The Current - What Trump’s approach to Ukraine says about the shifting global order

Episode Date: March 20, 2025

U.S. President Donald Trump has been trying to use telephone diplomacy to end the war in Ukraine — but historian Margaret MacMillan says Russia hasn’t made any concessions so far. She talks with Matt Galloway about what Trump’s approach to the war might tell us about the shifting world order, and where Canada fits into it.

What do you see when you look around? Lively cities, growing neighborhoods, things that connect us. For those into skilled trades, it's a world they helped create. Discover more than 300 careers, paid apprenticeships, and the unmatched feeling of saying, I made that. Learn more at Canada.ca slash skilled trades. A message from the government of Canada. This is a CBC podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway, and this is the current podcast. This is the person who attacked my country. Like, of course, there's no trust. Trump nowadays and Putin especially don't make me want to trust him. And it's the fourth

year this thing is going and I'm devastated. I'm really tired of this. That's the sound of weariness on the streets of Kiev. U.S. President Donald Trump has been trying to use telephone diplomacy to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. Yesterday, he rang up Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. On Tuesday, he had a two-hour phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. And despite agreeing to pause on attacking energy infrastructure, Russia unleashed dozens of attacks on Ukraine after that conversation.

Ukraine also launched drone attacks along the Russian border and fighting has continued overnight. In just a moment, we'll hear from the Canadian historian Margaret McMillan, but first, we're joined by Jane Litvinenko. She's a freelance reporter who contributes to the Wall Street Journal, and she is in Kyiv. Jane, hello. Hi. What have the last 24 hours been like in Kyiv? So over the last 24 hours, air raid alerts have been going in Kiev. There have been Russian drone attacks, Russian drones in the air, and at the same time Zelensky

has been making an effort to speak with Ukrainians and with the press about the diplomatic situation and about the status of the negotiations with the US and with the press about the diplomatic situation and about the status of the negotiations with the US and with Russia. How are Ukrainians reacting to this? I talked about telephone diplomacy. There was this call between Zelensky and Donald Trump. What are people thinking around that? There's a lot of weariness in Kiev and in Ukraine at large.

Of course, the war has taken a big toll on the country. This is three years of children going to school in bomb shelters and civilian targets being bombed. Just yesterday, there was a prisoner exchange that just shows the very human toll that this war is taking. But at the same time, there's no desire from Ukrainians to accept peace at any cost.

Ukrainians overwhelmingly believe that they need to have some sort of guarantee of protection of security in case Russia attacks again, if there is a ceasefire. And so there's a lot of caution when it comes to the negotiations and the situation. How do people read the situation right now? Again, there's this kind of agreement to an agreement to try to get to a ceasefire, but fighting continues. What do people think is actually happening right now, given these phone calls between the various leaders?

Well, the way Zelensky is presenting it is that a ceasefire is a quite complex negotiation. And all of these steps are just the first step. He's said publicly that Ukraine is ready for a full ceasefire, not just in the air, but also in the sea and on the land. But that will take some time to implement. But I will say that looking at polls, the trust in Zelensky from Ukrainians is quite high. So it seems like there's a sort of just a wait and see feeling across Ukraine at the moment.

How likely are Ukrainians to trust a deal with or the word of Vladimir Putin? Because Trump and Putin spoke this week as well for a couple of hours apparently on the phone and Donald Trump said they were making progress on a ceasefire. And then right after, Russia struck civilian and energy infrastructure. So what weight will Ukrainians give to the word such as it is of Vladimir Putin? You know, Ukrainians have a very better experience with Russia. Of course, the war began in 2014, the full-scale invasion three years ago. And even after 2014, there have been many attempts at ceasefires that have been broken. And I think that that's the exact reason why Zelensky has been including

European leaders in the development of Ukrainian defense industries and potential ceasefire talks. That's why the US is involved as well. Ukrainians don't trust Russia. They have very good reasons to not trust Russia, but they do put faith in their European and North American and global partners that if a ceasefire is reached, perhaps a technical approach to enforcing it could keep the peace. I don't know if desperate is the right word, but how eager are Ukrainians for an end to this fighting? You talked about the weariness.

We heard it from that individual at the very top of our conversation saying that he's tired of this. You know, when you go to frontline towns, the people there who face bombings daily and curative fire in the background, just as they go about their daily routines, they place a lot of hope in the idea that maybe the war will be over soon. But no matter who you speak with in Ukraine, the majority opinion is that the peace should not come at any cost. There is a question of justice.

