World situation is not decided in Washington today - diplomat

He told this in an interview with Antin Borkovskyi, host of the Studio West program on Espreso TV.

The Trump administration chose one of the most effective tools - pressuring the weaker party. Unfortunately, in this case, we depend on Trump's administration, not the other way around. On the other hand, enormous negotiations are ongoing, and the tension has even gone beyond reason. It's very difficult to predict what the U.S. administration might do in the next couple of days. However, we in Ukraine understand how tough the current American officials can play. What is your view of the current situation? What caused the freeze in supplying not only military equipment but also, just as importantly, intelligence information?

We have repeatedly stated that it is necessary to separate information from the actual course of events. The first thing I want to say is that these are post-Friday events (the February 28 meeting at the White House between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and U.S. President Donald Trump): the information about the suspension of supplies, which is partially confirmed, about the halting of intelligence sharing.

Regarding the issue of equipment, ammunition, and technology supplies, I am currently trying to find any solutions in the original databases of the Pentagon, the White House, and the State Department, but I have not found any document that would explain such actions. Perhaps I am unable to access such a document.

One thing is information, quite another are specific orders and actions. If we look at similar situations, such documents are available in the database and are issued urgently. As of today, such documents are not available. However, this does not mean that the suspension has not occurred, as even Donald Tusk (the former Prime Minister of Poland) confirmed some level of suspension.

As is known, this aid comes through various channels and not from a single source. Additionally, I have not found any document confirming that the $3 billion, or just over $3 billion, in question have been withheld, or that they are not being paid to the companies that have supplied or are supplying products, since there is a whole range of sums that have a compensatory nature. Behind all this are contracts. As for how things will develop here, I would react less emotionally to this part, because, again, maybe there is something I don't know.

Another thing to consider is the intelligence-sharing framework between Ukraine and our partners, such as France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, and others. They operate within the so-called "Five Eyes" group, which includes the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, New Zealand, and Australia. There is an ongoing exchange of information between all of them.

As you remember, a week before the events that are now being announced, the United Kingdom stated that it would decide whether it should continue sharing information with the United States. This raised the issue of the fate of intelligence exchange within the "Five Eyes" framework, which, from the perspective of intelligence agencies, was unacceptable. The information the U.S. possesses is the result of intelligence gathered from sources I mentioned, and additionally, we should consider countries like Germany, France, Italy, Japan, and South Korea.

"Ukraine continues to cooperate with foreign intelligence agencies within the community of intelligence services. "

Regarding the United States, this is just part of the information that Ukrainian intelligence agencies receive. Moreover, if we look at recent years, the volume of information exchanged between Ukraine and the United States has been approximately equal. The quality can be debated in each individual case. What is important is that the intelligence currently possessed by France and Germany is of very high quality.

In my opinion, regarding intelligence information, I would be calm because, at present, its availability and presence are of high quality and in large volumes. However, the weakest link is the analytical processing of this information, including counteraction and response, particularly in areas such as cyber intelligence, counterintelligence, and the situation on the front line. It also involves monitoring the relocation of forces, not only on the front line but also in the rear, as well as maneuvers related to the military's equipment and preparation.

On the one hand, this is true. On the other hand, I want to emphasize that over the years, the system has been well-developed, and Ukraine has significantly strengthened intelligence cooperation with the UK, Germany, and especially France in recent years compared to before.

“In this area, the issue of arms and ammunition supply requires thorough attention. Under the Trump administration, the contribution has been zero.”

The deliveries were made under decisions by the Biden administration. As of January 1, they covered Ukraine’s needs through the end of 2025.

Now, one more thing: I urge everyone to be very cautious about discussions claiming that in a month, three months, or half a year, there will be nothing left. We clearly understand that only a certain limited circle of leadership knows the answer to this question, and even then, this information is highly filtered and portioned. When I once again read that only two weeks or two months remain, ask yourself - where does this information come from, and why is it being disseminated? Therefore, in this regard, it is also important to understand that things are not that simple.

