Speaker 1: You and Me Both is a production of I Heart Radio,
Speaker 1: I'm Hillary Clinton, and this is You and Me Both.
Speaker 1: Over the course of this season of the podcast, we've
Speaker 1: been looking at the challenges democracy faces right here in
Speaker 1: our own country, from the relentless assault on voting rights
Speaker 1: in the States to an ideologically driven Supreme Court whose
Speaker 1: decisions have dire consequences for our civil rights and freedom. Today,
Speaker 1: we're taking our exploration of the battle to save democracy abroad,
Speaker 1: unpacking the motivations behind the brutal, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine
Speaker 1: by Putin's Russia. The war in Ukraine has captured the
Speaker 1: world's attention since Russia began its assault on February. I
Speaker 1: don't know about you, but my heart just rakes watching
Speaker 1: the Russian military shelling cities, destroying apartment buildings, community centers,
Speaker 1: religious institutions, homes, lives, everything in their way. And yet
Speaker 1: my heart also soars while I watched the Ukrainians bravely
Speaker 1: persevere in the fight against this attack to preserve their
Speaker 1: country and their freedom. There has been incredible reporting from
Speaker 1: the front lines that is keeping us informed. But I
Speaker 1: want to do something a little different today and take
Speaker 1: advantage of the expertise and insights of two Gats I
Speaker 1: know and admire, to talk about how we got here,
Speaker 1: where this may be heading, what this crisis has to
Speaker 1: do with us and with our democracy here in the
Speaker 1: United States as well as elsewhere. Later, I'll be speaking
Speaker 1: with Mike McFall, who served as ambassador to Russia when
Speaker 1: I was Secretary of State. We both had a front
Speaker 1: row seat to Putin's return to power in twelve and
Speaker 1: we both have some interesting stories to share from that time.
Speaker 1: But first, I'm talking to historian and journalist An Applebaum,
Speaker 1: and has been writing about Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union,
Speaker 1: democracy and authoritarianism for years. I don't think it's hyperbole
Speaker 1: to say she's one of the smartest journalists out there,
Speaker 1: particularly when it comes to what's happening right now. You
Speaker 1: may have seen or read one of her many books
Speaker 1: and articles. She's currently a staff writer at The Atlantic.
Speaker 1: I've often looked to Anne to bring a wide lens
Speaker 1: and historical context to the current events in Europe and Russia.
Speaker 1: Uh and I was eager to talk to her about
Speaker 1: what's happening now. And lives mostly in Warsaw, Poland, but
Speaker 1: she's currently teaching a course un Democracy at Johns Hopkins University.
Speaker 1: So for this conversation, we reached her in Baltimore. Hello
Speaker 1: and hello Hilary. How nice to see you. It is
Speaker 1: really nice to see you. I have to say You've
Speaker 1: been a constant source of information and explanation for me
Speaker 1: over a number of years, but particularly over the last
Speaker 1: few years. And I'm delighted that you can take some
Speaker 1: time to be on this podcast. So welcome, Thank you.
Speaker 1: I'm flattered to be asked and very happy to join
Speaker 1: you to get us started. You know, there's been a
Speaker 1: lot of speculation about Putin's mindset, and I have my
Speaker 1: own experience as a Secretary of State and apparently one
Speaker 1: of his favorite people on the planet. Um, and you
Speaker 1: are an expert on authoritarianism, democracy, Eastern Europe, and so
Speaker 1: much else. You wrote a really prescient, very smart piece
Speaker 1: three weeks before the invasion in the Atlantic called the
Speaker 1: Reason Putin would risk War? So and unpack that for us.
Speaker 1: What do you know about Putin that enabled you to
Speaker 1: see that when so many other people were happy to
Speaker 1: put their heads in the sand. So, first of all,
Speaker 1: thanks for having me, and thanks for that particular question. Um,
Speaker 1: there is a relevance to you, which I which I'll
Speaker 1: get you in a second. Um Putin is someone who
Speaker 1: was very shaped by the events of in the way
Speaker 1: that all of us were. But he was shaped differently
Speaker 1: from from you and me and many listeners. We I
Speaker 1: was in Eastern Europe and nineteen nine I watched the
Speaker 1: ballin Wall fell. It was a moment of great excitement,
Speaker 1: feeling of liberation, uh In, when the Soviet Union came
Speaker 1: to an end, that felt like a possibility for a
Speaker 1: new beginning. It was a great moment for Russia. Um
Speaker 1: Putin experienced all those events from exactly the opposite point
Speaker 1: of view. So he saw the Berlin Wall. To him,
Speaker 1: he saw democracy activists, demonstrators on the street, forced the
Speaker 1: legitimate government out of power and forced him to make
Speaker 1: this humiliating retreat. You know. There he was, you know,
Speaker 1: a member of the Imperial Police, you know, policing East
Speaker 1: Germany with which is where he was based at the time,
Speaker 1: the KGB headquarters in Dresden. They had to burn their
Speaker 1: papers in the courtyard. Um They called Moscow for reinforcements.
Speaker 1: None came, and they understood the empire was over. He's
Speaker 1: written about that and spoken about it several times, so
Speaker 1: we know he remembers that. You know, he then retreated
Speaker 1: back to Russia. UM, where he was part of this,
Speaker 1: you know, his generation's extraordinary theft of resources. Actually they
Speaker 1: stole money from the state, they then laundered in the West. UM.
Speaker 1: They then brought it back to Russia, and they brought
Speaker 1: themselves back to power. But he's always harbored this, this
Speaker 1: memory of that humiliating defeat, and for him, it was
Speaker 1: both a defeat of the empire, but it was also
Speaker 1: the victory of what he sees as a kind of
Speaker 1: Western virus, you know, and um, an anti autocratic ideology.
Speaker 1: You know, the language of democracy, the language of freedom,
Speaker 1: the language of rights, the language of anti corruption. UM.
Speaker 1: These are the things that he thinks are the most
Speaker 1: dangerous to his form of power, and he fears that
Speaker 1: it could bring him down exactly the way that it
Speaker 1: brought down the Soviet Union. You figure in this because
Speaker 1: inn when there were genuine democracy protests in Moscow, UM,
Speaker 1: and these were I stipulate, grassroots demonstrations organized in Russia
Speaker 1: by Russians. His reaction was the United States and the
Speaker 1: CIA and Hillary Clinton have organized these in order to
Speaker 1: take me down um. So he sees all of that
Speaker 1: language and all of those movements he perceives as being
Speaker 1: somehow orchestrated by the United States. It comes from the West,
Speaker 1: it's being done secretly. He can't believe that it's authentic
Speaker 1: and real. And his hatred of Ukraine comes from exactly this,
Speaker 1: because Ukraine is a country that has been trying for
Speaker 1: three decades to achieve independence, democracy, freedom and sovereignty, most
Speaker 1: recently in teen when another enormous grassroots democracy movement forced
Speaker 1: an autocratic president who is breaking the Ukrainian constitution, forced
Speaker 1: him to flee the country. And that is what he
Speaker 1: is most afraid of. And so Ukraine for him is
Speaker 1: this representative of a set of ideas that he doesn't like.
Speaker 1: I mean, there may there is a historical component as well,
Speaker 1: and this, you know, this kind of traditional Russian feeling
Speaker 1: that Ukraine is not a real country and it's just
Speaker 1: part of us. But it's also what's truly motivating him
Speaker 1: is that this is the language, the language that's used
Speaker 1: by the Ukrainian president that we're all hearing him using
Speaker 1: now is a problem for him personally. This is what
Speaker 1: he's afraid of. Russian's hearing and adopting a successful, prosperous
Speaker 1: democratic Ukraine would be such a challenge to his form
Speaker 1: of government that he can't tolerate it. How do you think,
Speaker 1: you know, Putin judged this time. You know, obviously he
Speaker 1: had an incredibly wonderful experience with four years of Trump,
Speaker 1: who was parroting everything that he wanted to hear. Why
Speaker 1: now do you think that this has happened? So it's
Speaker 1: a it's a good question. It's actually clear from the
Speaker 1: nature of the attack that this is something he's been
Speaker 1: thinking about for a long time. Um, He's been planning
Speaker 1: it for a long time. He's even been planning the
Speaker 1: propaganda around it for a long time. UM. It was
Speaker 1: not a spontaneous attack provoked by something Joe Biden said,
Speaker 1: or Zelinsky said, I think he chose the moment for
Speaker 1: a reason. I think there are a few things going on.
