The Duran Podcast - US and Ukraine meet in Saudi Arabia

Episode Date: March 11, 2025

US and Ukraine meet in Saudi Arabia

All right, Alexander, let's talk about the diplomacy that is about to take place in Saudi Arabia between the United States and Ukraine. From what I understand, the latest reports are that there's not going to be a meeting between Russia and the United States directly after the meeting between, I believe it's Rubio, Whitkoff, and Waltz, along with, they're going to be meeting with Yermak and his team. Zelensky is not going to be there. is not being allowed to participate in this meetings. I think that's significant. That says a lot. But let's talk about the diplomacy. Once again, we're getting a lot of reports about what the U.S. is going to offer Ukraine, what Ukraine is going to tell the United States. We're getting reports about what Putin is ready to concede in a ceasefire from Bloomberg. I don't believe these reports, but we're getting them. We're getting reports from NBC News, which claims that

Trump wants not only a mineral deal, but he wants negotiations, and he wants some sort of concession from Ukraine that they're willing to cede territory to Russia. I don't have an understanding as to what exactly the territory that they want to see to Russia, what that means? Does that mean the current front line? Does that mean something more? I don't know. NBC's not telling us.

And we're getting the counteroffer from Ukraine, which is very much along the lines of what Stamer and Macron pitched to Trump, which is a no-fly zone, effectively, a no-fly zone, and then European troops in Ukraine. So anyway, that's kind of the information that's floating around the diplomacy that's going to take place in Saudi Arabia. Once again, I don't know if these reports are true. Who knows? We'll find out. We'll find out in the next couple of days, I guess. Anyway, what are your thoughts on the diplomacy that is going to take place between the United States and Ukraine? the best thing to do about all of these reports is to put them to one side, actually, because

there's so much that's floating around, which is completely contradictory and inconsistent. And to go quickly to the Bloomberg article about the Russians being prepared to concede a six-month ceasefire, this is completely contrary to what the Russians themselves are saying. And when you go to that article, and I actually, you know, analyzed it, I gave it a bit of time in one of my programs. I mean, it's quite clear that it's not coming from Russian officials, so-called informed people informed about the matter, who might not even be Russians.

I mean, there might just be diplomats floating around Moscow or journalists or people of that kind. So I think let's put all of that to one side. Let's actually look at the rea- The matter. I'm just smiling informed on. It could be anybody. could be anybody, exactly.

Or about the matter. I mean, I mean, you know, we're informed. We're informed about them. We are, we are informed about the matter. I mean, you know, you and I, we pour over all of the various statements. We're very well informed about the matter. It's like Bloomberg coming to us. Right.

They're coming to us, exactly. Yes. So anyway, and we, you know, for all we know. So let's, let's actually look at the, let's actually look at those things we really do No. Firstly, the meeting is happening in Riyadh. It's not happening in Paris or Berlin or Brussels. They're meeting in Riyadh. In other words, the decision has been made to keep this meeting away from Europe, which is already important because it means that the Ukrainians are going to be isolated. They're not going to be able to talk immediately to their friends. They're going to have limited access

to the media. The Americans undoubtedly will be relying on their friends, their Saudi friends, to keep the Ukrainians, you know, sealed off. And the second thing is Zelensky is not going to be there. Now, again, I discussed this in one of my programs. It's now being picked up in the British media. Zelensky himself is going to Saudi Arabia, but he's not going to be participating in these talks. Now, again, the obvious reason that has happened is because the Americans must have insisted on it. There is no other explanation for this. Admittedly, Trump was never going to go there. But this is a talks on existential matters relating to Ukraine. Zelensky would have been perfectly within his rights in any normal situation to be participating.

After all, he's met with Kellogg, he's met with other US officials. Why shouldn't he participate in these talks? The only explanation is that the Americans don't want him there. So the Americans are trying to separate the Ukrainians from their European friends and their friends in the United States, just saying. And they're also trying to separate Zelensky's team from Zelensky himself. They clearly very, very suspicious now of Zelensky. They saw him when he came to Washington.

