Transcript Follows:
I just wanted to do a quick review of the breaking news out of Secretary Hegseth's visit to NATO for this conference around Ukrainian security. It's probably going to fly under the radar.
It was a relatively quiet announcement, not in a major forum, but this is going to have major effects on U.S. security. What we have going on right now is Secretary of State Rubio attending the Munich Security Conference, kind of the world's premier security conference, saying that the key topic of discussion will be ending the war in Ukraine.
We have Trump, talking about a pie in the sky ideas of ending the war in Ukraine. Obviously, he said it was going to end before he was inaugurated. It was going to end on day one. And now he says it's a focal point for his efforts to end the war in Ukraine. He had a conversation with Putin, seems like the first of several.
He managed to get a wrongfully detained former U.S. diplomat released, which is good news, but the costs are quite high.
Coming back around to Hegseth and joining NATO for this summit on Ukrainian security is something that's been going on for several years.
It was started under Lloyd Austin. It's all the NATO member states and some other donors that contribute to security assistance for Ukraine.
What Hegseth said is that he does not see... Ukraine joining NATO and does not see a path where Ukraine returns back to its 1991 borders, where it regains control, sovereignty over all its territory.
That latter point, you know, to a certain extent is true. It's a hard thing to get to. But to have a senior official state that and give away the farm with regards to undermining the bargaining position, not saying that Ukraine has the right and should be resourced with the means to liberate its territory occupied from Russia. That is bad deal-making!
Worse than that, Hegseth announced that, he doesn't see a means for or a path for Ukraine to enter NATO. That's highly problematic.
That is a significant change in U.S. position across multiple administrations.
In 2008, the U.S. and the Bucharest summit announced that ultimately, eventually, with really no clear path, but at least it was a vision for Ukraine, Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO.
All this is really, frankly, bad news because it's not just about Ukraine.
That, in a significant way, precipitated Russia's invasion of Georgia later on that year, just months down the road.
Since then, the US and NATO has held that ultimately Ukraine and Georgia would eventually join NATO.
Even under the first Trump administration, this was policy, not reversing course, not appeasing Russia.
The reality now is that in this, you know, either thoughtful and coordinated policy statement or in a lack of understanding of the consequences, just spouting off because Hegseth is unqualified, he said that Ukraine won't be joining NATO.
That is, what does that mean? Of course, that means that Putin has gotten a significant portion of what he wants.
He wants to make sure that Ukraine doesn't join a bloc that perpetually protects it from Russian aggression.
That even if there were terms to end this war, that Ukraine in joining NATO could forestall further Russian aggression. That ends one kind of security guarantee.
It also means that in a lot of ways, Russia starts with a advanced bargaining position. They've already gotten what they wanted with the U.S. capitulating on NATO.
So what else can they get?
Seizing and holding great swathes of territory that are currently occupied.
This, to me, strikes a bad chord for how the Trump administration is going to negotiate.
They're putting maximum pressure on Ukraine.
While Ukraine is more than willing to bend over backwards to compromise and try to meet the U.S., you know, everything from compromising on the territory it wishes to liberate, to potentially paying for security assistance, while the Russians are completely intransigent.
And the Russians have shown no appetite to compromise in this war.
So they're putting their boot on Ukraine's neck when Ukraine is willing to compromise and easing the pressure on Russia when Russia is intransigent.
It is a bad way to make a deal. It undermines the ability to end this war.
The Ukrainians have less incentive to try to accommodate the U.S. They will continue to fight on. It's in their national interest to resist as long as they can. They have the resources.
The fact is that the Russians are under enormous pressure right now.
The Russians are letting up on their military campaigns in Ukraine. But this boasters Putin's desire to continue the war, even though the Russians don't really have a path to get to where they want to, to get the Ukrainians to relent.
So, all this is really, frankly, bad news because it's not just about Ukraine.
It's also about the messages sent to China.
China will feel even more comfortable with regards to the fact that it can engage in militarizing the South China and East China Seas, advancing its plans for maybe military force in Taiwan.
This further incentivizes Russia to use military means in other parts of its neighborhood, whether that's Moldova or the Baltics that are parts of EU and NATO.
And it really continues to destabilize European security.
So all in all, with this relatively quiet announcement, pretty negative turn of events.
We'll see if it reverses, if there's a reverse course here, because this is a pretty big announcement.
It might've been uncoordinated and it is probably in certain regards at odds with what has been discussed even earlier in the first three weeks of the Trump administration, but it's a dangerous situation undermining US security.
Just wanted to quickly tell you about these developments and catch up with you later about this.
Thanks for listening.
Share this post