Speaker 1: One is that I think during the Trump administration, Putin
Speaker 1: believed that he might have a way to at Ukraine back,
Speaker 1: or to weaken Ukraine, or to undermine Ukraine, maybe even
Speaker 1: using the United States. Um, he hoped that Trump would
Speaker 1: be an accessory to that. And I think Putin hope
Speaker 1: that it may be in a second Trump term, um,
Speaker 1: that task would be completed. UM. I think he also
Speaker 1: imagined both that America was more divided and also that
Speaker 1: American Europe were more divided than they are. He did
Speaker 1: not expect the reaction of the alliance. So it's not
Speaker 1: just the United States as the United States plus Europe
Speaker 1: plus other allies. Actually Japan has been very supportive as well,
Speaker 1: who are joining in the sanctions, who are helping with
Speaker 1: military aid. You know, he has a narrative about the
Speaker 1: West being degenerate and the West being finished um in
Speaker 1: the West, you know term in power being over. And
Speaker 1: I think he believed his own narrative um, and so
Speaker 1: he thought that this, this would be a good moment
Speaker 1: to strike. I agree with that. I think that, as
Speaker 1: you say, this is something that he's long been planning,
Speaker 1: and it was opportunistic. Now, as shocking as it is
Speaker 1: to see that invasion, I think a lot of people
Speaker 1: are similarly just totally confused and frankly heartbroken about the brutality.
Speaker 1: Anybody who followed what Putin did in Czechnia, or in
Speaker 1: Syria or even in you know, the parts of Ukraine
Speaker 1: that he seized. I think ten thousand people have died
Speaker 1: since and ongoing fighting with Russian proxies as well as
Speaker 1: the Russian military. So what do you think is the
Speaker 1: best case outcome here? The best case outcome is that
Speaker 1: Ukraine wins um and by winning I mean that the
Speaker 1: Russian troops are forced out of the country. You're exactly
Speaker 1: right to point to the behavior of Russian troops in
Speaker 1: previously occupied territories in the past. What we know about
Speaker 1: occupied Crimea is that they came in, they arrested anyone
Speaker 1: who they thought might be a dissident. They expelled people
Speaker 1: from the country, People were disappeared, people were kidnapped on
Speaker 1: the street who they thought might be political opponents. As
Speaker 1: the Russians move into eastern Ukraine, they are behaving like
Speaker 1: the nkb D, which was the precursor of the KGB
Speaker 1: did in Eastern Europe. Sometimes I have this horrible deja
Speaker 1: vu because I wrote a book about exactly that period,
Speaker 1: and they came in, they had lists of people to arrest,
Speaker 1: they terrorized the population, and they brought in a regime
Speaker 1: of terror. And my guess is that the Russians will
Speaker 1: do the same. And this is why I say this,
Speaker 1: because this is why the Ukrainians are fighting, It's not
Speaker 1: just about sovereignty. It's also that they know their entire
Speaker 1: way of life will be destroyed if the Russians come
Speaker 1: um and for that reason, the only positive outcome that
Speaker 1: and I think the one outcome that the United States
Speaker 1: should be working towards, is that the Russians withdraw. Any
Speaker 1: remaining Russian presence in those territories is going to be
Speaker 1: pure hell for the people who live there. Right, I
Speaker 1: agree with that completely, certainly in any communication I've had
Speaker 1: with anybody in any position to influence our policy, I
Speaker 1: think that is exactly what we should be aiming for,
Speaker 1: which means that we need to have even more lethal
Speaker 1: aid flowing into Ukraine to help support them. Where do
Speaker 1: you stand on this whole issue and about you know,
Speaker 1: direct NATO involvement, particularly direct American involvement, in doing more
Speaker 1: than providing equipment and obviously intelligence and financial support to
Speaker 1: help the Ukrainians, uh, you know, defend themselves. So I
Speaker 1: understand why the White House and NATO are reluctant to
Speaker 1: have a direct confrontation between NATO troops and Russian troops.
Speaker 1: You know, I understand where that comes from. I understand
Speaker 1: that people. It's not just that people are afraid of
Speaker 1: nuclear war. It's also that, you know, we haven't had
Speaker 1: a proxy war with Russia since Afghanistan in the nineteen eighties,
Speaker 1: which was a completely different war, completely different era, not
Speaker 1: the same stakes in terms of you know, in terms
Speaker 1: of nuclear weapons and so on, and people just don't
Speaker 1: know what the rules are. I mean, what counts as galactian?
Speaker 1: What's a provocation? You know, I don't think we have
Speaker 1: the same kinds of back channels. There's no polit bureau,
Speaker 1: there are no intermediate institutions with which we have relationships. Um.
Speaker 1: It's not clear even that ambassadors, you know, have any
Speaker 1: influence in this, you know, in the Putin regime, so
Speaker 1: it's we don't have any contacts with them. Um. So
Speaker 1: I understand that reluctance. However, I also worry that some
Speaker 1: in Washington and elsewhere haven't really understood what the stakes
Speaker 1: are here. I mean, I don't think we can allow
Speaker 1: Ukraine to be defeated. I think that it would have
Speaker 1: such catastrophic consequences for us and for our allies, um,
Speaker 1: you know, both in inviting Putin to come into those
Speaker 1: territories and in terms of what it would mean for
Speaker 1: you know, for the self confidence of NATO allies, but
Speaker 1: also other allies around the world. I hope that people
Speaker 1: in Washington are beginning to be a little bit more
Speaker 1: creative that if a no fly zone is out, then um,
Speaker 1: you know, are we thinking about doing big millet verry
Speaker 1: exercises in the Baltic Sea in order to draw Russian
Speaker 1: troops away? Are we thinking about ways of training and
Speaker 1: army Ukrainians that we haven't tried before. One of the
Speaker 1: things that you've done so effectively over the last couple
Speaker 1: of years, particularly is to link what the stakes are
Speaker 1: between this rise of autocracy, particularly the aggressive disinformation campaigns
Speaker 1: of Russia, but linking it to arise in either an
Speaker 1: indifference or contempt or rejection of democracy on the part
Speaker 1: of too many people in my view, in Europe and
Speaker 1: in the United States. Do you think that this could
Speaker 1: be a turning point in waking people up as to
Speaker 1: what is at stake and what could be lost if
Speaker 1: we don't protect our freedom and our our democratic institutions.
Speaker 1: I think all of the people who took democracy for
Speaker 1: granted in our society and in in our in Allied
Speaker 1: societies suddenly realized how much they would have to lose,
Speaker 1: and how much value there is in the institutions that
Speaker 1: we have, and why we need to protect them and
Speaker 1: reinforce them. I mean, it's been actually very interesting to
Speaker 1: watch how some of the pro Russian politicians in Europe
Speaker 1: have been embarrassed. Salvini, who is the leader of the
Speaker 1: Italian far right, went to the Polish border a few
Speaker 1: days ago where the mayor of the local town shouted
Speaker 1: at him on camera and and waved a T shirt
Speaker 1: that he'd worn in Moscow, which which is a sort
Speaker 1: of pro Putin T shirt and said, you know, Mr Salvini,
Speaker 1: do you want to wear this when you're talking to
Speaker 1: the refugees. There is a feeling that these, you know,
Speaker 1: these pro Russian politicians who were very often taking money
Speaker 1: from or at least accepting kind of pr help from
Speaker 1: the Russians, or had interactions with the Russians, are part
Speaker 1: of the problem. They did have influence and a lot
Speaker 1: of societies, and the feeling that they are partly responsible
Speaker 1: um is now quite widespread. I mean, Nigel Farage in
Speaker 1: the UK is under attack, you know, Marine Lapin in
Speaker 1: France is under attack, so many many of them are
Speaker 1: now being seen as having been irresponsible. And of course
Speaker 1: these are the same politicians who say they hate liberal
Speaker 1: democracy and you know, have autocratic leanings and would destroy
Speaker 1: institutions if they if they came to power. Well, in fact,
Speaker 1: you're currently at Johns Hopkins University, UH teaching a course
Speaker 1: appropriately titled democracy. And I'm just curious, you know, with
Speaker 1: the Cold War having ended before most, if not all,
Speaker 1: of your students were even born, how do they view
Speaker 1: this war in Ukraine? What kind of questions do they
Speaker 1: ask you about? You know what it all means? Um,
Speaker 1: it's You're right, It's a fascinating moment. I was thinking
Speaker 1: about how shaped my worldview this war I think plus
Speaker 1: January the six is going to shape the world view
Speaker 1: of a lot of Americans. These will be the two
Speaker 1: big events of this era for for people who are
Speaker 1: just coming of age, and I think they do see it,
Speaker 1: you know, very much the way we've we've just discussed
Speaker 1: as a as a moment when a democracy is fighting
Speaker 1: back against an autocracy, suddenly issues that seemed very vague
Speaker 1: or hard to understand become black and white. I think
Speaker 1: it's also very important that this war kills a kind
Speaker 1: of myth that we had in the West, which was
Speaker 1: the myth of inevitability, that somehow liberal democracy is inevitable,
Speaker 1: that it will always be with us, that it will
Speaker 1: always win the battles, and that there's nothing in particular
Speaker 1: that we need to do in order to support it
Speaker 1: or keep it going. This was particularly damaging in the
Speaker 1: United States, where it seemed like, you know, we could
Speaker 1: just let the professional politicians go and do their jobs,
Speaker 1: none of us had to really participate in anything because
Speaker 1: our democracy was just fine. I think this this and
Speaker 1: as I say in January, the six are a moment
Speaker 1: when people see that that's not true, that there may
Speaker 1: have to be more public participation, that you might have
Speaker 1: to involve yourself in politics and ways that you didn't expect,
Speaker 1: just like the Ukrainians are right now. We're taking a
Speaker 1: quick break. Stay with us, you know, and I recently
Speaker 1: wrote an essay for The Atlantic where your work appears
Speaker 1: about how republicans in our country undermine democracy at home
Speaker 1: and that helps autocrats like Putin or jin Ping. You know,
Speaker 1: we're seeing this play out in real time, as you
Speaker 1: point out. In Europe, there has been a shaming of
Speaker 1: a lot of the political leaders who supported and praise Putin.