They saw how unreliable and impossible he is. They're making an effort to try to talk to the Ukrainians without the Europeans floating around and without Zelensky himself being present. And they're going to try, I think, and this is the only explanation for these talks. try to move the Ukrainians towards what the Americans want, which is some kind of negotiation process with the Russians. Now, there's all sorts of talk about, you know, Ukraine offering again to sign the mineral deal as it was originally negotiated and that kind of thing. But Trump has actually gone public and on the record as saying that what he wants from the Ukrainians is

proof or at least evidence that they are seriously interested in seeking peace. Now, that might extend to an admission from the Ukrainians that they're prepared to concede territory. Though, again, to say that clearly, I mean, that's NBC. One mustn't put too much weight on that. But a genuine, honest commitment from the Ukrainians that they're prepared to engage the Russians and work with the Americans in some sort of serious negotiating process. This isn't going to be the Ukrainians coming along with proposals like the one floated by Macron, which Zelensky has seized on for ceasefires that are not really seized fires, but really attempts to create no-fly zones, things that the Russians are certain to reject.

Get past all of that. See from the Ukrainians whether they are, in fact, capable of conducting negotiations. Because what the Trump people, what the Trump administration clearly wants to do is to bring the war to an end so as to extricate the United States from a losing conflict, a conflict which is being lost and which has resulted in an enormous investment of American resources and prestige, which the United States wants to, you know, cut the losses over and wants to sort of limit the damage that has already been done to itself. And bear in mind, what alternative now do the Americans have? I mean, if the negotiations with the Russians don't proceed, what do the Americans do?

Do they go back to the Biden formula supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes? Do they really escalate the economic war against the Russians? These are things so contrary to what the United States, what the administration says, it wants, that they make no possible sense. What the Americans need to do or want to do is to get the Ukrainians, obviously without Zelensky, to commit to a negotiating track. And that's what the purpose of this meeting in Riyadh is all about. And that's why Zelensky is being kept away. And that's why it's happening in Riyadh and not in London, Paris, Brussels, Berlin, Frankfurt, Vienna, or any other place. So what if Ukraine Yerbach tells Rubio and Waltz, no, I don't agree to whatever terms you guys are putting on the table?

What if he says that? Or what if he says, yes, I agree, but a week or two later. Ukraine just scraps the whole thing and they just go back to their old ways. They tear up whatever agreement or whatever they talked about at this meeting. What happens then? They talk to the UK. They talk to Boris Johnson, flies into Kiev, or they talk to the Europeans. And they say, you know what, whatever we told you in Riyadh about agreeing to the terms

and that we're open to peace talks on those terms, just forget about that. We're going to listen to the Europeans and we're going to listen to Bojo and to Kirstaubber. I mean, it's happened before. So I mean, you know, what does the Trump White House do then? Because I've got a feeling that my sense of things is that the Trump White House, yes, they know they've lost this conflict. The collective West has lost this war. Proxy War. They even call it a proxy war.

Rubio calls it a proxy war. Kellogg has called it a proxy war. They lost this thing. But they wanted to appear as if Russia has not won this conflict. It's not a decisive military victory. And the United States helped to preserve Ukraine while Trump, the great negotiator, negotiated a peace. I mean, this is the type of narrative that they want around this conflict.

What happens if they can't get there? What is a Trump White House? do in this situation. They need a Ukraine buy, and otherwise, do they walk away? Yeah. I mean, because they can. I guess they can't say we tried and we walk away now. Can I just say quickly that I think the second possibility that you outlined, which is that the Ukrainians tell the Americans things that they think the Americans want to hear and then go back to Kiev and talk to their European friends and walk it all back, is far and away the most likely outcome. I mean, probably they won't want to say no to the Americans when they meet them.

Though even there, the Americans may find that the Ukrainians are doing the usual thing of saying one thing and then immediately shifting and trying to move it and try to push it into other directions. So they could be doing that. But more likely than not, they will appear to agree and then immediately walk it back, which is what they have consistently done ever since, The Maidan coup of 2014. I mean, that has been the consistent process. That was Minsk, remember?

Minsk agreement was exactly that. So what the Americans should do in that case, it's very simple. They should say, enough's enough. We've done all that we can. We find that these people are impossible. The United States has done all it can. It's tried to achieve peace. Ukraine is clearly not interested in peace.

They make commitments that they don't honor. They make commitments to us that they're. They don't honor. They have continued to behave in the way that Trump complained about. They're taking sweets, candy from a baby, which is what they've been doing with us. They've been taking our money. They've been taking our arms. They won't listen to what we're saying.