I often hear phrases like "only this," "only that," and "only from the United States." Let's take a look: has even one Patriot system come from the U.S.? No, it hasn’t. Where did they come from? Europe! Where did the missiles for them come from? Europe! The U.S. compensated for these supplies by replenishing European stockpiles.

This replenishment system applied to armories in both the U.S. and Europe. Everyone understands that military equipment, especially ammunition, cannot remain in storage indefinitely. Moreover, this system was never designed for stockpiling - it has always operated on a replacement basis. That’s why we should be cautious when panic arises, claiming that the "lifeline has been cut" and a catastrophe is imminent.

There won’t be a catastrophe tomorrow, but the trajectory is indeed dramatic. We understand that the Trump administration is also using unfair pressure tactics - that’s one aspect. We also see many politicians scrambling, not only in the EU but in Ukraine as well. Moreover, the Trump team is playing recklessly on the global stage, affecting relations with Canada, Mexico, and China.

Regarding Trump's team, we will discuss that later. Now, let’s turn to Europe. It has been developing its defense program under the Versailles initiative, which has been in place since March 2022. At this very moment, Europe is finalizing its project for arms production and the development of its defense-industrial complex under the ReArm Europe Plan.

“We are talking about a radical increase in ammunition, the development of the defense industry worth 800 billion euros over the next four years. Of these 800 billion, 150 billion are urgent needs to cover assistance to Ukraine in such areas as air defense and missile defense systems, artillery, aviation, armored vehicles and unmanned systems, as well as systems to combat unmanned modifications of various types.”

 Moreover, other projects that involve joint production, such as the Danish project and the Czech project, also provide resources to pay for the production of ammunition and spare parts.

One more thing I have to clarify. We often say that the United States is the only country that has developed its system within the framework of NATO. All systems that are known today were prepared and developed on the basis of a competition between American and European manufacturers. For example, there is the Abrams tank, but there are also Leopard 1, 2, 2M, 2MA tank models of the same capacity and so on. And this sparring competition was absolutely in all types of weapons, especially in air defense and missile defense.

Another very important thing is that we are all talking about air and missile defense. I would like to remind you that the European system called Aegis operates within Europe, the United States and Canada, and actually monitors the situation up to the Urals. This system works on the basis of weapons that have been developed and are being produced today in the United States, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, and Germany.

“If someone is not too lazy and searches for “Aegis Prometheus” on Google, they will see how this system works. It operates on the basis of 5-6 components from different countries, and they are interchangeable.”

Only today, in the course of this war, we are consuming some of the tactical means, such as cruise missiles, systems of destruction at the moment of takeoff, orbit and destruction of ballistic missiles, but only fragmentarily.

In this regard, there should be close cooperation with European partners. And for Ukraine to get such things today, it will be associated with licenses so that Europeans can increase the capacity to produce such weapons, bullets, and ammunition. In fact, both Europe and the United States have been working very closely together in this regard for a long time within NATO.

This is not all that I understand and know in this regard, because I consider it necessary to stop deepening the information. I think there should always be a limit to such information. But with the current desire of Europe and the position of the United States, if “King Don” continues to escalate this situation, Europe will increase the amount of autonomy in terms of the security system. And when U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hagel said at the Ramstein meeting that the United States would remain with Europe, he was asked the question: how much does this phrase correspond to reality?

The current situation, with another escalation, with the so-called customs war, may lead to what Emmanuel Macron said in his speech. It is no coincidence that he touched upon two key things: the nuclear umbrella over Europe and a separate European joint force. And in this regard, it is also clear that Macron sent a message to “King Don” as well: “Will you continue?” Because Trump said one thing to Macron during the meeting, and then began to act in a completely different direction. Therefore, Macron made it clear: if you act like this, Europe will respond in this way.

Why is it important that this was said from Paris? Because Washington has a peculiar attitude towards different European countries, considering the UK its ironclad ally and France and Germany its direct competitors. So what had to be said was said.

And the happiness of the “great Don” is that “in the office of the washing machine”, as the office of the German Chancellor is called, there is no Merz. Because given the developments since the beginning of this week, if Merz were present, Doni would have received a much sharper response.