Speaker 1: Here in this country, you have followed how we've had
Speaker 1: our own leaders praising Putin as they call him an
Speaker 1: anti woke hero and a warrior in the culture wars.
Speaker 1: And the Russian government even broadcasts Tucker Carlson, who appears
Speaker 1: on Fox News because of what he says in support
Speaker 1: of Putin or casting doubt on those who are seeing
Speaker 1: with our own eyes what Putin is doing. How do
Speaker 1: Russian viewers actually get information and how do you think
Speaker 1: Russia views somebody like Tucker Carlson and the other Trump apologists,
Speaker 1: both in the US and in Europe. The role of
Speaker 1: the Trump apologists is truly interesting because, of course, for me,
Speaker 1: it evokes the role of left wing apologists for communism,
Speaker 1: you know, in the in the last century. And I
Speaker 1: think their behavior comes out of something similar their dislike
Speaker 1: of their own country, of the United States. The nature
Speaker 1: of modern America is so strong that they're looking for
Speaker 1: alternatives anywhere, even if those are autocratic alternatives, and they're
Speaker 1: willing to overlook the true nature of those autocratic states
Speaker 1: if that gives them a kind of stick with which
Speaker 1: they can beat their own country. And so the idea,
Speaker 1: first of all, that Putin is a Christian or that
Speaker 1: he represents some kind of white Christian um, you know,
Speaker 1: anti woke spirit. I mean, it's absurd on all kinds
Speaker 1: of levels. Very few Russians or Christians, almost none of
Speaker 1: them go to church, very few of them have ever
Speaker 1: read the Bible. You know. One of the features of
Speaker 1: this war has been Russian bombing of cathedrals and churches,
Speaker 1: you know, but of course the Russians themselves encourage it.
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know exactly where Tucker gets his information, UM,
Speaker 1: but some of it is quite specific. He's made specific
Speaker 1: comments about, you know, things that the Ukrainians have done.
Speaker 1: That somebody is feeding him information about how he should
Speaker 1: describe the war and giving him ideas UM. And then
Speaker 1: of course that information is very very useful for the
Speaker 1: Putin regime to play that back on Russian television. UM.
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson appears quite frequently, and it's you know, used
Speaker 1: as evidence that we have support in America. UM. And
Speaker 1: so he is literally a useful idiot. I mean, he
Speaker 1: is getting his information from someone with ties to Russia.
Speaker 1: I don't know who it is, and I don't want
Speaker 1: to speculate that information is then being reproduced. It is
Speaker 1: then useful to the Russian regime. So he's acting as
Speaker 1: a conduit for Russian propaganda, which is extremely useful to them. Um,
Speaker 1: it's it's a really ugly thing to see, you know.
Speaker 1: I I like a lot of people only knew about
Speaker 1: President Zelenski from Afar, but what we've seen has been
Speaker 1: truly inspirational. And I think but for him and his leadership,
Speaker 1: we might not have the unity and the commitment that
Speaker 1: we need to keep supporting Ukraine in this fight. Have
Speaker 1: you ever met him, an and and if so, can
Speaker 1: you give us some idea about how this former comedian
Speaker 1: and actor has grown into the principal defender of democracy
Speaker 1: and freedom in the world right now? Um, The first
Speaker 1: time I met Zelenski or saw Zelenski was not that
Speaker 1: long after he was elected. There was a conference, a
Speaker 1: sort of big event in Kiev. I was invited. He
Speaker 1: was speaking there and he when he spoke, he did
Speaker 1: a kind of performance. I mean, it's you know, there
Speaker 1: was some comedy routine. One of his comedy troops came
Speaker 1: and pretended to be him, and you know, then he
Speaker 1: stood up. You know, it was it was funny, It
Speaker 1: was very well done, and afterwards people said, well, that's
Speaker 1: I guess it's nice that the president of Ukraine is amusing,
Speaker 1: but you know, this is a country war with Russia.
Speaker 1: Maybe we need something more. And people were really worried
Speaker 1: by that Um and they didn't know how he would
Speaker 1: react in the case of a crisis. One of the
Speaker 1: really interesting things about him, though, is how he got elected.
Speaker 1: So he was in a television series that he wrote
Speaker 1: and produced called Servant of the People, in which he
Speaker 1: played an ordinary school teacher who accidentally becomes president Um.
Speaker 1: And it's it's a long story and the plot it's complicated,
Speaker 1: and you know, and but a lot of the the
Speaker 1: television series does is it makes fun of how Ukrainians
Speaker 1: are overrespectful of power. You know, once he was a
Speaker 1: sort of, you know, an ordinary guy. He becomes president.
Speaker 1: Suddenly people start genuflecting to him, and you know, he's
Speaker 1: mystified by that and so on. And I think one
Speaker 1: of the things that he's understood is that the way
Speaker 1: to reach people is to be an ordinary person, to
Speaker 1: have ordinary emotions. And in a country that's used to
Speaker 1: feeling distance and sort of fear from the state and
Speaker 1: from power, which they've had for you know, several hundred years.
Speaker 1: Really he has broken through and he you know, HiT's
Speaker 1: what he's wearing. He's wearing a T shirt, not not fatigues.
Speaker 1: He's not pretending to be a general. He's just an
Speaker 1: ordinary person who's fighting this war, like so many are.
Speaker 1: He uses the language of ordinary people. He doesn't talk
Speaker 1: in kind of pompous tones. Um. He uses his own
Speaker 1: phone to make the videos that he's showing to people,
Speaker 1: so they're sort of it's unprofessional. I mean some of
Speaker 1: that is orchestrated, but it's orchestrated with a desire to
Speaker 1: be authentic, and it works because it is authentic. Um.
Speaker 1: And so I think his the he's trying to inspire
Speaker 1: people with bravery by acting out bravery himself. This is
Speaker 1: what bravery looks like. Look here I am, here's my
Speaker 1: chief of staff, here's the head of the parliament, and
Speaker 1: we're all here. We're in Kiev. We're not going anywhere,
Speaker 1: you know, we're not leaving the country. That was his
Speaker 1: first big video, you know, the first or second night
Speaker 1: of the war, and I think that has been really transformational.
Speaker 1: I know that people in Ukraine now turn him on
Speaker 1: every night, you know, he now makes a nightly video
Speaker 1: and there's a kind of national However, people are now
Speaker 1: getting videos because you know, whether it's through a telegram
Speaker 1: channel or some other app but people are getting them,
Speaker 1: watching them, and they're inspirational. I would say only one
Speaker 1: thing though, which is that Ukraine has a long history
Speaker 1: of being a kind of grassroots up country rather than
Speaker 1: a leadership down country. And I do think that even
Speaker 1: if anything happened to him, that they would keep fighting. So,
Speaker 1: you know, it's it's a it's it's it's what you're
Speaker 1: watching is this kind of self organization, you know, this
Speaker 1: territory army that people all kinds of people are now
Speaker 1: joining who have no experience fighting in the past. That's
Speaker 1: not just because of him, it's also you know, he
Speaker 1: is he is learning from them as much as they
Speaker 1: learned from him. So I think they would they would
Speaker 1: be fighting even without him. And what about Russia. I
Speaker 1: know it's so difficult to get accurate factual information if
Speaker 1: you're in Russia, and we've seen a lot of protests,
Speaker 1: we've seen people being arrested. Latest numbers I saw were
Speaker 1: you know, in the you know, fifteen thousand plus area
Speaker 1: of people have been thrown in jail for protesting. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's it's ironic that in a time of so much
Speaker 1: technology about information being conveyed, we're having a harder time
Speaker 1: getting accurate information into Russia now than we did back
Speaker 1: in the Cold War, the Soviet times, when we had
Speaker 1: you know, radio free Europe, we had short wave, we
Speaker 1: had lots of other, you know, ways of getting information.
