Where peace talks stand in Ukraine, 3 years into war

President Trump is promising to end the now three-year long war in Ukraine. But with Ukraine and Europe sidelined in current negotiations – how far off really is peace?

Illia Ponomarenko, Ukrainian journalist and author. Former war reporter with Kyiv Post and The Kyiv Independent. Author of "I Will Show You How It Was: The Story of Wartime Kyiv."

Nicholas Lokker, research associate for the Transatlantic Security Program at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS).

Ionela Ciolan, researcher at the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies, focusing on European Foreign Policy, Security and Defense.

Julia Tymoshenko, a Ukrainian living in Kyiv.

Part I

DEBORAH BECKER: This is On Point. I’m Deborah Becker in for Meghna Chakrabarti.

Today marks the third year of the Russian war on Ukraine. For Julia Tymoshenko - that means three years of living in a war zone in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv where it’s not uncommon to hear broadcast warnings of air raids.

(AIR RAID ANNOUNCEMENT) Yeah, we got the air raid, right now. Because I'm, like, sitting in the, at the mall. Yeah. Yeah, like, they're kicking people out. But I still think that I can answer questions. One second. (AIR RAID ANNOUCEMENT)

BECKER: That was four days ago – at about 9pm in Kyiv. Julia was at the mall when the warnings went out over the public address system. She did not panic. Or duck and cover. Or run for shelter. Instead - she pulled out her phone.

JULIA: I can go on this like specific news channel, and I can read right now what kind of attack or like what kind of danger we have. So it's drones. The drones coming from different sites on different cities currently. So if it's drones, we don't really take it super seriously because it's, I mean, there's still danger, but it's not like a ballistic missile. It's like super fast. At this point, we know that they might, they will probably shut all the drones down, but they obviously need to send warnings out to the people.

BECKER: So Julia just carried on.

JULIA: I sometimes try to remember and reminisce life before February 2022 for me. And honestly, it's really even hard for me to remember that.

BECKER: Julia is 25 years old.  Living like this isn’t easy she says, but she – and all Ukrainians have had to adapt.

JULIA: A lot of these things that I'm now so used to, and now, like, sort of, like, are part of my life routine, hearing air raid sirens, and just going to sleep with the sounds of the kamikaze drones being shut down over Kyiv, or occasionally waking up from ballistic missiles, like, all of this is just, you know, normal thing.

BECKER: Julia has left Ukraine a few times in the past three years but says she wants to stay. It’s her home.

JULIA: I feel like Ukraine is a place where I want to be. And Kyiv is the city where I want to be despite everything, because I feel like it's the history of my country happening, and I wouldn't want to miss it. And I want to also be the part of the community that essentially contributes to just overall resilience and resistance of my country.

BECKER: But Julia acknowledges that living with war for three years has taken a toll on everyone.

JULIA: We feel very exhausted and you see that exhaustion and you see how people are more anxious, how people just like less patient, and you need to learn how to deal with that kind of community around you because, you know, you never know, like, even if you would meet somebody, a stranger, let's say in a cafe.

And they're being rude to you, like you never know, and you should never assume that they're just like rude because you never know what they are dealing with. They might have lost their home, they might have lost their loved one, they might have lost, you know, something else that they love deeply, because of, or they might have seen death firsthand, or they might have had to kill firsthand as well.

BECKER: Last week Russia and the U.S. met in Saudi Arabia to discuss a possible peace deal, but Ukraine was not there for the talks.

While Julia says Ukrainians can be impatient for the war to end, any peace talks must include them.

JULIA: So, it's like really, really painful to see that kind of language being used, weaponized against us. And it's kind of like when people are saying like, Oh, well, we need peace. And then they don't sit, don't give Ukraine an ability to formulate what peace means for us. As if Ukrainians are not the first people in this world who want that peace. Like, there is nobody else wanting peace more than Ukrainians. But people who are weaponizing that word right now like they don't actually care about peace, because if they cared, they would have asked us what peace means for us.

