Hello and welcome to the forecast. So Ukraine has agreed to a 30 day ceasefire, the American defence and intelligence is flowing again into Ukrainian defence forces and everyone is waiting to see what Vladimir Putin does. The phrase everyone is using from Washington to London to European capitals is the ball is in the Russian court. But what's likely to happen? What's it likely to mean? And will a ceasefire lead to a
peace? Joining me from Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, our international editor, Lindsay Hills. Lindsay, there's there's lots that's confusing about this in that you would have thought in the past that if the Ukrainians were told to freeze the lines, having lost 20% of their territory, they would throw their hands up in horror. Yet they seem to be pleased at this. Can can you explain what people
are thinking and saying? The most important thing about this is the rapprochement between UK, Ukraine and the United States. That is what this is all about because after that disastrous meeting in the Oval Office between President Zelensky and President Trump, and then the way that the US cut off intelligence and military aid to Ukraine, the Ukrainians knew that they had to scramble to get back into the Americans good books.
And that is what this shows. Because the fact that there was a joint statement by Ukraine and the US saying they both agreed that there should be this 30 day ceasefire and that it was now up to the Russians to reciprocate and up to the Americans to get the Russians to agree to it. That in the cliche that Marco Rubio used puts the ball in the Russians court. And that is exactly where the Ukrainians want it to be at the
moment. Do you think the Ukrainians think this process is actually going to lead to a ceasefire? I think that they're not quite sure. What they want is for it to become clear to the Americans that Russia is the obstacle, not them. That is how they see it. They say, look, we want an end to this war, but we have various terms, one of which is we want our country back. We want our sovereignty.
We want our children back, the children who were abducted by the Russians and are being brought up in Russia under Russian rather than Ukrainian names. We want our prisoners of war back. There are all sorts of things that they want. But yes, they too want an end to the war. Whereas they think that President Trump has misunderstood the situation. And this is, of course, what President Zelensky was trying to explain in the Oval Office, which went so disastrously wrong.
They think that what the Americans need to understand is that the problem is Russia and the fact that Russia wants to control Ukraine and not to allow it to have its own sovereignty. So that is what they are hoping, that this will lead to, a clarifying moment that I think they think is more likely than a ceasefire, at least one which might endure.
From the Trump point of view, they will portray this as a enormous victory for Trump thinking because they will say, well, the trouble with the Ukrainians was they didn't really want peace. They weren't serious about peace. That's what that showdown in the Oval Office revealed and that we needed to bring them to heel by showing them just how tough we were. And now they have changed their minds and they are serious about peace. And that's why we can re engage.
Do you think there has been any change in Ukrainian thinking since that disastrous meeting in the Oval Office? I mean, did it work in any way from the Trump point of view? Well, there's certainly been a change in thinking in terms of understanding how to deal with this American administration. Absolutely. They totally realised that the way they were trying to deal with the administration, particularly at the highest level, was a disaster and and
would not work at all. Now in terms of what they actually want for Ukraine, which is an enduring peace with security guarantees, which will stop the Russians coming back and distorting Ukrainian politics, controlling Ukraine, making demands to keep Ukrainian territory, none of that has changed. But how you get to where they want to go and how you handle this administration, that has
completely changed. And in the short term, I suppose you could say that the what should we call it, the Trump Doctrine has worked because they are working alongside the Americans now. And they are also extremely relieved that the Americans have agreed to switch back on the intelligence, including the including the Max, our satellite system, and get military aid back on back on track again. I suppose what I mean is, you know, the, the, the balls Trump analysis is they didn't want peace.
They weren't prepared to compromise. Now they are. Is that a change that has really happened, or did Ukraine always know that in the final analysis, there would be a compromise on territory? We are nowhere near that. And that again, I think is one of the things which was misunderstood when when President Zelensky said to the Europeans that the end of the
war is a long way off. And President Trump was furious about that because he wants to think that the end of the war is going to happen very quickly because that's what he decrees, you know, as if he had a magic wand and say, woof, it's all over. The Ukrainians understand very well that a 30 day ceasefire, even if it were to happen, is really not a lot. Both sides actually would rather
like a 30 day ceasefire. I think give the soldiers a bit of a rest, you know, and then you can get preparing and planning for the further fighting that's to come during the fighting season, which is in the spring. It hasn't changed anything on what the Ukrainians want in the long term. Now, there are a lot of people within the Ukrainian government and military who know that they are not going to be able to get the territory back at the moment under the Ukrainian constitution.