Speaker 1: How how do Russians get accurate information so that they
Speaker 1: have some sense of what Putin is doing? So that
Speaker 1: is an excellent question and a very very interesting one.
Speaker 1: I testified in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and said
Speaker 1: exactly this that one of the things we should be
Speaker 1: thinking about doing now is hiring all of those Russian
Speaker 1: journalists and television producers who are fleeing Moscow and employing
Speaker 1: them to create a Russian satellite channel that could reach people,
Speaker 1: um a little bit better. The Russians are trying to
Speaker 1: cut off all access to the outside world, sort of
Speaker 1: app by app and station by station. All of the
Speaker 1: Russian journalists have now been expelled from Moscow who had
Speaker 1: any independent standing. I spoke yesterday actually to a friend
Speaker 1: of mine in Moscow who is she's sort of the
Speaker 1: last liberal journalist standing and she says she doesn't want
Speaker 1: to leave her book collection, which cash, but everyone she
Speaker 1: knows has gone. Everybody's leaving, and so you know, I
Speaker 1: really think it's the task now for our administration and
Speaker 1: for other European governments to figuring out what we're gonna do.
Speaker 1: Do we need Russian satellite station? As I discussed, do
Speaker 1: we need to be thinking about digital samise dot? Should
Speaker 1: there be people who are trying to organize community cations
Speaker 1: inside Russia through email chains or through other kinds of connections, Um,
Speaker 1: what is the best way to reach Russians? I mean
Speaker 1: there's a lot of creative thinking going on right now,
Speaker 1: you know, at the sort of lowest possible levels, as
Speaker 1: people try and figure out exactly this problem. But um,
Speaker 1: but it's not easy to solve. I mean, one almost
Speaker 1: wishes for short wave radio is back, because at least
Speaker 1: at least there was one channel, you know, on which
Speaker 1: it was possible to hear things. Well. In fact, I
Speaker 1: think I heard the BBC was going to dig out
Speaker 1: their old shortwave you know, the radio communications equipment to
Speaker 1: see if they could actually get into Russia. Well, and
Speaker 1: I just have to close by number one thanking you
Speaker 1: because honestly, you are such a clear and level headed
Speaker 1: source of insight and knowledge when it comes to this
Speaker 1: part of the world. But I also have to ask,
Speaker 1: as you look at the threats to our future, not
Speaker 1: just coming from Putin, but sadly sometimes coming from ourselves,
Speaker 1: given your understanding and appreciate creation of history, are you optimistic?
Speaker 1: So I am naturally pessimistic. I think anybody who spends
Speaker 1: their life studying Soviet history has you know, has some issues.
Speaker 1: But one of the conclusions I've recently come to um,
Speaker 1: and this is particularly true in our country, is that
Speaker 1: it's very irresponsible for someone like me to be pessimistic
Speaker 1: about our country and about the future of democracy, because
Speaker 1: really what happens tomorrow depends on choices that we make today.
Speaker 1: So nothing is inevitable. Liberal democracy is not inevitable, but
Speaker 1: also decline is not inevitable. Autocracy is not inevitable, And
Speaker 1: so I think we owe it, particularly to younger people,
Speaker 1: to continue to be optimistic. It's only by thinking about
Speaker 1: a better and more positive future and then figuring out
Speaker 1: how to get there that we will be able to
Speaker 1: achieve it. So I remain an optimist. I believe that
Speaker 1: people are good and that they want to create better societies,
Speaker 1: and that people instinctively understand what's justice and what's injustice.
Speaker 1: And you know, I do believe that if we try,
Speaker 1: and if we if we want it to happen, that
Speaker 1: Ukraine can win and liberal democracy can prevail. From your lips,
Speaker 1: my friend, I cannot thank you enough and apple Bomb,
Speaker 1: and I hope you wouldn't mind if I set up
Speaker 1: my own channel with you to stay in touch with you,
Speaker 1: because occasionally I do get a chance to, you know,
Speaker 1: kibbits with those who are making these literally life and
Speaker 1: death decisions for Ukrainians, for our future. And I so
Speaker 1: value your insight and I look forward to continuing the conversation.
Speaker 1: Thank you. It was a real pleasure to speak to you.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. And Apple Bomb's newest book is
Speaker 1: called Twilight of Democracy The Seductive Lure of a Oraitarianism.
Speaker 1: I hope you will all pick it up and recommend
Speaker 1: it to your friends. There's a lot that sadly applies
Speaker 1: right here in our own country. We'll be right back now.
Speaker 1: I know our next guest pretty well. Mike McFall served
Speaker 1: as America's ambassador to Russia, starting when I was Secretary
Speaker 1: of State. Before that, he served on the National Security
Speaker 1: Council at the White House. He's a professor of international
Speaker 1: relations at Stanford University and also an international affairs analyst
Speaker 1: for NBC News. Hello, Mike, see you. Oh well, please
Speaker 1: call me Hillary my friend. I could call you ambassador,
Speaker 1: you could call me secretary. We sound very official. I
Speaker 1: think I do that. Well. It is so great to
Speaker 1: have on this podcast, Ambassador Mike McFall. And to get
Speaker 1: us started, I I want to set the stage for
Speaker 1: our listeners. Can you describe what our relationship with Russia
Speaker 1: was like when you and I joined the Obama administration
Speaker 1: in two thousand and nine and how it has evolved. Well, first,
Speaker 1: it's great to see you again. Um. So, when we
Speaker 1: came into the government, everybody needs to remember there was
Speaker 1: a different president. President Vieira was the president. Putin was
Speaker 1: the prime minister. Russia just invaded Georgia in August two thight,
Speaker 1: and US Russia relations were at a at that time,
Speaker 1: at its lowest point ever since the collapse of the
Speaker 1: Soviet Union. Um, the Bush administration had a pretty tepid response.
Speaker 1: I think it's fair to say, uh, they did not
Speaker 1: sanction anybody. They didn't send military assistance. You can think
Speaker 1: about all the things we're debating now they did not do.
Speaker 1: And we came in several months later under the banner
Speaker 1: of the Reset, as you know. Well uhm. But but
Speaker 1: I think it's been misunderstood what the reset was about.
Speaker 1: The reset was about trying to get some things done
Speaker 1: that we're good for the American people and good for
Speaker 1: our security interests. And you played a central role in that.
Speaker 1: Things like the New Start Treaty reducing you know, thirty
Speaker 1: percent of the nuclear weapons in the world, new supply
Speaker 1: routes for our soldiers in Afghanistan, uh sanctions on Iran
Speaker 1: the most comprehensive sanctions ever multilateral at that time. I
Speaker 1: add one more thing to that early period that I
Speaker 1: think is important for your listeners to understand, is that
Speaker 1: why we were doing all that cooperation, we were not
Speaker 1: checking our values at the door. You personally and in particular,
Speaker 1: I want to make make sure people understand that that
Speaker 1: us to say that when you traveled to Russia, you
Speaker 1: met with the government and med Vieta fin Putin, but
Speaker 1: then you also met with human rights activists and civil
Speaker 1: society leaders. When President Obama did that. He did the
Speaker 1: same two thousand nine, his his first trip there as president.
Speaker 1: He first day was government, second day civil society. That
Speaker 1: was our policy, right, dual track engagement. And by the way,
Speaker 1: when all that was happening in the mid VIETA f years,
Speaker 1: it was no big deal. You know. Obama had a
Speaker 1: roundtable with all the chief opposition leaders, so did you,
Speaker 1: and it was kind of no big deal. It was
Speaker 1: not it was not news. It's important to remember we
Speaker 1: were at least in a position where we were talking
Speaker 1: with and even negotiating with the then president of Russia.
Speaker 1: What happened? How did we get from there to here?
Speaker 1: In your expert opinion, two things changed, very consequential. One,
Speaker 1: Putin decided to run for re election to become president again.
Speaker 1: He thought, you know, mid vietnif was drinking too much
Speaker 1: reset kool aid. From his point of view, he's getting
Speaker 1: too soft with us. And then in between the time
Speaker 1: he announced that he was running, So he announces in
Speaker 1: September two thousand eleven, the elections in March two thousand twelve,
Speaker 1: and in between there was a parliamentary election and it
Speaker 1: was stolen kind of you know, falsified five kind of
Speaker 1: the normal levels. Just so you know, I remember sitting
Speaker 1: in the situation room. It's like, there's no big deal.
Speaker 1: There's just a normal Russian election under Vladimir Putin. But
Speaker 1: two things happen, and one of them was you were
Speaker 1: directly responsible for one. You issued a statement about those
Speaker 1: elections not being free and fair. I think you were
Speaker 1: in Vilnos at the time, if I'm not mistaken. I
Speaker 1: was actually at an os c E meeting, So that's right.
Speaker 1: You know, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe,
Speaker 1: and one of the goals of American to plomacy literally
Speaker 1: since post World War Two was to promote and protect
Speaker 1: free and fair elections exactly, And I remember it vividly.