BECKER: That was Julia Tymoshenko, a 25-year-old Ukrainian living in Kyiv.
I now want to introduce to the conversation Illia Ponomarenko. He’s a Ukrainian journalist and author. He’s a former war reporter with Kyiv Post and The Kyiv Independent. And author of: “I Will Show You How It Was: The Story of Wartime Kyiv."

He joins us from Bucha, Ukraine. Welcome to On Point.

ILLIA PONOMARENKO: Hello. Thanks for having me.

BECKER: The New York Times has actually written about Bucha, describing the city as a symbol of Russian brutality.

After the war began, I guess it was liberated. The city was liberated about two months after Russia took it over in February of 2022. Can you describe for us what happened there?

Bucha is one of the most comfortable and coziest suburbs of Kyiv. It's a pretty small town, not too large. It's a town that could look like a resort in the mountains, in the woods. It's very clean, very fresh in the air. It's one of the places where development, construction, housing is super popular.

So many people want to move from Kyiv, from noisy city, to this quiet and nice and very comfortable suburb, and I did this too. I purchased my first, very first apartment here in Bucha just about a year before the full-scale invasion. Because it's a special place in terms of life, it's peaceful.

It's nice. It's comfortable and when we, with the military, with the police, were coming here, getting back after Russian withdrawal. We saw something that is the illustration of the word brutality, and the barbarism of the beautiful thing. It feels like right now, three years after, we have a beautiful wintertime, sun, it's sunny weather, it's nice.

But back then in early April, late March, after five years of Russian occupation, you could even feel it in the air that something really wild and evil happened in there. The smell, the grayness of the very atmosphere, the mess, the bodies, mutilations. It wasn't that ruined as many other cities, but you could feel it, that something really evil happened in there. And then we started discovering, with the police, with other forces, we started discovering mass graves, many bodies scattered here and there, including in the streets, many bodies who were like days and weeks dead, and they were not removed from there.

In many ways, Bucha is, it's not the only place that was the scene of mass killing, hostilities and the era of Russian invasion. It was the symbol, and it remains the symbol of life and everything that's good about, what happiness of peaceful life, being brutalized by a very irrational evil that wasn't even sure what it was doing.

By brutalizing this place and this, and there was definitely a touch of evil in this.

BECKER: So basically, you went from a resort community to a community of mass graves that is now, in your opinion, a symbol of Russia's brutality.

PONOMARENKO: Yes, and moreover we can continue talking about Bucha and I realized that it took very little time for Bucha to recover from this touch of evil that I'm trying to describe.

The liberation of Kyiv Oblast, of Kyiv area, is a result of the Battle of Kyiv. It happens in the coming of weather spring. With the withdrawal of Russians, springtime came, actual springtime. The sun, the green vegetation, within days, thousands and thousands of people were getting back from other areas, having fled their homes.

They were getting back ... there were immense traffic jams at military checkpoints. And life replaced death, and this touch of evil that I'm trying to describe so fast that I was really stunned by this, moms get back to the green streets with their babies and strollers. It's green grass.

It's sun. It's the life, so to me, I'm really happy that I live here. I moved here into the city following the liberation of Bucha. And I'm really happy that, it was my destiny to be the resident of the city, because every time I drive through the streets, every time I see the church of Bucha, the church next week we discovered a mass grave full of bodies.

It reminds me of the triumph of life. It tells me that no matter what happens, life and light prevails. Same could be said about a local thing ... it's the, literally, railway station street. You could remember it from pictures that went viral on the internet.

They show birds. Eagles that took the entire street, as long as the eye can see. ... I'm sure you could see those pictures on the internet. And less than, I would say, six, eight months after the liberation, the street was completely renovated. I think it was, the renovation was sponsored by Warren Buffet's son.

And it turned this hell site with burnt Russian armored vehicles, with legs and heads severed with all the ashes and dust. ... To me, Bucha is the international symbol of bloodbath and carnage for nothing and pure evil.