So in light of this, we can't continue to support them anymore. We will continue to stop. We will stop again supplying arms. We'll stop again supplying intelligence. Ukraine is on its own. European friends can help it. If the Ukrainians ever change their minds, then they can come back to us and we'll see what can be done. But for the moment, we're walking away.

And that is what I think they should do. And that is what I think they will do. Do they cut off Starlink? Because there's a lot of talk now about Starlink, like a lot of debate about Starlink all of a sudden. Trump, by the way, he did say on Air Force One that he's going to restart. the intel sharing. The reporter has asked him a question, and he said, we're restarting the intel sharing.

But there's a lot of focus around Starlink. Rightly so, I believe, because on the one hand, you have Elon Musk talking about how the war has to come to an end and that it's horrific what is happening. But at the same time, he's posting that if Starlink were to be cut off, then the entire Ukraine front line collapses. And the war effectively is over. In other words, you would have a Ukraine military capitulation and a decisive Russian victory, which is why I say they want to try to avoid the decisive Russian victory.

I think that's also something that the Trump White House wants to avoid. So that's why they're keeping Starlink operating. I mean, do they then shut Starlink down, which would, if you go by what Elon Musk has posted, which would lead to a complete collapse of the front line? and which would lead to a quicker end to the conflict. I mean, it would be a military end. No. But I mean, I don't know, man, I'll ask you that.

Would that lead to a quicker end to the conflict if Starlink is shut off? Oh, indisputably. I mean, it would not perhaps lead to an immediate collapse. I mean, you know, the Ukrainians can probably develop workarounds to some extent. But they've relied Starlink massively for their commitment. communications without Starlink, it'll be much, much more difficult for them to coordinate, much more difficult for them to conduct drone attacks, for example. Starlink has been essential to them.

So, as I said, he wouldn't lead to an immediate collapse, but it would be a massive, massive blow. Now, the Americans for the moment, Musk himself, are saying that they're not planning to cut off Starlink. But of course, the longer this goes on, if the Ukrainians dig in their heels, if they refuse to negotiate, if they refuse to bargain with the Americans, then the Americans may say at the moment that they're not going to cut off Starlink. But the point may eventually come when they say, well, look, by providing you with Starlink, all we are doing is we're prolonging the war, which is causing more people. to die, better just to switch it off. I wouldn't exclude that possibility, but I don't think it's going to happen over the next couple of days or weeks. We're probably months at least away from that point. By the way, my own understanding of what Trump said on Air Force One was not that they were

resuming intelligence sharing, but that they were, you know, that they were almost there towards resuming intelligence. So it's Trump's old game. of, you know, say one thing, one moment, say something completely different than next, keeping the Ukrainians off balance. He does this constantly. It doesn't always work to his advantage, but it is what he does, and we just have to accept it. Quite plausibly, as a result of this meeting in Riyadh, intelligence sharing will presume. But as I said before, The Americans can't just turn it on and turn it off whenever they choose. Eventually, if the Ukrainians dig in and do what we said and, you know, make a commitment

and then immediately walk it back or soon after walk it back, then the Americans do need to make a final decision, whether they're prepared to go on intelligence sharing and perhaps make a decision to switch it off. basically indefinitely. And if they do that, then the logic of keeping Starlink working starts to become problematic because if you're not prepared to provide Ukraine with intelligence, because you say that this is simply prolonging a war and is leading to more and more people dying, how do you justify keeping Starlink operating in that case, which is prolonging the war. Doesn't make any sense. It doesn't really make sense.

So I think we will eventually come to that point. But let's just repeat again, the underlying position. Trump clearly wants an end to the war. It makes sense that Trump wants to end the war. This is not ego. It's not Trump wanting to be given the Nobel Peace Prize. which is the nonsense that people are spreading, it's an objective, tough-minded assessment

of American national interests. There is no virtue for the United States to continue to expend its money, its weapons, and in its prestige, in a war that is being lost. It makes no sense at all. It is a distraction. It is keeping the Trump administration, from focusing on other things. And of course, the major geopolitical beneficiary is China. So the Americans