They are not going to and they cannot give away the territory and say that belongs to Russia now. But it's perfectly possible to say, OK, the lines stop here, it's frozen, but that is still our territory and we'll get it back one day. But of course, what the Russians are demanding is far more than that. They're saying they want a lot of territory which they don't
control at the moment. I mean, there's even reports that they're saying that they want Odessa, they're trying to take as much as possible, and those are aligned. You know, they have maximalist demands. So the Ukrainians understand perfectly well that any kind of negotiation over a longer term peace is a very, very long and complex thing. It's not just a 30 day
ceasefire. Now, from the Russian point of view, you know, there's a question as to why they why they would go along with this beyond the 30 day ceasefire. As you say, they may well say, well, the 30 day pause is quite useful for us, but but right now, particularly in the cursed region, they're doing pretty well. So, so, So what? What is in it for them to settle at this stage? Yeah, I think there's short,
medium and long term. In the short term, I suspect that the Russians might try and spin this out for quite a while. I mean, they've said, you know, that they need to have a direct term contact with the White House before they're going to
make any answer on this. And I think we're going to, you know, see quite a bit of backwards and forwards because in the coming days they are pushing the Ukrainians very hard out of curse, which is this small bit of Russian territory that the Ukrainians moved into and held part of since last summer. And it's. There, a big bargaining chip isn't.
It yeah, it's a bargaining chip for the Ukrainians and I suspect it's a bargaining chip that they may soon lose because they are retreating and everyday we hear about more about the about the the Ukrainians having to to retreat. So it may be that that gets spun out. But then if you look in the medium term, the Russians are losing a lot of soldiers, a lot of people. And, you know, there's a question of how much longer they
can carry on doing that for. And they are you losing a lot of equipment because the Ukrainians are in a defensive position at the moment and the Russians are trying to move forward. And when you're trying to move forward and when you're being proactive in that way, you often do have greater losses than the other side, which is just trying to hold the line.
So in the medium term, I think some kind of ceasefire is quite useful for the Russians because they can use that to regroup, to get their weapons manufacture up. Maybe they would like to bring in and train more soldiers from other countries they've already got in ones from North Korea.
So all of that, a pause in that way will be very helpful to the Russians. And in the long term, the issue of what are the Russians war aims, and this I think is where certainly President Trump appears to have not accepted or understood the war aim of Russia is to control Ukraine. That is what they want to do. Now, they have various ways of doing that. Militarily is one way.
Politically is another way. So if they succeed in persuading President Trump that what Ukraine has to do is have elections six months after a ceasefire, there's all sorts of mischief they can do. The presidential election is one thing. What about local elections, Local elections in the territories they control, Local elections in the territories which are border where they control. It's all sorts of possibilities of bribing people and interfering and turning
Ukrainians against each other. Because, you know, elections are always competitive, aren't they? And then you're not all fighting Russia, you're fighting each other. These are the kind of things that the Russians want to do. They want some kind of settlement that enables them to have power over Ukraine. That is their long term goal. I mean, you say that Putin is likely to string this out for a few days at least and that there'll be a negotiation over
the ceasefire. What are his options beyond that? Well, his options are what they always are, to go into a negotiation where he has the advantage and where he will use every KGB trick in the book. And I've spoken to people who've negotiated, been on the Ukrainian side negotiating the Minsk accords. And, you know, everything is down to the last detail that they'll, the Russians will suddenly come in and say, we're going to spend a whole day negotiating the 100mm cannon.