But also, it's the symbol of revival. And I can see it in the streets every single day.

Part II

BECKER: We're talking about the three-year anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which is today. Negotiations continue over how to end the war. President Trump recently held talks in Saudi Arabia with Russian President Vladimir Putin, talks that did not include Ukraine or European leaders.

And Trump said he would succeed in negotiating a deal to end the war.

DONALD TRUMP: Biden never tried. Europe has failed to bring peace and Zelensky probably wants to. Maybe he wants to keep the gravy train going. I don't know what's the problem, but he hasn't been able. He's very upset that he wasn't invited. He could have come if he wanted to, but that he wasn't invited to Saudi Arabia.

But he's been working for three years, has never been even meetings or phone calls to stop this war. It's a horrible thing. I love Ukraine, but Zelensky has done a terrible job. His country is shattered. And millions of people have unnecessarily died. And you can't bring a war to an end if you don't talk to both sides.

You gotta talk. They haven't been talking for three years.

BECKER: And then Zelensky was asked to respond to the criticism he's received from President Trump. And this is what he told reporters.

ZELENSKY: It is unfortunate that President Trump, and with great respect for him as the leader of the American people who constantly support us, unfortunately lives in this disinformation space.

BECKER: French President Macron is expected to meet with President Trump and present Ukrainian peace proposals and also work on potential threats from Russia on Europe. Several European leaders and Canada's Prime minister are in Kyiv today to show support for Ukraine. So there's a lot going on here, a lot to talk about. We're joined by Illia Ponomarenko, a Ukrainian journalist and author.

And we were talking with you before the break, Illia, about what's happening in Bucha, where you live what you've called a symbol of Russian brutality, but also a symbol of revival since the war began. I'm wondering what your reaction is to this back and forth, the negotiations that are going on in Saudi Arabia and the back and forth between the U.S. and European leaders and Ukraine and Putin.

PONOMARENKO: I must say that of course, in Ukraine, there is a super emotional and painful reaction to what was happening. In many ways it happens because Ukraine has got used to all this emotional seesaw.

... When emotional background is, it's pretty bad, especially in the time of our media, intensive media backgrounds, and Ukrainians are balanced between two poles all the time. But when it comes to this period of time that we are having, it's the reaction in Ukraine is super emotional, down to the words, betrayal circulating in all social media and also public conversation.

It's because the coming of Trump administration was seen by many as the sign of hope, as something that may bring difference from the pace of the previous administration under Joseph Biden. A lot of people were dissatisfied with the way the Biden administration handled this conflict.

Many people expected Ukraine to simply bleed out, but all that's endless escalation management and things like that. And we ended up having our hopes broken. This chance doesn't seem to play out.

BECKER: What did, sorry to interrupt, but what did they think President Trump was going to do differently?

That was going to make a difference here, that Biden wasn't doing. What were they expecting from Trump?

PONOMARENKO: Many hopes that all this ... rhetorics that we had during the U.S. presidential campaign. All those outrageous statements regarding Russia, regarding, peace, and good relations with Putin.

Many were considering this as the fiery rhetoric for the sake of the campaigning, for the sake of the election struggle, and many hoped that Trump being a reasonable man, running for the office of the president of the United States, when, if he takes office, will be far more rational, far less emotional, far less rhetoric driven in his actual policies in the office.

So many people expected bad relations, bad deals between Putin and Trump. Essentially, many believe that they may end up not getting along with an attempt to reach something that is unreachable, which is the quick and easy peace in a very complicated war in which both sides are not ready to give up and die.

And many had hopes that because of this possible quarrel between Putin, and conflict between his, they have won some both sides. Putin may might simply switch to much more resolute and cohesive politics towards Ukraine, to go towards assisting Ukraine towards bringing it all to action and providing, finally, Ukraine for a firm solution of this conflict, which is the military defeat and Ukraine having a strong arm in the upcoming negotiations. Because it could be rationally seen as something that gives Donald trump something that he desires most, victory over Putin.