The Trump administration is trying to push through a certain solution. I would like to believe that this formula exists or will be finalized in the course of bargaining with the Russians, but the bargaining is ongoing, and the Americans are putting pressure. They are putting pressure quite gently now, because they have the tools to put tough pressure on the Ukrainian administration or the Ukrainian government. We understand that at any moment they can bring out either Victoria Spartz or some other congressman who will start telling us how everything was stolen and how bad Ukrainians are. And in this era of media technology, this may have some effect, at least within the United States. But we don't even understand what Putin, through Trump or with the help of certain circles around Trump, wants to impose on Ukraine. What are the parameters of what the Russians want to push through with the help of certain not-so-smart or too-cunning Americans?

Mr. Antin, don't give such easy passes, because your deck artillery will now all be turned over into the water. If you want to understand what Washington is doing now, you need to follow two things. The first is the American diplomat Richard Holbrooke and his negotiations on Bosnia and Kosovo: how was this model built, who led the negotiations, who was included in them?

“To understand what role “Big Donnie” can play, we need to go back to the Camp David Accords and Carter's role in signing the agreement between Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin.”

Let me remind you of the plot so that readers can understand us. Richard Holbrooke is actually the person who delivered the ultimatum to Milosevic (the president of Serbia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia), who single-handedly negotiated with all the participants, Bosnians, Serbs, and then Kosovars. All this was 99% done by Richard Holbrooke.

The Europeans in the so-called quadruple-agency, which includes the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, and France, were only receiving information. Although everyone believed that the negotiations were being conducted within the framework of this “quad”. Unfortunately, Richard Holbrooke has died, so the details could be found out, but his memoirs do not describe in great detail how the exchange of information between European capitals and Holbrooke, who was the one who led this conversation, went.

This model is roughly how the negotiating circle works today. But it is important that communications between all participants are so important and open that they trust each other. So far, this mechanism has not even been reached, so Europe is developing its own plan of approach. In the United States, they point fingers at the sky because “Big Donnie” cannot think strategically, and this is a problem. But this model can be seen in the way Richard Holbrooke negotiated.

Now, as to why I mentioned the Camp David Accords, as you know, the negotiations lasted several years and were completely unproductive. Jimmy Carter (the 39th President of the United States) was a kind of mediator, and it was with his participation that Begin and Sadat engaged in a dialogue and eventually reached a solution, but it was imperfect. The solution had many flaws, but it opened the way and stabilized the situation for a while.

What is happening now requires very careful consideration, nerves of steel, a minimum of reflection on the emotional level, and a thoughtful response in terms of interaction with partners and allies.

A message from Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy when he addressed Trump before his speech to Congress, then said he recognized the US president's leadership on the path to peace. President Zelenskyy and his team support Trump's initiatives. But I don't know what initiatives we are talking about and what leadership will be. This is a very complicated story when we are trying to open this bag that contains something extremely important.

Remember when British Prime Minister Keir Starmer was asked: “Do you trust Donald Trump?”. He said: “Yes, I trust Donald Trump in his desire to secure peace.” This is a very serious thing, and the British, whether they are Labor or Conservative, I am closer to the Conservatives, but they do not throw words around.

Emmanuel Macron's position in this situation is also important, because the two of them have met and have some feedback from Donald Trump. 

“It is also important that Starmer and Macron say that no capitulation of Ukraine is possible and unacceptable - this is Europe's position.”

Moreover, after the Sunday summit on March 2, the Europeans took a clear position, which was communicated to Donald Trump. It reads as follows: “Europe will develop a plan, and soon the British Prime Minister and the French President will present this plan to Donald Trump.”

I'm not talking about things that were said by somebody, by journalists or people who wish to remain anonymous, but these are words that were said by the Prime Minister of Great Britain and the President of France. The mediation in these things was taken over by this lady in the white suit, the Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni. As you know, at the March 2 summit, the Starmer, Macron, and Maloney trio spent a lot of time trying to find a common ground because there was a dispute over who would be in touch with the “big Don”.