There have been many war crimes that Russia has been accused of. There have been many Ukrainian cities destroyed, Ukrainian children kidnapped, Ukrainian civilians and soldiers taken prisoner in Russia. And so none of those questions can go unanswered before a cease fire or before a true peace is reached. What about territory? Marco Rubio, the secretary of state for the United States, said that Ukrainians will have to make decisions on, in his words, difficult things. And part of that he believes is giving up perhaps some, maybe all of the

territory that has been seized by Russia. When Ukrainians in the face of that weariness, three years into this war, wanting things to settle down, would they be willing to consider that? You know, during a press call with reporters yesterday, Zelensky said that the question of territories will no doubt be the most complicated question. Ukraine still has a small toehold

in the Russian territory of Kursk, although that has been shrinking in the recent weeks. Kiev had been hoping to trade that for some territory that Moscow is occupying, but that by all accounts will be one of the most complicated conversations. And if a concession is made, it'll be one of the most difficult concessions. Although Zelensky and Ukrainians at large are very clear that there will never be a recognition that the territory that Russia occupies is Russian territory. It will always be Ukrainian territory in the eyes of Ukrainians. If he makes that compromise, you've said that he has, Zelensky has a lot

of support still from Ukrainians, but if he makes that compromise, will that support diminish, do you think? Oh, it's an open question. You know, the popularity of Zelensky ebbs and flows with the situation on the front line and with the political situation. I think many Ukrainians are pragmatic, but they're also unwilling to see Russia rewarded for beginning this invasion. So how this will develop in the future, I think it's a million dollar question. I think that's what we have to wait and see and find out where the negotiations land. But in the meantime, people are, is your sense that people are optimistic that, as we say, this might be the beginning of the end? It's possible. I would not say that there's optimism in the air here in Kiev or across

the country, but there is a sort of hope for quiet. Ukrainians have been through a lot over the last three years. Many have lost their families, their lives, their homes. And so I do think that there is a desire to see some sort of winding down of the conflict, but again, not at any cost. Jane, it's good to speak with you as always. Thank you very much. Thank you so much for having me. Jane Litvinenko is a freelance reporter who contributes to the Wall Street Journal. She was in Keefe. paid apprenticeships, and the unmatched feeling of saying, I made that. Learn more at Canada.ca slash skilled trades.

A message from the government of Canada. In Scarborough, there's this fire behind our eyes. A passion in our bellies. It's in the hearts of our neighbors. The eyes of our nurses. And the hands of our doctors. It's what makes Scarborough Scarborough. In our hospitals, we do more than anyone thought possible.

We've less than anyone could imagine. But it's time to imagine what we can do with more. Join Scarborough Health Network and together, we can turn grit into greatness. Donate at lovescarborough.ca Margaret McMillan is an emeritus professor of history at the University of Toronto, emeritus professor of international history

at the University of Oxford. Her books include Paris 1919, about peace negotiations after the First World War, and Nixon in China, about Richard Nixon's famous meeting with Mao Zedong in the 1970s. Margaret, good morning to you. Good morning. What strikes you about the way that US President Donald Trump is approaching ending this war in

Ukraine? I don't know what he thinks he'll get out of it. He wants to end the war, but he doesn't seem to be negotiating in a way that will force Russia to make any compromises. I mean, he's, as far as I can see, conceded a lot of Russia's initial demands. And I thought the symbolism of the phone call between Putin and President Trump was very telling. Putin kept Trump waiting for 40 minutes for the call, which I think shows something about the position Putin feels that he's in.

I was gonna say, who do you think has the upper hand between Trump and Putin? But you've in. I was going to say, who do you think has the upper hand between Trump and Putin? But you've kind of answered that in some ways that Putin is playing a little bit with Donald Trump. I think he's playing more than a little bit. And he's so far made no concessions whatsoever. He's continuing to insist that territory,

which Russia doesn't even occupy, should be part of the deal. He's insisting or trying to insist that Ukraine not be rearmed during any period of truce. He's of course insisted on no NATO membership for NATO. He's trying to insist on no NATO troops in Ukraine for safekeeping, for safety, for peacekeeping. And so I don't see any signs that Putin is actually willing to make the sort of compromises you need if you're going to get some sort of successful deal. The suggestion is, and the deal is interesting

because Donald Trump likes to say that he is, you know, the master of the art of the deal and he likes to believe that he can be a peacemaker in this situation, perhaps others as well. And you could look at that approach to Ukraine, maybe in a broader pattern of pulling away from allies, that the terror threats against people like us in Canada, against the European