And then they will say, and then we're going to do this, then we're going to do that. And then suddenly they come in with 100 pages that you've got assigned tonight before you go back. So they do all of that, that stuff, all of the, the time. They make it very, very difficult. And they, they have lots of lawyers and they have, you know, they have incredibly skilled
negotiators. And one of the things I think is very, which maybe President Trump hasn't sort of seen in that way is President Trump is a fairly blunt instrument. Either there's fighting or there's no, no fighting. That's all he cares about. He doesn't care about the detail. Vladimir Putin cares about every single detail and will try and make sure that in any negotiation every single detail is to Russia's advantage. So that, I think is what he is likely to do.
And Trump can't do to Russia what he did to Ukraine, can he in in reality, which is to get furious and throw his weight around and insult them. That is not how he deals with Russia and it is not how he deals with Vladimir Putin. However, he could put on more sanctions. And the other thing which maybe would we can put him more than anything else would be if the price of oil went down.
Now, President Biden tried to make that happen with his negotiations with Saudi Arabia. The Saudis told them they
weren't going to do that. President Trump, you know, it would be to his advantage in some ways if the price of oil came right down, partly because it would be very good for inflation in America. But it would also mean that the Russians had very, very little money because they are entirely dependent on oil, on the shadow fleet, which, you know, takes their sanctioned oil around the world. So if he wanted to, President Trump could try and push that angle and that might make a difference.
It's it's worth then talking about the European position which remains, that they are prepared to send peacekeepers or Britain and France's position at least. And others are are considering it, which is looking increasingly daft, frankly, because Russia's not going to accept it. Yeah. And and it never was. The whole talk about peacekeepers is pushing the cart before the horse because there
is no peace to keep. And certainly one of Russia's main concerns is NATO and they want Ukraine as a buffer zone, a neutral buffer zone under their their sway between them and NATO. If you bring in British and French forces who control who are going right up to the Russian border, then NATO's right on their border. That's done exactly the opposite of what they what they want. So it's very hard to see how that kind of peacekeeping force could ever be acceptable to the Russians.
Yes. And and so it also makes you wonder whether Russia is considering the wider diplomatic victory that it can possibly see, because even if Donald Trump is back on Ukraine's side today, I'm guessing nobody in Ukraine feels that they can rely on that. There's a lesson that for, you know, there for all the other American partners, which is that you cannot rely on Washington really to be a, a sort of a steady security partner in the
future. And it's very difficult to see how that comes back anytime soon, even beyond the Trump period, because, you know, the the Trump ideology could return in the form of JD Vance or somebody else in the future. So there is serious damage to the whole question of Western security stability. And that's an enormous victory for Russia in the longer term. Absolutely.
The other thing, the Russians obviously want the far right parties in Europe to succeed and you know, increase their their influence and so on. So you look at my Le Pen in France and you know she had loans from Russia at one point. This came out in a in a court case, even though she did deny it. The Afd in Germany, all of these various parties, they will continue to try and exert as much influence as they can within the European political system as well as they are doing in in Ukraine.
So, yeah, none of that is going to change. And from the Ukrainian point to view, Europe becomes ever more important. And I think that the issue about weapons is very important because, you know, we talk about the American weapons, which have been so useful to Ukraine. But at the same time, Ukraine has been developing its own weapons industry. It now produces 40% of the weaponry that it uses on the battlefield. A lot of that is very high tech drones.
Ukraine is ahead of almost anywhere else in the world in the use of high tech drones, all sorts of extraordinary things that drones couldn't do before this war started. So the technology they are developing is also going to be very useful for Europe as it spends more and more on defence and actually, you know, it would be useful for the Americans as
well. It's hard to know whether they're going to whether they're going to the bite on that, but Ukraine has an opportunity to integrate its defence production with Europe, which would strengthen Europe and Ukraine and that could leave America on the side. Just to come back to the question of security guarantees, this is something that has dominated the conversation for
weeks now. And I think, you know, the the Trump side have been saying, look, don't get ahead of yourself when it comes to security guarantees. Security guarantees may be the final part of the jigsaw once we're at negotiating stage. And from the Russian point of view, as you, as you've laid out, there can't really be the kind of security guarantee that Ukraine wants because there's no way that Russia will accept NATO troops on its border of any
kind. So the security guarantee is going to have to be something different, isn't it? And and not what we're talking about at the moment.