So we're seeing that, it doesn't play out.

BECKER: And do you think that folks are dissatisfied with President Zelensky?

PONOMARENKO: It's if we talk about the current situation as of now, and I'm seeing it again, that's public. Background and emotional background in Ukraine is very changing.

It's very volatile in this regard. ... Ukrainians really appreciate leaders who actively demonstrate the willingness not to sell this country out, because we are so fed up with many other politicians who were far weaker in this regard or who had a double agenda.

While pronouncing patriotic slogans. We in Ukraine have a weird situation in which the national president Volodymyr Zelensky, wartime leader, he is bitterly, severely criticized in his domestic politics. But when we see what he does especially when it comes to critical situations outside Ukraine, in international politics, many people say things like, I don't have this guy for domestic politics as well.

BECKER: All right, Illia Ponomarenko who is a Ukrainian journalist and author, former war reporter with Kyiv Post and the Kyiv Independent, thanks so much for being with us.

PONOMARENKO: Thank you.

BECKER: We're joined now by Nicholas Lokker, who's a research associate for the Transatlantic Security Program at the Center for a New American Security.

Also with us is Ionela Ciolan, a researcher at the Wilfried Martens Center for European Studies focusing on European foreign policy, security and defense. And Nicholas Lokker, I just wanna start with you and go back to something that Illia first told or just told us about Ukrainians feeling that President Zelensky is a strong leader, at least when it comes to some of the negotiating that's going on right now in terms of the war, the Russian War.

I'm wondering do you think that Zelensky is an obstacle here, or it's a benefit to have Zelensky leading some of these efforts to try to end the war in Ukraine?

NICHOLAS LOKKER: Hi, Deborah, and thanks for having me on the show. It's good to be here. When we're looking at the current situation regarding negotiations, I think that President Zelensky is taking the right approach from the Ukrainian perspective, in terms of really advocating for Ukraine to have a seat at the table in these negotiations.

And protesting against the fact, for instance, that the U.S., a U.S.-Russia meeting last week in Saudi Arabia did not include any Ukrainian representatives or the Europeans, for that matter. And saying that Ukraine will not accept any peace deal that is negotiated without their input.

So I think that this is necessary from the Ukrainian perspective. This is correct, that there should be nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine, as has been said for the past three years, before the Trump administration took office. I think the question really is what leverage Zelensky has at this point in time, I think it's been interesting also to look at the ongoing discussions between the United States and Ukraine over this proposed deal for Ukraine's rare earth resources that the Trump administration has  has offered Ukraine.

And so far, Ukraine has rejected this deal. But it looks like maybe those negotiations are moving forward. So we'll see what happens there. But I think at the end of the day, for any peace to be both just and sustainable, Ukraine absolutely needs to have a seat at the table.

BECKER: And you're talking about the mineral proposal, where the White House has said that Ukraine would give up some of its mineral wealth and other resources to cover the amount of money that the U.S. has given the Ukraine so far in aid this year. So this is something that's been on the table and President Zelensky, Ukrainian President Zelensky, has reacted to that proposal.

Last week, this is what he said. I want to play a clip of tape here. Let's listen.

ZELENSKY: I am defending Ukraine. I cannot sell our country, that is all. I say, OK, let's have something positive. You will write down some guarantees and we will write a memorandum with some percentages.

I was told only 50%. I said, okay, no.

BECKER: So that was Ukrainian President Zelensky on this deal to give up some of Ukrainian resources to the U.S., to pay the U.S. back for some of the aid that it has provided. And I wonder, Nicholas Lokker, we heard Illia tell us that one of the things that is so attractive about Zelensky to many Ukrainians, is the fact that they feel that he will not sell out the country.

This must be a really difficult thing for Zelensky to try to negotiate here and also be able to stay in the good graces of his constituents. How might he do that? As you said, there are reports that this deal is still going forward.

