker 2: fight.
Speaker 1: Professor, we've got a question on Russia. We'll get to
Speaker 1: that in a moment, but for now we want to
Speaker 1: ask you, do you see the US getting behind Keir
Speaker 1: Starmer's four-step plan? He does stress Europe will do the
Speaker 1: heavy lifting.
Speaker 1: But the US must still ultimately provide that military backstop.
Speaker 2: Well, he said he won't, uh, so we can't always
Speaker 2: believe what he says, that he can, he doesn't always
Speaker 2: continue through with what he, he says he's going to do,
Speaker 2: but he's said up until now that he's not going
Speaker 2: to provide that sort of, uh, that sort of backstop.
Speaker 2: And of course, again, you've got to ask about the Americans.
Speaker 2: I mean, they've said, you know, we can do this
Speaker 2: providing the Americans do what they say they're not going
Speaker 2: to do. So how realistic and how genuine is the
Speaker 2: European offer, which it just doesn't seem to me to
Speaker 2: be uh,
Speaker 2: To be one that's uh that's, that's got any legs
Speaker 2: at all.
Speaker 1: Professor, we're going to get to a couple more questions
Speaker 1: regarding uh Mr. Putin and of course China, but this
Speaker 1: has just come in from the news wires. President Trump has, uh,
Speaker 1: according to media reports in the US, paused all military
Speaker 1: aid to Ukraine. Uh, what does this mean now that
Speaker 1: they did clarify that this is not a permanent termination
Speaker 1: of aid, it's a pause. Is this part of the
Speaker 1: process here based on what we saw over the last weekend?
Speaker 2: Well, I think, I think Trump is trying to put
Speaker 2: pressure on uh on Ukraine to uh to negotiate and.
Speaker 2: The quickest way of doing that is to hinder his
Speaker 2: the Ukraine's ability to continue fighting, and I think that's
Speaker 2: what Trump has been about virtually since he was elected,
Speaker 2: that he's, he,
Speaker 2: For one reason or another, he does want peace to, to,
Speaker 2: to come about in the region. Perhaps it's, it's for, for,
Speaker 2: for the right sort of reasons, perhaps it's because he
Speaker 2: wants the US to be able to get in economically
Speaker 2: into Ukraine, who knows. But since he's come to power,
Speaker 2: he does seem to want peace in the region, and
Speaker 2: the quickest way to bring that peace is to bring
Speaker 2: the parties to the negotiating table. And one way of
Speaker 2: doing that is to, to, for Ukraine at least is
Speaker 2: to cut off support to Ukraine.
Speaker 2: I don't know whether that's what he's thinking, but that's,
Speaker 2: that seems to me to fit with the overall strategy
Speaker 2: of what he's been doing over the last, uh, last
Speaker 2: month or so.
Speaker 1: Professor, we want to go back to Russia now, uh,
Speaker 1: as we mentioned. How do you think Russian President Vladimir
Speaker 1: Putin is watching all this? How might he capitalize on
Speaker 1: the growing tensions between Kiev and Washington?
Speaker 2: Well, I think at the moment all he has to
Speaker 2: do is to sit quiet and do nothing because they
Speaker 2: seem to be, they seem to be, uh, be doing
Speaker 2: it all themselves. Um, he has, he has uh he
Speaker 2: has intimated that uh that Russia has the sort of
Speaker 2: minerals that the US is that the US wants, and
Speaker 2: it would be willing to enter into an agreement to
Speaker 2: uh to supply those um,
Speaker 2: Uh, those minerals. So that's, that's one way that he's
Speaker 2: seeking to sort of undercut, if you like, the, uh, uh,
Speaker 2: the Ukrainian position. Um, but I think what he, what he,
Speaker 2: what he, what he'll do is, he won't say anything.
Speaker 2: He doesn't need to say anything. I think what will
Speaker 2: be interesting is what happens on the ground, and if we,
Speaker 2: if we now see a a major Russian push on
Speaker 2: the ground in eastern Ukraine.
Speaker 2: Uh, what that will suggest is that he's trying to
Speaker 2: take advantage of this, this lapse in support for Ukraine
Speaker 2: and the weakness of Ukraine, because what Putin wants is,
Speaker 2: is recognition of Russian control over the five provinces of Ukraine.