Speaker 1: Just say, you know, Hillary, because I was at my
Speaker 1: son's football game in Maryland and trying to find a
Speaker 1: quiet space to speak to your eight at the time,
Speaker 1: Jake Sullivan, because I was the guy that cleared that
Speaker 1: statement for the White House on a Saturday, and your
Speaker 1: statement plus Russians going out onto the streets to protest
Speaker 1: that uh falsified election. Right first, five hundred and five thousand,
Speaker 1: and hundreds of thousands of people protesting. First time you've
Speaker 1: seen that kind of protesting in Russia since nine the
Speaker 1: year of the Soviet Union collapsed, and Putin put those
Speaker 1: two things together and he said, ah ha, there's a
Speaker 1: threat to my regime here, and it's Hillary Clinton's fault.
Speaker 1: It's the West fault. And I really think, you know,
Speaker 1: he's paranoid about democracy, right with with good reason, by
Speaker 1: the way, but that became the drama that leads to
Speaker 1: the events today because two years after those protests, there
Speaker 1: were major protests in Ukraine. By the way, I think
Speaker 1: you're in another meeting in Europe when Yanakovich was supposed
Speaker 1: to come sign an EU agreement and he got cold
Speaker 1: feet at the time, and he's, you know, because Putin
Speaker 1: put a lot of pressure on him. By that time.
Speaker 1: I was working in Moscow and I remember they gave
Speaker 1: him a big financial aid package to not sign that agreement.
Speaker 1: And Covi was that at that time, the president of Ukraine.
Speaker 1: So that for people who may not know right, right,
Speaker 1: and he was coming to and I want to say
Speaker 1: another meeting that you were at, if I'm not mistaken, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I was in Ukraine. I actually I remember I was.
Speaker 1: I was in Ukraine, and you know, there was such
Speaker 1: a sense of hope and optimism, particularly among young Ukrainians,
Speaker 1: and you know, their hopes were to move toward Europe.
Speaker 1: They wanted to be part of the European Union and
Speaker 1: that was a separate issue from NATO, that they wanted
Speaker 1: to be considered Europeans. Uh, They're in literally the largest
Speaker 1: landmass country other than Russia that is in Europe, and
Speaker 1: they wanted to look west right. Well, and that's exactly
Speaker 1: what happened. Janakovic did not sign that accession agreement with
Speaker 1: European unions and a journalists then turned parliamentary in his
Speaker 1: name is Mustafa got onto Facebook and said this is outrageous.
Speaker 1: We are European. He said, come to the streets, and eventually, uh,
Speaker 1: they came to the streets, and that was again for
Speaker 1: putin there. It is again mass mobilization. He doesn't believe
Speaker 1: that people can do this on their own. There's got
Speaker 1: to be the hand of the United States and the CIA.
Speaker 1: It then got violent. As you remember, by this time
Speaker 1: you were no longer Secretary of State, as I recalled,
Speaker 1: but that I left February one, right, right, So this
Speaker 1: had happened, you know, after Secretary Carrey was in place.
Speaker 1: But the mobilization again. That's what they called the Revolution
Speaker 1: of dignity. Janikovich fled and Putin decided, okay, here's the
Speaker 1: the hidden hand of the Americans again, and that's when
Speaker 1: he invaded Ukraine. The first time. Sees Crimea supported the separatists,
Speaker 1: but ever since he's been trying to undermine that democratic
Speaker 1: government that took over, ever since, through all kinds of
Speaker 1: different ways. And as he said the night before he invaded,
Speaker 1: I watched that speech. It was just rant all over
Speaker 1: the place. Took fifty eight minutes for him to make
Speaker 1: his argument um. And by the way, you know, as
Speaker 1: a professor, let me say, if you need fifty eight
Speaker 1: minutes to make your argument, you don't know what your
Speaker 1: argument is, um. But there were two seeds of it
Speaker 1: in there, and to this day, this is what it
Speaker 1: is about. He said, we're gonna destroy the Ukrainian army
Speaker 1: and we're gonna do denazification, which means to kill Mr Zelenski,
Speaker 1: to pipe out his government. So this is about him
Speaker 1: trying to roll back the Revolution of dignity from two
Speaker 1: thousand four. Mike, I want to I want to go
Speaker 1: back a little bit because I know you were born
Speaker 1: and raised in Montana. How did you become interested in
Speaker 1: Russia and become a Russian expert? Wow, we're going way back.
Speaker 1: Uh so yeah, I grew up in Montana, never been
Speaker 1: to California, let alone abroad, until as a seventeen year
Speaker 1: old kid, I flew to Stanford. I was an undergraduate
Speaker 1: at Stanford, but I got interested in Hillary in high school.
Speaker 1: I was on the high school debate team, and my
Speaker 1: junior year in Bozeman Senior High the topic was to
Speaker 1: improve US trade policy, and so my partner and I
Speaker 1: ran a case, as they're called in debate, to grant
Speaker 1: the Soviet Union most Favored Nation status. That was our case,
Speaker 1: by the way, something I later disagreed with, but at
Speaker 1: the time that's how I got interested. And when I
Speaker 1: showed up, you know, it was the fall of nineteen
Speaker 1: eight one, so President Reagan had just been elected. Uh
Speaker 1: he was talking about, you know, the Evil Empire, and
Speaker 1: it felt like a very scary time to me as
Speaker 1: a young kid. And so fall quarter of my freshman
Speaker 1: year I enrolled in two classes that really had a
Speaker 1: big impact on my life. First year Russian, which I
Speaker 1: then took you know for many years, and then you know,
Speaker 1: of course, on how nations deal with each other. And
Speaker 1: I was animated by an idea that that, you know,
Speaker 1: in different ways, has been a part of my thinking
Speaker 1: ever since. You know, I wanted to see the Soviets themselves.
Speaker 1: You know, I was wondering, well, what is this about
Speaker 1: the evil Empire? And I'm not sure I believe Ronald Reagan,
Speaker 1: and so I wanted to get to the Soviet Union.
Speaker 1: And so, you know, most kids at Stamford they go
Speaker 1: to London, Paris, Florence for their junior year abroad. At
Speaker 1: the end of my sophomore year, I went to Leninggrad.
Speaker 1: I went to Leningrad State University. And you gotta remember,
Speaker 1: like this is imagine that phone call to my mom.
Speaker 1: H you thought that California was a communist country, you know,
Speaker 1: and suddenly her sons going to you know, the evil Empire.
Speaker 1: But and you know, basically ever since that, that was
Speaker 1: how I got kind of interested in thinking about the place.
Speaker 1: That's really an interesting story because you've been evolving ever since,
Speaker 1: and you ended up being our ambassador to Russia. And
Speaker 1: I remember very well the challenges that you and your
Speaker 1: family faced, because I think, Mike, you also posed a
Speaker 1: real challenge, a real, in their view, threat to their
Speaker 1: mentality starting with Putin, but going on down, you wanted
Speaker 1: to live your life. Your kids were with you. Initially,
Speaker 1: you were engaged in the community, you were on social media,
Speaker 1: and then we started to get very troubling, you know,
Speaker 1: messages about how the government of Russia and that had
Speaker 1: to start with Putin was really making life hard for you.
Speaker 1: Can you talk a little bit about that, because I
Speaker 1: think again, people who are just for the first time
Speaker 1: maybe tuning in because Ukraine is so dramatic and so horrific,
Speaker 1: may not have at all the background that you certainly
Speaker 1: do about how we ended up where we are. Um So,
Speaker 1: remember we left out a few chapters of my history
Speaker 1: and I'll go through them quickly. But you know, my
Speaker 1: initial time in the Soviet Union, I was like, Oh,
Speaker 1: this place isn't so bad. I went back in eight
Speaker 1: five understanding Russian better, and I got deeper into the society,
Speaker 1: and then I came out a militant anti communist and
Speaker 1: a militant pro democrat. And then I lived in the
Speaker 1: Soviet Union. Um I was a fulbright scholar. You know,
Speaker 1: that's when there was mass mobilization, democratic movement, and I
Speaker 1: worked with a group that you probably know, the National
Speaker 1: Democratic Institute, and it was just a you just got
Speaker 1: to remember. It was such a euphoric moment. I remember
Speaker 1: because you know, the Berlin Wall fell in nineteen eighty
Speaker 1: nine and then the years you're describing um led to
Speaker 1: the fall of the Soviet Union. So at that period,
Speaker 1: groups like NDI and and you know, I then opened
Speaker 1: the office in Moscow, the National Democratic Institute funded by
Speaker 1: the United States government, actually yes, and it's affiliated with
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party, and we were there to help do
Speaker 1: political party development. But we were not We were there
Speaker 1: at the invitation of the government. I think that's the
Speaker 1: part that people get wrong. They wanted us there, and
Speaker 1: you know, I was a rock star. We were these young,
Speaker 1: idealistic people and got to know, you know, people that
Speaker 1: later became the opposition to Putin when I showed up
Speaker 1: two decades later. And I tell you that piece because
Speaker 1: Putin knows that. But fast forward to when I showed
Speaker 1: up as ambassador. You know, before I had gotten there,
Speaker 1: these massive protests had been taking place, and Putin went
Speaker 1: out of his way to criticize you personally. He said
Speaker 1: that you had sent a signal to those protesters, and
Speaker 1: so I arrived right in the in the as that
Speaker 1: was all happening. And you know, I just I remember
Speaker 1: my last meeting with you before I left. You told
Speaker 1: me three things, he said, be strong, don't forget about
Speaker 1: our values. And you are the person that told me
Speaker 1: to get on Twitter. I don't know if you remember that,
Speaker 1: but you said, you said, And I'm still on Twitter,
Speaker 1: by the way, and it's an important platform for me.