LOKKER: Yeah. It absolutely is a difficult position to be in. I think that the initial deal that was proposed was absolutely unacceptable with some estimates suggesting that the economic burden on Ukraine would have been even larger than that imposed on Germany as reparations following World War I.

And a critical aspect also of this proposed deal is that notably it wouldn't offer any guarantees of continued U.S. aid or any sort of security guarantees. It's really just intended as payback for the already provided aid. So I think that in any case where these negotiations over this rare earths deal do move forward, for the Ukrainian side, in order for anything, for that to be acceptable, I think you would have to see, you would have to see security guarantees and you would have to see guarantees of continued aid for key from the United States in the future.

And I think it remains to be seen how that evolves. But of course Ukraine is in a tough position if it doesn't have continued USAID. And the other factor there is, of course, support from Ukraine's other partners notably in Europe. And there have been some suggestions recently that Europe could be motivated to offer, bring more to the table and try to fill the gap from the United States, but I think there are major questions there about how feasible that actually is.

BECKER: That's a perfect segue here to Ionela Ciolan, who's at the Wilfried Martin Center for European Studies. And I wonder Ionela, can you tell us, what do you think?

Do you think that Europe will band together and try to do something different than it has in the past, because of what's happening with these negotiations right now?

IONELA CIOLAN: Hello from Brussels. Thank you very much for the invitation. From what we are seeing these days, of course, the Europeans are trying to cooperate more together and come together with more support for the Ukrainians.

We know so far that the European Union needs basically the organization who provides the most military, financial and humanitarian support for Ukrainians, more than what the United States is providing. And they will do that in the future as well. Today from Kyiv, the president of the European Commission announced a $3.5 billion support for Ukraine and there are discussions currently in Brussels for another aid package of 20 billion of euros for the Ukraine as well. So we might see a reach of this package next week when we'll have an extraordinary European Council meeting in Brussels deciding on the security guarantees that the Europeans can provide for Ukrainians.

But there are also some ideas on how the Europeans are viewing the peace negotiations. And for the Europeans, it's important that there is no framework for peace without Ukraine's involvement, that it's up to Kyiv to decide what is acceptable to end the conflict, and this shouldn't be decided by President Trump or by the Russians, and that the peace in Ukraine cannot be imposed.

If we want a just and lasting peace, that means we have to involve the Europeans and Ukrainians in these negotiations.

BECKER: But some have said, actually, that President Trump's approach here to at least break the ice with Russia may actually do something and prompt some sort of talks or some set of different kind of negotiations to end this war that's been going on for three years with no end in sight, with lots of death. Is there perhaps some advantage here, to at least making maybe a bit of headway into talks even beginning.

CIOLAN: Of course, you are right. I feel like the Europeans needed this push for them to start discussing among each other and start creating a European view on a peace formula.

This is something that Trump administration basically pressured the European on and this is an approach that works. I hope that this approach will lead to a peace through strength and not the peace to surrender. This is my fear. And here I would also want to add that there are some elements which in this peace negotiations we have to take into account, and especially the Trump administration has to take into account.

Part III

BECKER: Before the break, we were talking about peace talks and what those talks should consider and include. There have been talks held without Europe or Ukraine, and you said that is not what many European leader, leaders believe should be happening to affect change in this war.

What do you think are some of the main ingredients that are needed here?

CIOLAN: From the European and also the Ukrainian side, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, it's important. So it will be important to make sure that Ukraine remains a sovereign state, that there is no recognition of the occupation, that there is no partition of the country, even though currently the Russians are occupying 18% of the country.

Then the Russians, since it's a stalemate, shouldn't pose restriction of the Ukrainian army, in case that maybe in the future they will call for limited capabilities for the Ukrainian army. And Europeans will maintain sanctions in the near future, even in the event of a peace agreement, until the point that the Russians will stop their war economy.

It's also important that Russia has to pay for the damage it's created, because Russia is the aggressor in this conflict. They violated international rules and norms, and negotiations do not take a place between equals. They are between an aggressor state, Russia, and a victim, Ukraine. So these are some of the elements that are important for Ukrainians, but also for Europeans.