The decision was made as follows: Macron is working with the staffs, and it is no coincidence that the chiefs of staff of European states will meet in the coming days to work out the technological component, i.e. the availability of troops, weapons, and the location of the communications system, while Keir Starmer is working on a plan to achieve the ceasefire phase, i.e. the ceasefire, the negotiation process, and the transition to a peace agreement.

It is no coincidence that Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan attended the meeting in London, because he proposed that Turkey could present a platform when all the necessary approaches are prepared and the US president is familiarized with them, and then this process of dialogue can begin.

It is clear that on the other hand, there is a game of “Donald Trump” being played by Moscow, which is very active. Washington responds to this game, sometimes making very gross mistakes. In particular, like Secretary of State Marco Rubio's phrase about the proxy war between Russia and the United States. They simply do not yet understand who is the proxy in this situation. And the reason for this is Marco Rubio's inexperience, especially in international relations, and in today's situation, he does not have a deep understanding of the current role played by all participants in this process, including Moscow.

Gradually, when interacting with European partners, I emphasize this, because I constantly say that we need to pay attention to the European vector, which is radically changing its role in this situation. Why does it seem that the Don is dominating the media? Because intellectual Europe is highly productive, it is not in a hurry, because Europeans, unlike the Donnie, understand the value of the Euro-Atlantic model of security and cooperation between Europe and the United States, which the “big Doni” does not appreciate. 

“But the “great Donnie” is temporary, whether for 2-3 years or who knows how long, because he is now heading for his impeachment. Only 4% of Americans, according to a Reuters poll, support his rhetoric and actions toward Ukraine, while 70% oppose him.”

Today, his balance of support in the United States is zero, with 47% in favor and 47% against him. This is despite the fact that most European politicians, including the president of Ukraine, have a positive balance, precisely because of the topic of understanding what role Russia plays in the current situation. That's why Doni had to play this concert with an address to stabilize his situation.

So it's obvious that this is a troubling time, I agree, it's not easy, it's very cruel to Europe and Ukraine, but it's important that Ukraine and Europe partner and cooperate on the following issues. The first is to compensate for Ukraine's assistance if the United States continues to “sponge” without understanding who Russia is. The second is that Europe and Ukraine should take a common position during the negotiation process. And, for that matter, at some point in time, say to Washington: “Can you help with weapons? Help us! Can you sell weapons? Sell them to us! You can't? Keep it for yourself! “.

Therefore, this moment, on the one hand, exacerbated the situation, but on the other hand, it very clearly emphasized all the points and positions of the parties. In my opinion, the position of our European partners deserves the highest praise.

As for the United States, it is necessary to continue our cooperation correctly, patiently, prudently, realizing the value of the Euro-Atlantic partnership. But it is also correct to say at a certain time: “This decision will not be implemented, because we are categorically against it,” without hue and cry.

There is also the position of the aggressor state, the Russian Federation, which is actively communicating with Trump's people, both in official positions and behind the scenes. At all public platforms, Kremlin representatives repeated their ultimatum mantra: occupation of the still unoccupied Ukrainian territories, interference in Ukraine's internal politics, and possibly in the economic affairs of a sovereign state. That is, the Kremlin's appetite has not diminished. How will they try to promote this or that formula? By the way, Lukashenko has also revived his efforts, offering Minsk again.

For Putin, the current situation, which is called “playing Trump,” is to try to use Trump to put pressure on Ukraine. This is the plot, if we take the information line, and this is how it is being realized: playing along with Donald Trump, actually playing on the parallels of information messages.

At the same time, you and I are well aware that Putin's main goal is to destroy the Ukrainian state and the Ukrainian nation, which means that Moscow's position is that Ukraine and Ukrainians should not exist. That's it, it should be a cleared field, and the people should be called the same Russians or whatever they call them?

Malorosians.

This is even worse. We understand Putin's goal and his tool, using Donald Trump.

