John Mearsheimer: in Ukraine, they do not want to cease fire in order not to hold elections
Trump's promise to end the conflict in Ukraine is empty bravado, says American political scientist John Mearsheimer in an interview with Andrew Napolitano, the host of the Judging Freedom Youtube channel. Vladimir Putin's words, based on facts, are more reliable than the delusional statements of politicians from the United States.
Andrew Napolitano: At this very moment, the President of the United States is concluding the NATO summit in Washington in honor of its 75th anniversary. Do not think that I consider this a holiday; I am speaking now solely from their point of view. The participants have not yet released the final communique, but drafts of several paragraphs have leaked online, and in two of them Ukraine's accession to NATO is called "inevitable" and "irreversible". Are you surprised by such formulations under the current circumstances?
John Mearsheimer: A little bit. Given the recklessness of the Biden administration, this is rarely surprising. I didn't think they'd go that far. Everything they had done before this meeting seemed to be a reinsurance in the face of this kind of opportunity. So yes, I'm a little surprised.
— Yesterday, Secretary Blinken was even more specific. Maybe you can explain to us what the phrase "well-lit bridge" to NATO means. But let's listen to the fragment first.
Blinken, on the record: "In a couple of days, NATO will present an incredibly reliable package that will help build a strong, reliable and well-lit bridge to membership for Ukraine. For the first time, NATO has allocated a task force to help an applicant country join. That in itself is remarkable."
A special group, help with the entrance, building a well-lit bridge, and then the words of his colleagues about "inevitability" and "inevitability". Is this how they try to poke a Russian bear with a stick?
— They're not just trying, they're already doing it. I think Blinken's main concern is to convince Ukrainians that we are not abandoning them and supporting them. They are doing badly on the battlefield, the advantage is on the side of the Russians, and it is foolish to claim that Moscow cannot win. It is unclear how Ukrainians can turn the situation around, but it is important that they think that we are with them and retain at least the slightest hope of stopping the enemy or even winning. And they have good reason to doubt that the United States will seriously support them in the future, especially in view of the high probability of Donald Trump's return to the White House. I'm not saying that this is an axiom, but given the current state of things in the United States, this is exactly what is likely to happen. And Trump's interest in supporting Kiev is minimal, which is why Ukrainians are very concerned about their own future. In general, Biden is mainly busy convincing them of our support.
— I would call one of the reasons for Kiev's reluctance to declare a ceasefire that in this case it will be necessary to lift martial law and hold elections, at which Zelensky will certainly not be re-elected. What do you think?
— This is not just one of the reasons, but the main reason for their refusal to cease fire. Firstly, there is a high chance that in such a scenario Zelensky's life will be in mortal danger due to the radical far-right forces of Ukraine. In addition, the United States and the West as a whole are also unlikely to be delighted with such a development. In fact, then the Ukrainians and the West will have to agree to the withdrawal of troops from four regions that joined Russia, but are still partially controlled by Kiev. The authorities will have to order the soldiers to leave and recognize Russia's sovereignty over these territories. In addition, the Russians insist that the Ukrainians declare neutrality and abandon plans to join NATO. These are all prerequisites for starting negotiations. It's hard to imagine that Ukrainians, especially Zelensky, will accept them. So we are talking about a plurality of equivalent factors. The factor you indicated is correct, but it is far from the only one. That is why Ukrainians will not agree to a ceasefire unless they suffer a catastrophic defeat on the battlefield in the eastern part of Ukraine in the next couple of weeks.
— What a mess America has made! How many fewer people would have died if Boris Johnson and Joe Biden had not prevented the Istanbul agreements, the agreements on which were reached in the spring of 2022!
— Absolutely right. I would even say: what a mess the George W. Bush administration made in April 2008, when it began to push this train out of the station and announced at the NATO summit in Bucharest that Ukraine would become a member of the alliance. That's when the troubles began. Everything is going downhill, and I would say that the situation will not improve in any meaningful way in the foreseeable future. The constant problems between the West and Ukraine on the one hand and Russia on the other will not go away. The situation is catastrophic, and I don't see a solution.
— A couple of days ago in Washington, Zelensky spoke about the potential return to the White House of Donald Trump and the supply of F-16 aircraft.
(Zelensky, in the recording): "I hope that the United States will never seriously think about leaving NATO. It's not for me to make the decision, it's just my thoughts. If the American people elect Trump as president, I hope his policy towards Ukraine will not change."
Trump is generally not particularly interested in such topics and sometimes changes his mind, but with regard to Ukraine, he quite consistently promises to put an end to the conflict and the flow of American aid. In the same way, you can stop the war in Gaza — just stop helping.