And finally, elections cannot be part of the negotiations. Because we are in a war period and according to the Ukrainian constitution, they cannot organize elections when the martial law is installed. And of course, we need to have discussions about strong security guarantees.

And here for the Europeans, it's important to have a U.S. backstop in this peace, troops or boats on the ground in a form of U. S. air power support.

BECKER: Those are a lot of lists from European leaders, you brought up elections, which is something that President Trump has referred to, to have elections in Ukraine, which as you said, Ukraine did not hold elections because of Martial Law, because of the Russian invasion. And President Trump has said a lot of things that he's repeated several times, regarding his beliefs about what needs to happen in Ukraine. Elections are just one of them.

He's also mentioned the amount of money that the U.S., that he says the U.S. has given to Ukraine. And he's repeatedly criticized Ukraine President Zelensky. This is what he said during a speech at an investment summit in Miami, where he claimed that the Russia-Ukraine war should never even have started. And of course, he also said that Ukraine was the aggressor here.

Let's listen.

TRUMP: President Zelensky talked the United States of America into spending $350 billion to go into a war that basically couldn't be won, that never had to start and never would have started if I was president. Not even a chance. And it didn't start for four years. Never would have started. But a war that he, without the U.S. and Trump, will never be able to settle. They'll never settle that war without our involvement.

BECKER: Nicholas Lokker, I want to ask you that $350 billion amount that President Trump says the U.S. has given for the war in Ukraine, that has been disputed and apparently is not accurate. What do you think is needed to help move peace forward in Ukraine?

LOKKER: I think if you take a look at the beginning of this negotiation process from the United States. From the side of the United States. I think it's quite concerning, honestly, just because I think there's a mismatch between the United States and the Russians in their willingness to move forward with peace at any cost.

So to explain that a little further, I think that the Russians are currently pretty confident about their position in this war. While the situation on the battlefield, in terms of territorial control has been pretty slow moving, I think the trend unquestionably is that Russia is slowly, grindingly, but surely moving forward and occupying more and more Ukrainian territory.

And I think that Russia also believes that time is on its side in this conflict, both because of its manpower advantage over Ukraine and also because of the fact that it's been able to put its economy on a wartime footing and continue to ramp up production of the material that it needs to continue prosecuting this war.

BECKER: But hasn't there also been quite a strain on Russia from this war on its economy and also on the number of people who've been killed in this war?

LOKKER: That's a factor as well. It certainly is. And I do think that the massive casualties that Russia has taken are certainly a factor.

But just if you're thinking about who can win in a war of attrition here, Russia has a much larger population than Ukraine. And also, the system of government is such that Russia has much greater authority to conscript its population and continue essentially feeding its population into the meat grinder of this war.

So there's a real disadvantage on the Ukrainian side there. And just one thing I wanted to say earlier is that I don't think, I think that because Russia believes it has time on its side here, I don't think it's really been willing to drop its maximalist demands for what it wants out of this conflict.

And unfortunately, the United States under the Trump administration seems to care much more about reaching some sort of settlement rather than ensuring that the settlement that is reached is a just and sustainable peace. And because of that, I'm worried that you could see the United States make a lot of concessions that basically end up giving Russia everything it wants.

BECKER: Which would mean no to NATO, right? That's a big part of Russia's position, that Ukraine does not join NATO. And that perhaps, there's some talk that perhaps Ukraine could become part of the EU instead. What are you thinking might happen there?

LOKKER: Yeah. So I think the main Russian demands are one, as you mentioned, Ukraine does not become a part of NATO.

And I think in particular, Russia wants NATO to walk back the promise that it made to Ukraine originally in 2008, that it would become a member of NATO one day. And that's one. Two is a neutral or really in Russia's eyes, subservient Ukraine, that would be within, reliably within the Russian sphere of influence.