Speaker 1: But but your argument was, we gotta reach out to
Speaker 1: Russian society, we gotta engage with them. So I did that,
Speaker 1: but the conditions and change, right. It was one thing
Speaker 1: to meet the opposition when mid Vietnef was president, when
Speaker 1: we traveled together, Um, you probably don't remember, but one
Speaker 1: of the times we traveled together, like I want to say,
Speaker 1: two thousand and ten or so, I was actually meeting
Speaker 1: with a group of opposition leaders in the hotel room
Speaker 1: and you walked by, and I grabbed your eye and
Speaker 1: you came over and you you you did a vodka
Speaker 1: shot with them all. One of them. One of them
Speaker 1: is a guy named Boris and himself who who five
Speaker 1: years later was assassinated. But you made a huge impression
Speaker 1: on them. And it was you know, but it wasn't
Speaker 1: dangerous then, you know that that was a different era.
Speaker 1: By the time I showed up as ambassador, Putin was
Speaker 1: completely you know, nervous about his regime. So they used
Speaker 1: me as a target of you know, to say that
Speaker 1: I was sent by you and Obama to go orchestrate
Speaker 1: the revolution and so that that was my faith. Yeah. No,
Speaker 1: I mean, his his paranoia just seemed to grow and grow.
Speaker 1: And you know, there's been a lot of armchair psychologists
Speaker 1: trying to figure out what's happened to Putin? Why Putin
Speaker 1: is so aggressive and really risk taking right now? Does
Speaker 1: he have some health issues physical mental? Some people who
Speaker 1: said he looks puffy, looks like he's taking steroids. I mean,
Speaker 1: do you have any um, I don't know about insight,
Speaker 1: maybe too you know, too much to ask for, but
Speaker 1: any observations about what's going on with him personally. So
Speaker 1: a couple of things, and it's speculation, of course, right.
Speaker 1: But one remember, even when I was ambassador, we were
Speaker 1: writing lots of cables back explaining how isolated he was.
Speaker 1: Back then. That's eight years ago, right, Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: when when you came out to see him as Secretary
Speaker 1: of State. We had to drive out this compound. Right.
Speaker 1: We didn't meet in the Kremlin. That's because because he
Speaker 1: always met all of his people out in his country state,
Speaker 1: and he would sit out there, this is several years ago,
Speaker 1: barely meet with his advisers, not meet with many foreigners.
Speaker 1: It was a major deal that he would meet with you.
Speaker 1: Very few leaders in the world even back then, had
Speaker 1: FaceTime with him. And he's been in power for twenty
Speaker 1: two years, right, So when you get to be in
Speaker 1: power that long, you don't think that anybody can tell
Speaker 1: you anything. And COVID added to his isolation. Uh, he
Speaker 1: doesn't get very good information. He just gets this secret
Speaker 1: information from the KGB guys, and it's all distorted about Ukraine.
Speaker 1: You know, he's already removed some of his intelligence generals
Speaker 1: because because he got bad information about how the Ukrainians
Speaker 1: were going to receive them. So I think he's been
Speaker 1: very isolated for a long time, has been starting to
Speaker 1: believe his own propaganda. And then you know, has this
Speaker 1: other piece that I think is important for people to understand.
Speaker 1: He thinks of himself as a great you know, Catherine
Speaker 1: the Great, Peter the Great Restorer of the Russian Empire,
Speaker 1: wants to bring the Slavic people's together, as he explained
Speaker 1: before he invaded Ukraine, and fundamentally doesn't understand Ukrainians like
Speaker 1: he just doesn't understand they aren't just people with an
Speaker 1: accent but basically Russians, right, that's what he thinks. Um.
Speaker 1: And he drastically miscalculated in thinking that this was going
Speaker 1: to be a cake walk. And you can see he's
Speaker 1: he's gradually getting more and more angry, saying more and
Speaker 1: more crazy things, talking about the internal they call it
Speaker 1: the fifth column, right, the people inside Russia. That's an
Speaker 1: all communists sort of Leninist Stalinist term, is exactly it is.
Speaker 1: That was scary, especially because I think of, you know,
Speaker 1: my Russian friends who he's thinking of, um, and guys
Speaker 1: like Mr Novaldy, who's you know, in jail right now
Speaker 1: and from jail calling on Russia to protest this horrible war.
Speaker 1: So he feels like he's getting more and more unhinged. Um.
Speaker 1: I don't think he's suicidal. So I think we should
Speaker 1: be you know, we need to be firm and not
Speaker 1: you know, these threats he's making about nuclear weapons. We
Speaker 1: we should make sure that they haven't changed their policy
Speaker 1: on that. But we should also not overreact to his threats.
Speaker 1: I think at times, you know, he says, well, if
Speaker 1: you if we send these planes, these MiG twenty nine,
Speaker 1: he'll escalate. Well, what does that mean? He's going to escalate? Like,
Speaker 1: I think we need to be a little stronger and
Speaker 1: more confident. I agree with that. So I agree with that. Yeah, No,
Speaker 1: I mean, in fact, that's what I wanted to ask you.
Speaker 1: I think that the Biden administration um and like like you,
Speaker 1: I've I've talked to some of the people in it.
Speaker 1: Many of them were in the Obama administration, even the
Speaker 1: Klinton administration. So more for you, they're they're all I
Speaker 1: think about it, They all for you. Yeah, and they're
Speaker 1: they're full that we know and respect. And I thought
Speaker 1: that the initial phases of their reactions were really very strong,
Speaker 1: and I was impressed by their willingness to release intelligence
Speaker 1: in order to undercut what was clearly a plan of
Speaker 1: Putin's for a false flag operation to make it seem
Speaker 1: like somehow the Ukrainians were attacking Russians and therefore he
Speaker 1: had to go in and protect the Russians. So I
Speaker 1: do think that the accelerated pace of providing lethal weaponry
Speaker 1: to Ukraine is really important. But what do you think, Uh, Mike, again,
Speaker 1: it's just you and me kind of you know, throwing
Speaker 1: stuff up on the wall. See what we'll stick. Um,
Speaker 1: what should the US and NATO be doing in the
Speaker 1: days and weeks and months ahead? And second part of that,
Speaker 1: have you been surprised at how strongly, Um, the Ukrainians
Speaker 1: have defended themselves. Well, let's let's lilip around. Let's start
Speaker 1: with the Ukrainians and then what we should do to
Speaker 1: help them. So I'm it's been amazing, right. I mean
Speaker 1: the institute I run out here at Stanford, Hillary, we
Speaker 1: actually have been training activists in Ukraine starting in two
Speaker 1: thousand five. We had our first fellow from there from Ukraine.
Speaker 1: We're up to we had now have three hundred a
Speaker 1: lums throughout Ukraine. So people think of me as a
Speaker 1: Russia guy. But um, you know, I wrote my first
Speaker 1: book about Ukraine in two thousand and six, and because
Speaker 1: of that network, I've been in touch with Ukrainians throughout
Speaker 1: this entire war. UM. I hosted presidents a Lensky here
Speaker 1: at Stanford last September, the only place he spoke publicly.
Speaker 1: Is first Ukrainian president to come to California, so I
Speaker 1: got to know him. You know, we had a great
Speaker 1: day together, and he's a very engaging guy, and he's
Speaker 1: funny and you know, but nobody knew how he would
Speaker 1: respond in this moment. Right. He's a new guy to politics,
Speaker 1: and I just think he's a heroic figure. I spoke
Speaker 1: to him just fourth five days ago. By chance. I
Speaker 1: was hitting the Skype button to talk to one of
Speaker 1: our alums who works for him, his name Serge, and
Speaker 1: the screen came on just like we're talking, and there
Speaker 1: was Zelensky and his bunker and he said, Mike, you
Speaker 1: look just like, yeah, you looked what I was in California.