Yeah. And I don't know what that's going to be. You know, if I did, I'd, you know, probably be in charge of a small country somewhere in Europe. But the point is, is because the Ukrainians have this long experience of negotiating with the Russians. So after the Russian invasion and annexing of Crimea in 2014, as you'll remember, you had a lot of rounds of peace negotiations in Minsk, the capital of Belarus, Minsk 1, Minsk 2, all of these
negotiations and you had a ceasefire which both sides actually violated, but particularly the Russians. But the whole point about Minsk was the security guarantees didn't work. And that's why Russia was able to come back for for more. And that is the great concern of the Ukrainians and that is what the Russian, the Russians want to leave that open. So even if they do do a deal, they want to leave that open that they come can come back for
for more at some point. The other thing which I think is really difficult for the Ukrainians and this again is a longer term thing, is that if you leave this as a frozen conflict, you're not going to get something like, for example, you have in North and South Korea where South Korea was, you know, has been able to to blossom and to develop economically and so on, even though it has never had a formal ceasefire with the North because the North, you know, it frankly
hasn't interfered. I mean, it might, you know, there might be occasional raids and so on, but but it hasn't. And that's because China doesn't want it to. But here what you might get would be a diminished and diminishing country. You've already got a lot of Ukrainians who are living overseas.
There's a demographic crisis. One of the reasons that Zelensky has not called for a full scale mobilization of men under the age of 25 is that they're really worried about destroying that generation of there being no men left and the women having left the country. And then the population getting smaller and smaller and smaller and always having this massive threat to the east so that Ukraine in the end sort of dwindles away. These are the long term fears
that Ukraine has. Of course there are NATO troops on Russia's border already in a way, aren't there with with Finland. Why does Russia tolerate that? Yeah, Finland, the Baltic States and so on. The reason it tolerates that and it doesn't tolerate Ukraine is because it sees Ukraine as part of Russia. It has a different attitude to Ukraine. It does not see Ukraine as an independent country in any way. But also there are many who say, well, after Ukraine, it would
like to move that way too. Finland they can't do anything about but that they've got their eye on the Baltic states. And certainly if you talk to any of the Baltic state leaders, what they will say to you is after Ukraine we are in the firing line and that is why we are so supportive of Ukraine. They certainly think that Ukrainian soldiers are dying, not just for Ukraine's independence, but for theirs as
well. Now, just finally, there's going to be a temptation for people to have a look at the way we've been thinking about Donald Trump and say, well, you know what? He, he's the one who does make the difference. And for all the chaos and for all the confusion, he has got one side to agree to a ceasefire. And who knows, he may get Russia to agree to a 30 day ceasefire as well, whether or not it actually happens in in fact.
So. So what do we make, then, of whether the world has been too quick to judge Trump as a man who doesn't understand the way things are, when the facts on the ground might show he's the one who's actually making a difference? Well, the one thing he said, which is absolutely true is that too many people are dying in this war and too many, you know, soldiers on both sides are losing their their lives. Of that he is absolutely right.
And I think that what he has done in trying to push some of this through, yeah, you can say that this is not all bad. In many ways this is positive. A ceasefire would be great. The issue is what happens after a ceasefire. And that, I think, is the problem because from the
Ukrainian point of view is this. If the ceasefire just enables Russia to rearm, regroup and then come back for more, maybe in a year's time, maybe after Donald Trump is no longer in office, then that hasn't solved the problem in any way. It has just delayed the the problem. And so that, I think, is the key. There are some things he has understood and he has pushed through. And you cannot say that it's a bad idea to stop the killing. Of course you can't.
But if it just makes Russia stronger and so there's more killing later on, and Ukraine gets swallowed up, then maybe Donald Trump wouldn't look like such a brilliant thing after all. Lindsay Hilson, thank you very much indeed. That's the forecast for this morning. Until next time, bye bye.