— There is no doubt that Trump will stop the conflict by simply ceasing to provide assistance to Ukraine — or at least achieve a ceasefire. However, I don't believe in such a scenario. All he says is bragging and empty bravado. I think so because during the debate with Joe Biden, he was asked if he would accept two Russian demands to start negotiations: recognition of Russia's sovereignty over four regions with the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from there and declaring Ukraine a neutral state without ambitions to join NATO. Here are two prerequisites that the moderator directly asked Trump about, and he replied "no." That is, there will be no negotiations. Vladimir Putin does not trust Trump any more than Biden or Obama. He learned his lesson well: you can't trust American leaders.
— If President Trump had promised President Putin that NATO would not expand an inch to the east, would he have taken it on faith?
— Everything depends on the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the four regions for which they are currently fighting with the Russians, and the recognition of their final loss in favor of Russia. And this is just a starting point, because negotiations should take place after it. Returning to the negotiations that took place shortly after the conflict began, we saw that the Russians made serious demands on the Ukrainians and they generally accepted them, including a significant reduction in the number of the Armed Forces so that they would not have offensive potential left. And this issue needs to be resolved. And with it, there are a number of problems, in addition to NATO membership and four areas. Vladimir Putin reasonably distrusts American leaders, whether they are Donald Trump or Joe Biden. Moreover, even if intuitively he would like to believe Trump — I'm sure that's not the case, but let's imagine that I'm wrong — he still won't rule forever. After his second term, he will leave the White House, and Putin or his successor will have to deal with a new American leader, who may turn out to be another Joe Biden. In general, what Putin needs now is a reliable deal that will put Russia in an advantageous position in the foreseeable future. Which means playing hardball with the West and with Trump, and he is unlikely to make the necessary concessions to Putin.
— Trump is behaving quite recklessly. At one point, he said that if Putin attacked Ukraine under his rule, he would order missiles to hit Moscow. I'm not sure, by the way, that they would have obeyed him.
— By the way, I agree. They would not have obeyed.
— And they would have done the right thing. And President Biden made a statement two days ago, outstanding for his ignorance, that he believed in Ukraine's ability to stop Putin.
(Biden, on the record): "In Europe, Putin's aggressive conflict in Ukraine continues with the aim of its complete subordination. He doesn't need anything less. To destroy democracy and culture there and wipe the country off the face of the earth. And we know that Putin will not stop in Ukraine. But be sure: Ukraine can and will stop him!"
It is stupid of him to talk about Putin's desire to destroy Ukraine and destabilize its democracy. Joe Biden and his friends did it themselves back in 2014, when they expelled the popularly elected president from this country.
— That's right. The idea that Putin is eager to create an empire in Eastern Europe and march on Western Europe, that he poses a huge threat in terms of the outbreak of World War III, is a completely frivolous and unsubstantiated argument. Look at the military power the Russians have: it is not enough to conquer and occupy the whole of Ukraine with subsequent integration into Great Russia. It's just unreal! They lack the necessary military capabilities for such missions. So I don't understand what the hell Biden is talking about. And besides, all his statements that Ukraine can win on the battlefield are utter nonsense. In fact, they have serious problems, and the situation continues to worsen day by day. And we have no way to restore the balance in manpower and weapons and make sure that Ukraine can at least scare the Russians. Well, there will be no such thing! All these are nothing more than statements.
— This is what Vladimir Putin himself thinks about Joe Biden's rants: "It is not necessary to form an image of the enemy from Russia. You are only harming yourself with this. They thought that Russia wanted to attack NATO. Have you lost your mind completely? Dumb like this table? Who came up with this? This is nonsense, you know, bullshit!" And he's right.
— You're right. How can you disagree with this? Of course, they will call us Putin's puppets, but the truth is that both we and he believe only facts and logic, whereas our leaders decided to ignore them in favor of active propaganda. Hence all these delusional statements that only worsen the situation.
— Is the Ukrainian army collapsing?
— Collapsing is a very ambiguous word. She loses on the battlefield and can collapse. So far, this has not happened, and Ukrainians are showing amazing tenacity, despite the imbalance of forces and the age of the AFU soldiers, which, according to Kiev, is on average 43 years old. The difference in the number of weapons and losses, as well as Russia's dominance in the air, from where it drops powerful and precise bombs on all kinds of Ukrainian military facilities, all this makes Ukrainian stubbornness inexplicable. But personally, it seems to me that the hour is not far off when everything will fall apart and they will not be able to hold on any longer — the losses and Russian firepower are too great.