Speaker 1: I said, Mr President, you don't, uh, you know, he's
Speaker 1: got his scraggly beard and his T shirt. Um. But Hillary,
Speaker 1: let me tell you honestly, that was not by accident.
Speaker 1: I was speaking to two members of Congress just four
Speaker 1: hours later, and that shows you some of their savvy
Speaker 1: of their public communications strategy. They knew that, and they
Speaker 1: knew twenty minute conversation with Zelenski before I went to
Speaker 1: join Speaker Pelosi would have an effect on what I said,
Speaker 1: and it did so the battlefield, they're doing heroic work
Speaker 1: on the battlefield. I also think in terms of public communications,
Speaker 1: the speech he gave to Congress brilliant, and that's why,
Speaker 1: in my view, we should do everything we can do
Speaker 1: to help them win. And by win, I mean to
Speaker 1: fight the Russians to a stalemate, so they have to negotiate.
Speaker 1: And what I would say on the strategy so far,
Speaker 1: I'd say three of the four things they've done really well,
Speaker 1: uh and they have to keep doing it. So strengthening NATO,
Speaker 1: moving our forces and material to our frontline states great
Speaker 1: A plus military assistance historic levels. We've never done something
Speaker 1: as big. I always wanted more. I think they should
Speaker 1: have sent those big twenty nine for instance, and they
Speaker 1: should have done that quietly, not in the public back
Speaker 1: and forth, but but but generally that I support that.
Speaker 1: And the sanctions. Very impressed with what they've done on sanctions,
Speaker 1: that's been terrific. But I would say two things. One
Speaker 1: the communications inside Russia we're not doing as well as
Speaker 1: we need to. We need to get mothers of those
Speaker 1: soldiers to understand what's going on to Ukraine so that
Speaker 1: when the next draft date comes up, and it's coming
Speaker 1: up I think April one. They say, you know, I
Speaker 1: don't want to give my kid to this, this horrible war.
Speaker 1: And that's hard. I don't want to trivialize how hard
Speaker 1: that is, because they're closing down that space. But we
Speaker 1: got to get more creative on that. And as you know,
Speaker 1: the professor that I am, when I talk to my
Speaker 1: our colleagues in the government, I say, okay, you've got
Speaker 1: straight a's right now. But that was just the first midterm.
Speaker 1: We got ways to go here, folks. And um, you
Speaker 1: know you put six hundred oligarcs on the sanctions list,
Speaker 1: Well there's a list of six thousand, um, and so
Speaker 1: you've gotta keep at it, and especially on the weapons
Speaker 1: and and sanctions. It's not sufficient just to hold. You've
Speaker 1: got to keep ratcheting up the pressure on the economy
Speaker 1: and keep giving them the weapons to defend themselves. Oh.
Speaker 1: I completely agree with that, Mike. Um. Specifically, what more
Speaker 1: could be and should be done in terms of getting
Speaker 1: information into Russia. We know, you know the Kremlin is
Speaker 1: trying to block any kind of channels, but there's so
Speaker 1: much I mean, this is not you know fifty, there's
Speaker 1: lots of ways of getting information in so specifically, what
Speaker 1: would you advise not just the American government, but all
Speaker 1: the NATO governments, any allied government and and individuals as
Speaker 1: well as corporations. Yes, well, one thing we should do
Speaker 1: immediately is to help too. In particular, I can be
Speaker 1: very specific. TV Rain and Echo musk V the radio station.
Speaker 1: By the way, you were on Echo Musky. I remember,
Speaker 1: I remember we went to the studio. I remember they
Speaker 1: have your photo on the wall, just so you know.
Speaker 1: After that, so when I would go there as ambassador,
Speaker 1: I would walk by it and that, you know, just
Speaker 1: to for people who don't know, this is the number
Speaker 1: one radio multimedia companies started in this iconic Echo Muscovy.
Speaker 1: I mean everybody listens to millions of listeners throughout the country.
Speaker 1: They just were shut down a couple of weeks ago,
Speaker 1: and TV Rain is the last independent TV program. Their
Speaker 1: reconst tuting themselves outside of the country. And we should
Speaker 1: support them and they'll figure out through VPNs and you know,
Speaker 1: various ways to how to penetrate their cyber wall. It's
Speaker 1: not as good as the Chinese, they're not. They don't
Speaker 1: have that in place. UM even more creatively, text messaging
Speaker 1: is a very important information push. We know that from
Speaker 1: our elections, right. Um, opposition knows that inside Russia we're
Speaker 1: not doing enough in terms of that kind of messaging.
Speaker 1: And that's that's complicated, and you know who does it
Speaker 1: and what messaging. But I think in this moment, that's
Speaker 1: another place that we we want to be present. You know,
Speaker 1: Arnold Schwarzenegger did this video a few days ago, and
Speaker 1: you know he's very popular in Russia. That's what I've heard,
Speaker 1: and the video was really power. You've seen it, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I just saw it. I saw I saw it on Twitter. Yeah,
Speaker 1: well there you go. Umuh. And by the way, Twitter's blocked,
Speaker 1: but there's still through VPNs those all those platforms book
Speaker 1: on tact Day their Facebook like platform. I worry about YouTube.
Speaker 1: By the way, YouTube is a very important platform inside Russia.
Speaker 1: I predict that will be the next one that that
Speaker 1: Putin goes after. But back to Arnold like that, he's
Speaker 1: an iconic figure in Russia, so for him to do that,
Speaker 1: pieces of that interview will eventually show up on people's smartphones. Um,
Speaker 1: And we gotta think of other ways to do kind
Speaker 1: of you know, creative things like that. One other thing
Speaker 1: that's happening. For instance, just to give you a flavor
Speaker 1: of what Ukrainians and Russian opposition folks are doing. They're saying,
Speaker 1: go on to restaurant websites and when you give reviews,
Speaker 1: start writing, stop the war, right, So the little things
Speaker 1: like that, just you gotta you gotta be full in.
Speaker 1: That's the part I think we need to do more
Speaker 1: work on. Well, you pass that on, I'll pass it
Speaker 1: and we'll see if we can get you know, more
Speaker 1: of a reaction. We'll be back right after this quick break.
Speaker 1: Can you really describe for Americans why we have so
Speaker 1: much at stake in what's going on in Ukraine? Assuming
Speaker 1: that Ukraine continues this heroic resistance we're facing, you know,
Speaker 1: weeks maybe months of attacks and stalemates and everything that
Speaker 1: goes with it, continuing threats from Putin? Why should Americans
Speaker 1: keep caring? Why should they be willing to sacrifice whether
Speaker 1: it's increasing gas prices or other economic blowback from these
Speaker 1: very comprehensive sanctions. Yeah, great question and a hard one
Speaker 1: to answer. But let me frame it the way I
Speaker 1: think about it. This is a fight between autocrats and democrats. Uh,
Speaker 1: it is a fight of ideas as we're talking about before.
Speaker 1: Putin was never was never really threatened by NATO expansion.
Speaker 1: He was threatened by democratic expansion, and he always got
Speaker 1: h you know, it was always democratic expansion led to
Speaker 1: him complaining about NATO. So this is a fight about that.
Speaker 1: And let me just paint two scenarios. If Zelenski wins
Speaker 1: and and there's a stalemate and Putin is repelled, that
Speaker 1: has lots of important positive consequences from American national security interests. Right.
Speaker 1: First of all, our NATO allies will be less nervous
Speaker 1: than they are today because he'll be pushed back. Our
Speaker 1: allies and friends in Asia will feel more secure. Uh,
Speaker 1: Shijing Ping better think twice about invading Taiwan. Looking at
Speaker 1: what a fiasco what he thought was the third most
Speaker 1: powerful army in the in the world, one that he
Speaker 1: cooperates with, one that they have a lot of weapons
Speaker 1: systems together, right Uh, And out look at how morally
Speaker 1: they're performing in Ukraine. And if they lose there, that's
Speaker 1: good for deterring China from invading Taiwan. And by the way,
Speaker 1: if the sanctions help to keep the pressure on the economy,
Speaker 1: she's better thing twice about invading and facing those sanctions.
Speaker 1: That's a good thing, but the opposite is also true.
Speaker 1: If Putin wins and those fighting for democracy lose inside Ukraine,
Speaker 1: that has negative consequences all around the world as well.
Speaker 1: Our NATO allies will need more reassurance, and that means
Speaker 1: more military spending from US to help make sure that
Speaker 1: Putin doesn't attack them. Our allies in the Middle East
Speaker 1: will be nervous, uh and start hedging their bets. You know,
Speaker 1: maybe we need to work with the Russians because we can't.