are making a completely rational decision to try to finish the war. Now, there are lots of obstacles in the way. There's Zelensky. There's the Ukrainians. There's the fact that the Russians have their own demands, which don't correspond fully with what the Americans want. But sooner or later, if the Americans stick to the line that they want to end the war, and I don't see politically how they can reverse it, then they're going to have to come to terms, or at least they're going to have to ensure that the Ukrainians come to terms. And that means basically, as White Goff has already said, Russian terms, he said that, you know, Istanbul needs to be the starting point of the negotiating process. Or alternatively,

if the Ukrainians are not prepared to come to terms, if the Europeans are going to support the Ukrainians in refusing to come to terms, then the United States needs to just make the decision that he's got to walk away. Well, the Europeans so far have signaled that they will support Ukraine, but they can't. Everyone knows that they can't. Absolutely, everybody knows that they can't. I mean, Trump made the point. I mean, you know, they talk all the time.

They talk a big game about sending European peacekeepers and all of that to Ukraine. But, you know, the moment they do that, they start asking for an American backstop, which is an ambition that they're going to have the power to do it. So, you know, let them talk, let them range, let them come up with unachievable, utopian fantastic plans to rearm five years or four years or 20 years or 10 years. which will, as we've already discussed, financialize the German economy, which will work, by the way, in American interests, just saying, let the Europeans do all of these things. But as I said, don't get sucked in back, don't get sucked back in to the failed Biden policy of supporting a lost war in Ukraine. That makes absolutely no sense at all.

I just wonder if the United States can truly walk away from this, or if they walk away, will it be kind of one foot in, one foot out? In other words, we're not going to talk about Project Ukraine anymore. We're done with it. Let's just say Yermak doesn't agree, or in two weeks' time, Ukraine tells the U.S., forget about what we said in Riyadh. We're going to stick with the EU approach to escalation. Can the U.S. take an approach where they keep Starlink on, where they have some money and

some weapons flowing to Ukraine? I mean, the U.S. government is huge, it's massive, right? So, I mean, they could figure out ways the Pentagon could figure out ways of the CIA to get some stuff to Ukraine. I mean, will they be able to completely walk away or will they find some sort of method to just kind of keep the war going, simmering, keep the war simmering, keep the Europeans involved. And on our side, we're just going to not talk about this anymore. Well, I mean, I think the temptation to try the second is going to be very, very strong.

But I think it is a losing proposition, actually, because first of all, soon or later, there is going to be a Russian victory. and I think that keeping, trying to keep the war going, keeping one foot in and one foot out and all that kind of thing, doesn't resolve America's underlying problem, which is that it has invested prestige, money and resources towards a war that is being lost. You're still, in that case, investing money, prestige and resources in a war that is being lost. And when, you're still, in that case, investing money, prestige and resources in a war that is being lost. And when, If the war is lost, the damage that is done to you continues to be very great. Simply say to everybody, look, we tried to end the war. The war is a disaster. It's destroying Ukraine. It's resulted in all of these people dying.

The Ukrainians are not prepared to accept that and work with the Americans to achieve a realizable end to the war. much cleaner and simpler and I think easier to defend and explain is a clean cutoff telling the Ukrainians and the Europeans, look, from this moment on, it's up to you. It's all as if the Europeans are showing, as you pointed out, by the way, in several programs, including on your channel. It's not as if the Europeans are saying they don't want to take it. on this thing. On the contrary, they are in euphoria about it. They're ecstatically thrilled at the idea that they're going to take it on all by themselves. In reality, of course, we all know that's a bluff. In reality, of course, we know that it can't be done. Everybody knows it. But at least, you know, publicly, we have Macron, we have mounts, we have Stama. They're all coming forward as, you know,

the stalwart defenders of Ukraine. So let it hand it over to them. Say, you know, you're a rich continent. You've got big economies. You've got lots of GDP. We've done what we can. It's time for you to take over. It's your continent.

We're an ocean away, as Trump correctly says. We've done what we can. We no longer have any conviction in this enterprise. But if you do, you're welcome to it. You say you want to take it over. take it over and then see what you can do without the United States. Yeah. If you're going to walk away, then make it a clean break.

If, all right. All right. We will end it there. The durand.com. We are on Rumble, odyssey, bitchie, telegram, rockfin, and X. Go to the Duran shop, pick up some merch like what we are wearing. In this video update, the link is in the description box down below. Take care.