Union, the threats to take over this country, to take over Greenland, to retake the Panama Canal. Do you see any historical precedent for something like this, the way that he is acting and operating? No, I don't. I mean, there are historical precedents for parts of what he's done. And we know that there's been a tendency

in certain parts of the United States history to bully its neighbors. The great hero of President Trump seems to be either President Polk or President McKinley, and both of whom had ambitions to take territory beyond America's borders and in some cases did. But I don't see that there's any coherent plan to what he's doing.

And what I have never seen, and I've talked to other historians about it, is a power systematically alienating all its allies and when it doesn't need to. And the allies have done nothing, as far as I can see, to upset the United States. They've been good allies. Canada certainly has been a good ally.

And this I find extraordinary. Why would a great power in a very uncertain world where it has potential enemies such as China and possibly Russia, why would it want to alienate those allies that it's worked with for decades? I've never seen that before in history. As a Canadian, how do you understand his threats to take this country over to swallow us up and make Canada the 51st state? Initially, people saw this as a joke, and that seemed to disappear fairly quickly as well. I don't think it's a joke anymore. I'm certainly not feeling it's a joke.

What I'm feeling is a sense of disbelief, I think, like a lot of us, that how could this be happening? You know, why take us over? I mean, if the Americans want our minerals, if they want our natural resources, if they want our food products, if they want our food products, if they want a part in car manufacturing, that can be negotiated.

I mean, that can all be negotiated. We're not keeping anything from the United States. And I'm afraid that Trump may mean it. I mean, not that he may be able to carry it out, but I don't think he's going to stop saying it. And I think this is going to go on being a very unsettling period in Canada, US relations. Where does that leave us?

Where does that leave Canada? If, if the United States perhaps can't be trusted anymore. We've got a real set of choices to make, haven't we? I mean, we face an existential threat to our existence from the United States. We have lost what has been a dependable ally to whom we've owed our security. We've always been part,

ever since we've become a nation and even before, we've always been part of a larger grouping. We were part of the British Empire and that gave us a sort of protection. Of course, we contributed enormously to it. And then we were part of what you could call the American Empire, but we were part of an alliance led system

led by the United States. And we've never had to negotiate the world on our own. And I think we're hoping that we won't have to do it. I mean, we're now talking about trying to make common ground with the European Union, possibly a coalition of like-minded democracies, including Australia, Japan, other countries around the world, but it's a very new situation for us.

We've always been multilateralist. We've always been part of larger groupings. But it's a very new situation for us. We've always been multilateralist. We've always been part of larger groupings, and it's been an important part of how we've survived in the world. Why this is so unsettling to so many people is, I said at the beginning of the program, that the world feels really different right now. There are these institutions that the United States

helped establish after the Second World War. And Donald Trump seems to be hell-bent on, if not pulling out of them, kind of destabilizing them. He's pulled out of the second world war. And Donald Trump seems to be hell bent on, if not pulling out of them, kind of destabilize them. He's pulled out of the World Health Organization. He's dismantled USAID. He suggests that the United States might not defend NATO allies. How do you see the world different now?

I mean, is that the end of the, you know, the Pax Americana that so many of us grew up with? It certainly is the end for the time being. And I'm not sure the United States, even under a different president with different attitudes that, you know, the Pax Americana that so many of us grew up with. It certainly is the end of the time being. And I'm not sure the United States, even under a different president with, with different attitudes towards the rest of the world, we'll be able to rebuild what it's lost in this period. What do you mean by that?