I think a third one would be, a third one would be that Russia keeps the territory that it has claimed to annex in Ukraine, which notably includes more than the actual territory that it currently occupies. And just on the note about the European Union, I think you're correct that there has been a promise of EU accession made to Ukraine that is currently advancing and there is real political will from the European side to make that happen.

But I'm not sure whether EU accession is really that much more acceptable in Russia's eyes than NATO membership is, given that really what Vladimir Putin is concerned about when it comes to Ukraine, is Ukraine becoming a full-fledged member of the Western community politically and economically.

And it's not about really the military, supposed military threat that would stem from NATO. It's about this broader geopolitical alignment that would be just as relevant in the case of the European Union, as it would be in the case of NATO.

BECKER: What do you think that this method of handling what's going on in Ukraine has done to the perception of the U.S. among its allies? And I'd like to ask that question to Ionela as well, but what about from your perspective?

LOKKER: I think it's been unquestionably harmful to the transatlantic relationship. I think for the first time in 75 years we're seeing Europeans grapple with the possibility that they really might, instead of a trustworthy partner in Washington, they might be dealing with more of an adversary under the Trump administration.

And that is a major shock and realignment in U.S. foreign policy that is going to have incredibly significant ripple effects to come, not just for Ukraine, but more broadly than that.

BECKER: What would be some of the big ones?

LOKKER: I think, number one on the top of that list is the future of the NATO alliance. I think people have speculated about whether Trump would attempt to withdraw from NATO, which I think still does remain a possibility.

But really what's more relevant than whether or not he formally withdraws is whether the Article Five mutual defense commitment that is the backbone of NATO, whether that really remains credible in whether the allies of the United States, but also adversaries of the United States, notably Russia, believe that the United States would actually come to the aid of its allies in the case of an act of aggression.

And that is more and more a question mark going forward.

BECKER: What do you say about what this has done to the U.S. relationship with its European allies.

CIOLAN: I agree with what Nicholas said so far, and I believe that we have a massive break in the transatlantic trust among traditional partners and allies for eight centuries, eight decades now.

And I would also add that also it strengthens a lot of the anti-American sentiments of some parts of the European society. Place a lot in the Russian and Chinese disinformation campaign among the Europeans.

For me, it's striking that United States, which was the symbol of international liberalism and human rights and norms and values and who was a soft power around the globe, is turning towards a country who believes in this great power politics, real politics, transitional and transactional relations which changed a lot the dynamics within the European partners and the American partners. Of course, this affects the most the future of the North Atlantic Alliance and the credibility of the Article Five.

This also has pushed the most traditional U.S. partners in Europe to speak about the need for Europeans to do more for their own defense. And also, to think about the idea that maybe we also need the European nuclear deterrence, because we are afraid that an American retreat from Europe will let us in a really weak position, from a security point of view.

And we know that Russia will remain the main security threat for the continent, even after the peace negotiations in Ukraine. And based on the outcome of this ceasefire in Ukraine, we might have a lasting peace in Ukraine, but we might have a stop of the war, and we might see another Russian attack in a couple of years, not only in Ukraine, but also on other countries in Europe.

So this is a real fear and a concern that we might, we are heading towards a larger war in Europe and the Americans will not support us.

BECKER: Nicholas Lokker, would you agree with that?

LOKKER: Yes, I would certainly agree with that. I think it's hard to say what exactly Vladimir Putin's intentions are, beyond Ukraine, whether or not he would go so far to attack a NATO ally, I think remains a question mark, but it only becomes likelier if we have a settlement in Ukraine that is extremely favorable to Russia. It's only going to embolden them and think that they can potentially get away with more. And I think that another factor here is also how other adversaries, revisionist actors around the world are looking at this conflict.

If you think about China, for instance, how are they going to perceive a settlement in Ukraine that leaves Russia with most of its objectives fulfilled, very little punishment to Russia for its aggression. And how does that make China think about its potential prospects for invading and retaking control over Taiwan, which has a notable objective of the of the Chinese Communist Party.