Speaker 1: These Americans are not so reliable. I'm thinking of Israel
Speaker 1: first and foremost, and out in Asia the same thing,
Speaker 1: like um, you know, those are fence sitters. Will think, well,
Speaker 1: maybe we better lean more towards the Chinese because the
Speaker 1: Americans didn't prevail. So I think the consequences actually are
Speaker 1: much bigger than just in Ukraine. Winning has a very
Speaker 1: positive consequence in terms of how other people will deal
Speaker 1: with us in the future. Well, that's very well said,
Speaker 1: and I agree completely and the and the only additional
Speaker 1: point I would make is that I think it's also
Speaker 1: good for our own democracy here at home because the
Speaker 1: apologists and frankly, shall we say, fellow travelers of a nationalistic,
Speaker 1: even violent opposition as we saw in January six in
Speaker 1: our own country will have to think twice. Their base
Speaker 1: will be rattled and uh, those who promote undermining our institutions,
Speaker 1: ignoring the rule of law, trying to undermine our elections,
Speaker 1: everything that we know, unfortunately is part of the agenda
Speaker 1: of the opposition in America. I think that too will
Speaker 1: be you know, shape absolutely. I mean, don't forget. I
Speaker 1: don't need to tell you, but maybe your listeners have forgotten.
Speaker 1: Putin's been trying to undermine democracy for a long long time,
Speaker 1: including our own democracy, including undermining you personally during our elections.
Speaker 1: For a reason. I mean, you know, small D democratic ideas,
Speaker 1: small L liberal ideas are a threat to him, and
Speaker 1: leaders around the world, including you, that support those are
Speaker 1: threats to him. And for years he's been cultivating ties
Speaker 1: with I call it the illiberal international rights populist nationalist
Speaker 1: leaders you know, Urban and Hungary, Salibanian, Italy, Lepin and
Speaker 1: France Farage in the UK and Mr Trump and his
Speaker 1: you know, the people around him, the Steve Bannons of
Speaker 1: the world. They have been He's been making progress. I
Speaker 1: think the good news out of this horrible crisis is
Speaker 1: it's like you just said, it's a lot harder to
Speaker 1: play those games and line up with Putin, But that's
Speaker 1: all the more important if he if he wins victorious,
Speaker 1: all those kind of groups will now you know, start
Speaker 1: sprouting again and say, well he's evil, but you know
Speaker 1: he's a strong leader. We can't we can't let them
Speaker 1: go back to that we've got. That's why Putin has
Speaker 1: to lose in Ukraine. And I guess the final thing
Speaker 1: I would ask you, Mike, is does does Putin and
Speaker 1: his regime survived this win or lose? So? Um? You know,
Speaker 1: I'm a political scientist, and I would say we're not
Speaker 1: very good at predicting the future. Um. I also worked
Speaker 1: five years in the government. I'd said, the CIA is
Speaker 1: not very good at it either. Just so so we
Speaker 1: they didn't get the Green Revolution in Iran, right, or
Speaker 1: the Arab spring rights, or the Russian protests are Ukraine.
Speaker 1: But so, but with that humble caveat, let me let
Speaker 1: me say two things I know I'm very certain of one.
Speaker 1: I'm absolutely sure that the Ukrainians eventually will win. I
Speaker 1: don't know when they were gonna win but Putin doesn't
Speaker 1: have the army to occupy this country, the largest country
Speaker 1: in Europe forty million people. Stalin had millions in the
Speaker 1: Red Army when he put his puppet regimes in place
Speaker 1: after forty five. Putin does not have that capability, and
Speaker 1: he doesn't have the ideas. Stalin was repelling real fascists,
Speaker 1: and when he liberated countries, he said he could make
Speaker 1: the argument, we're building a new society communists, and he
Speaker 1: attracted just enough lackeys to help him build those places.
Speaker 1: Putin doesn't have that. So Ukrainians will fight door by
Speaker 1: door with guns, acts of non violence, civic resistance. There's
Speaker 1: no doubt on my mind. Eventually though, they will repel
Speaker 1: putin soldiers. I just don't know when that should be.
Speaker 1: We should hasten that. But you asked a different question, yes,
Speaker 1: about Russia, And here's the way I think about it.
Speaker 1: It reminds me of the bresne era. You know, Bresnef
Speaker 1: was in power for almost twenty years, one of the
Speaker 1: longest serving general secretaries in the early phases, you know,
Speaker 1: he was he was kind of he did okay in
Speaker 1: the sixties, and then the seventies came along, and he
Speaker 1: went on this run victories where communist regimes, we're taking
Speaker 1: over the world, right, so Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and then
Speaker 1: Angola and Mozambique in Africa, Nicaragua, even in our hemisphere.
Speaker 1: That was seventy nine and so he had like five wins.
Speaker 1: And by the way, Hillary, we kind of looked like
Speaker 1: we did recently, right, We were divided amongst ourselves, lots
Speaker 1: of you know, civil rights movement, anti war movement, Nixon.
Speaker 1: These were times where we didn't look like we were
Speaker 1: so strong ourselves, right, So a lot of parallels. And
Speaker 1: then bres overreached. He invaded Afghanistan and he thought it
Speaker 1: was gonna be a k k walk, you know, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan.
Speaker 1: We're just gonna add one more stand to They called
Speaker 1: it the Sixteenth Republic, and we all know how that ended.
Speaker 1: It was a disaster for the Soviet Union. And it
Speaker 1: was one, not the only factor, but it was one
Speaker 1: of the factors. That was the beginning of the end
Speaker 1: of the Soviet Union. Took a decade, but but it
Speaker 1: it helped unravel things. And I think this is the
Speaker 1: beginning of the end of of Putinism. Even if Putin
Speaker 1: survives in power, which he may very well do, it's
Speaker 1: a pretty horrific dictatorship. But he's lots the elites, Hillary,
Speaker 1: I gotta tell you, like, I'm in touch with Russians
Speaker 1: all the time, including people that were kind of pro Putin. Right,
Speaker 1: he violated the contract, which was I'll be your dictator
Speaker 1: in return for a stable economy. Well that's over now,
Speaker 1: and I just think it will eventually, you know, maybe
Speaker 1: it'll take one more leader that won't have the authority.
Speaker 1: But I do think this is the beginning of the end.
Speaker 1: I just don't know how long that process will be.
Speaker 1: But it's very hard for me to imagine a Putin
Speaker 1: like figure in power in Russia twenty years from now.
Speaker 1: I think that's really unlikely. So that's a sliver of
Speaker 1: good news. We just don't know when that good news
Speaker 1: gets delivered. Yeah, no, And we just have to keep
Speaker 1: our nerve and be patient and be smart about, you know,
Speaker 1: the strategies we employ and absolutely stay the course. Well,
Speaker 1: I can't tell you what a delight it is for
Speaker 1: me to have this time to talk with you, Mike,
Speaker 1: and I really look to you for you know, interpretation
Speaker 1: and guidance about how we can stay the course. And
Speaker 1: thank you so much for you know, sharing this time
Speaker 1: with me and our listeners, really enjoying Hillary. Let's do
Speaker 1: it again sometime. Thank you. Bye. Mike mcfall's most recent
Speaker 1: book is From Cold War to Hot Peace, an American
Speaker 1: Ambassador in Putin's Russia. You can also follow him like
Speaker 1: I do on Twitter at McFall. Recent events have proven
Speaker 1: what we know to be true. We are all connected,
Speaker 1: that what happens abroad matters here at home, and that
Speaker 1: an attack on democracy anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
Speaker 1: So as we stand with the people of Ukraine in
Speaker 1: the difficult weeks and probably months ahead, it's also important
Speaker 1: that we stand with one another and stand up for
Speaker 1: our democracy right here at home. Before I go, as
Speaker 1: a reminder, I'll be answering your questions on a future
Speaker 1: episode of You and Me both with a special guest.
Speaker 1: Maybe you've got more questions about what's going on with
Speaker 1: Ukraine and Russia, or what's happening with attacks on our
Speaker 1: democracy right here in America, or maybe there's something more
Speaker 1: personal or lighthearted that you want to ask me. No
Speaker 1: matter what your questions might be, right to You and
Speaker 1: Me Both pod at gmail dot com, or you can
Speaker 1: leave a voice message at two oh two seven eight
Speaker 1: oh seven five one five and who knows, I might
Speaker 1: just answer your question on the show You and Me
Speaker 1: Both is brought to you by I Heart Radio. We're
Speaker 1: produced by Julie Subran, Kathleen Russo and Rob Russo, with
Speaker 1: help from Kuma Aberdeen, Oscar Flores, Lindsay Hoffman, Brianna Johnson,
Speaker 1: Nick Merrill, Laura Olan, Lona Velmorrow and Benita Zaman. Our
Speaker 1: engineer is Zack McNeice and original music is by Forrest Gray.
Speaker 1: If you like You and Me Both, please tell someone
Speaker 1: else about it. And if you're not already a subscriber,
Speaker 1: what are you waiting for? You can subscribe to You
Speaker 1: and Me Both on the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks for listening, take
Speaker 1: care of yourself and each other, and we'll be back
Speaker 1: next week. H