Speaker 2: Now, they occupy only one of those totally, the other 4,
Speaker 2: they occupy part thereof. And ideally what you would like
Speaker 2: to see is Russian troops getting up to the borders
Speaker 2: of those provinces by the time negotiations open, I think.
Speaker 1: Uh, another audience member watching from afar, Professor, is China. Uh,
Speaker 1: it's observing the US wanting to reduce its involvement in
Speaker 1: Europe effectively and the war as well, not to mention.
Speaker 1: Uh, very having very little involvement other than voicing up, uh,
Speaker 1: voicing out rather against what's happening in Ukraine. Now, the
Speaker 1: bigger question is what could China glean from all of
Speaker 1: this for its own objectives?
Speaker 2: Well, who, who knows, it's very difficult to discern what
Speaker 2: China is going to do anyway, but I mean the,
Speaker 2: China, China, China will see that it's alliance or it's
Speaker 2: it's relationship with Russia is in part a function of
Speaker 2: the breakdown of the Russian relationship with the West. And
Speaker 2: so if there is any improvement in the Russian relationship
Speaker 2: with the West, and there could be with the US
Speaker 2: if not with Europe for some time.
Speaker 2: Uh, that, that might then give some pause to the
Speaker 2: Chinese in terms of how, how, how firm they see
Speaker 2: their relationship with, with Russia being, um.
Speaker 2: But in contrast, they can, they can, they can read the,
Speaker 2: they can read the, uh, read the tea leaves as well.
Speaker 2: And clearly what uh, what the Americans are trying to
Speaker 2: do is to reduce their, their exposure in Europe, which
Speaker 2: will enable them to transfer more of their efforts to
Speaker 2: uh to Asia and therefore potentially to confronting China.
Speaker 2: Uh, and that means that, uh, that while, while I
Speaker 2: think the Chinese would like to see peace between Russia
Speaker 2: and Ukraine, because both have traditionally been friends of China, um,
Speaker 2: they are, I think they probably would be worried about
Speaker 2: the geopolitical consequences of that in terms of the relationship
Speaker 2: with the US.
Speaker 1: With the US reducing its exposure to Europe, as you say, Professor,
Speaker 1: could we also see China perhaps taking advantage of a
Speaker 1: potential reduced exposure on the part of the US to Taiwan,
Speaker 1: for example, uh, and the rest of Southeast Asia as
Speaker 1: well uh to influence its perhaps its own plans for
Speaker 1: the island.
Speaker 2: Well, of course this is what's always been talked about
Speaker 2: that China will see Taiwan in terms of in terms
Speaker 2: of Ukraine and if
Speaker 2: If Putin is successful or the Russians are successful, then
Speaker 2: that might be seen as giving a sort of a
Speaker 2: green light to
Speaker 2: To takeover of Taiwan.
Speaker 2: Uh, I mean, the issue, of course, is that, uh, that,
Speaker 2: that both sides can learn a lesson from this. I mean,
Speaker 2: if the, if the Chinese do, uh, do read the
Speaker 2: Ukraine situation as one which opens the door for them to, uh,
Speaker 2: for Taiwan, well, then the opponents of that move will
Speaker 2: also see the Ukraine, uh, situation as being one which,
Speaker 2: which dictates that there must be an even firmer line taken.
Speaker 2: With China. So that what you might see is that
Speaker 2: places like Japan, Korea, and, you know, perhaps the US,
Speaker 2: but again, who knows with Trump, um, might become even
Speaker 2: more intent on supporting Taiwan and preventing any Chinese, uh,
Speaker 2: any Chinese takeover. I mean, I, I still think it's
Speaker 2: unlikely that the Chinese would uh would try militarily to
Speaker 2: take over Taiwan, but um.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm not a scholar.
Speaker 1: That's
Speaker 1: a fair assessment, Professor. Uh, I think that that what
Speaker 1: the points that you've put across certainly have made their points, uh,
Speaker 1: to be sure. Uh, for now, we'll leave it here. Uh,
Speaker 1: it's been a really enlightening conversation, something that is constantly evolving, uh,
Speaker 1: in the news. So thank you very much for making
Speaker 1: the time for us this morning, Professor. I really appreciate
Speaker 1: it.
Speaker 2: Thanks very much. Bye.
Speaker 1: That's Graeme Gill. He's Professor emeritus for government and international
Speaker 1: relations at the University of Sydney.