Because a lot of people pin this on one man, but you're saying that that goes beyond that. Well, he's, he's reflecting, I think, a persistent strain in, in American foreign policy and that is isolationism, but the way in which he's doing it is disrupting an International order which has actually served the United States very well And the Pax Americana was good for the US as well as for the rest of the world And what it concerns me now is that the world is more integrated than ever in many ways We all face the common threat of climate change and we all face the common threat of

Pandemics again spreading around the world and the world is becoming more fragmented I mean Trump's view seems to be that if you're a big power you swagger around in your own neighborhood I mean he seems but who knows it's very difficult to pick out a consistent thread and when what a lot of what he says But he seems to think that the United States can be dominant in the Western Hemisphere Russia can be dominant in Eurasia. Europe he doesn't seem to think much of. And China will be dominant in the Pacific. But that means a very unstable world. Great power blocks have always been unstable and there have always been the borders between those blocks where they clash, where there are irritants. And I think we face also the prospect of an arms race. We already have far more weapons than we need to destroy the whole world.

And dealing with very dangerous things here. What is the fallout of that? I mean, people have talked about the decline in soft power. USAID provided aid, but it also was an instrument of soft power from the United States. And when you remove that, the suggestion is that China is there waiting to step into the breach, perhaps Russia as well.

What do you see as the, I mean, I'm not asking you to predict, but looking at history, what is the fallout that this might create? Soft power matters. I mean, power matters, but power is made up of many different things. It's not just the weapons and the hardware. It's not just your economic power. It's also how much you can persuade others to do what you want and how much others think that you might be the sort of country

that they would like to ally with. And the United States had that soft power and American culture was enormously powerful around the world. And I think the USAID cancellation has led to misery across large parts of the world. And I think the cancellation of the voice of America, radio Liberty, this is all destroying America's capacity

to attract people to want to be like the United States. And I don't know why. It seems to me an unnecessary thing to do. USAID was a fraction of the annual U.S. budget, but for some reason it was seen as sort of weak need and soft and sentimental. But power involves a great many different things. And as I say, it's not just the hardware,

it's much more than that. Is there anybody that could step into that breach? I mean, if there was an American led rules based international order that may have had its faults clearly, but is there anybody that can step into that breach? We're talking about this when it comes to, you know, Ukraine and safeguarding Ukraine, but it goes well beyond that.

Well, I don't see Russia stepping into that breach, partly because it's not a strong power. I mean, it's been very badly damaged by this war. We all know that the Russians have taken tremendous losses and they have not done well. I mean, this was a campaign they thought would be over in a week, and here we are into the third year. The Russian economy is in a mess, Russian demography, the birth rate is going down. This is something Putin is now worrying about. And China's on their borders and China is much more powerful. So I don't see Russia's becoming a major world power. China's the obvious one. And the Chinese already, excuse me, trying to make up some of the, the, the, the, the, some to take advantage of some of the openings that the Americans have left. I mean, they're very active in Latin America, for example. They're increasingly active in Central Asia.

They're active in Europe. The only possibility I think is the Europeans themselves and whether or not they can pull together in defense of European existence and European values is a very big question going into the future. Can I just ask you finally, I mean, your life's work has been about studying these periods

when the international order was upended in war and peace negotiations. There's that cliche of, you know, may we live in interesting times. These times perhaps are a bit too interesting for us. What is it like for you to see this unfold? I share that feeling. I mean, I wake up and I think, you know, I have studied.

I mean, I've studied the outbreak of the first world war. I'm now looking at the second world war, but I never thought I'd be living through it. And it's very unsettling. It makes me perhaps sympathize more with people who did live through it. I mean, we've lived such a protected and sheltered life in Canada.

We've never had to face this before. We haven't had to face an existential threat like this. And I find that like all of us, very preoccupied with it, I get up in the morning and think what's happened now. And so for those, maybe part of this is people will say this too shall pass. I mean, what is it, what is the thing that you hang onto when you wake up and you don't know

what has unfolded overnight and where that's going to leave us? I hang onto the fact that human beings are immensely resilient. And I've looked at previous wars and you look at how people survive, how the British survived, for example, when they, certainly in the other stages of the war, when they were on their own, but throughout the whole war,

how countries come back, how they rebuild themselves, how people can work together, how people adjust. I mean, I was in Ukraine last October and how people had adjusted to the fact that they needed bomb shelters and there were alarms going off quite often every night. And so I have faith in human beings and faith in our capacity. We have to remember we can also be nice to each other as well as what we're seeing at the moment.

I always appreciate the opportunity to talk to you, Margaret. Thank you very much for this. Thank you. Margaret McMillan is the author of Paris 1919, Nixon in China and many other excellent books. She is Emeritus Professor of History at the University of Toronto and Emeritus Professor of International History at the University of Oxford. For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.