Now we have to understand that our task in this situation is that Ukraine, our partners in the world, and this was clearly demonstrated by the vote in the UN General Assembly, do not recognize the seizure of Ukraine's territory as a matter of principle. Moreover, today only four or five states have recognized Crimea as the territory of the Russian Federation. That is, it is clear that neither today, nor tomorrow, nor the day after tomorrow, nor the United States, nor anyone else, under any course of events, will recognize the occupied territories of Ukraine as the territory of the Russian Federation. This is clear to us.

So, let's look at the way forward: Rubio and Trump are talking about compromises based on the current situation. What are these compromises? Neither Trump nor Rubio,

neither you nor I can imagine, nor, frankly, do I allow it, because I understand perfectly well what may follow, that no territorial things will happen in this situation in terms of the world map.

Why are Putin and his cronies operating with the situation on the ground? Because they are exercising what is called, from the point of view of international law, effective control, and thus recognize that they are responsible for all the problems that exist on this territory: all the tragedies, disasters, social issues, and so on. But this does not mean that the world recognizes their subjectivity over these territories. The world does not recognize this.

What is the position now? To resolve this issue diplomatically. 

“My answer to this question for those who want to say it or not, is that it is impossible to resolve this issue with Russia in a diplomatic way. I am telling you this as someone who has negotiated with them for a long time. It is impossible!”

In fact, the approach in action should be peace through strength, when the territory is returned or when we have achieved such strength that we can dictate at the negotiating table. Washington's Doni says: “No, cease fire, come to the table.” What does that mean? Macron replies: “Minsk-3”. There is a deadlock in this situation.

But Donnie says: “We must stop the killing, because 2,000 young people are dying every week.” The statistics are correct, the conclusion is absolutely ridiculous. Let me explain why. Because we all know very well that peace is sometimes worse than war. When people tell me that after World War II there was peace and Ukraine lived in peace, I ask: Who lived in peace? Levko Lukianenko, who served more than 25 years, or Horyn, who served more than 10 years, or other prisoners of Soviet concentration camps? Did they have an easy life? Did Ukrainians have an easy life when they were forbidden to speak their native language? We are well aware that peace can be worse than war, and we have gone through it. That's why Europeans say: “Listen to what Ukrainians say.” 

“The task today, by joining forces with the Europeans, is to bring this young, untouched team of Donald Trump to its senses.”

Why am I emphasizing this? Because I have analyzed the composition of Donald Trump's “first coming” team well, when Bolton was born in 1948, Tillerson was born in 1952, even the Secretary of Defense, I think, was born in 1954.

Now look now: Rubio, Vance, and others, born in 1980, 1975, and so on. Sons are children, meaning they are the same age as Trump's sons. And this is evidence that, first of all, they do not understand the post-war security model, because they have already burned their textbooks, which contained an understanding of what the security system is, and they still need to realize it. And they pushed out the people who knew it.

Thus, the endless wandering in their minds gives rise to these consequences. But I urge that we must patiently, without emotion, calmly explain all this, working with the Europeans, to resolve the issue of arms needs.

And as for the United States, together with the Europeans, we should again patiently explain, starting with Doni, who is mired, because everyone knows perfectly well that he collaborated with criminal authorities of the Soviet Union in Soviet times. Then he collaborated with the secret services, and then he worked with the criminal world of today's imperial Russia, with Putin's criminal entourage. There is more than enough information about this today.

Let's imagine that gradually this information will be filled in by the United States. Gradually, the Don will realize where he is. In this situation, the only tragedy is that Ukraine is paying for it with blood. However, in such circumstances, Europe's assistance should be as powerful and as active as possible.

Today, the situation in the world is not decided in Washington. Washington, thanks to the fact that the Americans elected who they did, has begun to suffer from isolationism. Another thing is that it is beginning to act in the manner of Richard Holbrooke, but the situation has not yet reached that point. Because, first of all, Ukraine is not in the role of Milosevic, and Putin is playing the role of Milosevic. Ukraine is the victim of this aggression. That is why this game and this model have enormous flaws and shortcomings. I am not talking about the Sadat and Begin model.

I cited this example as the best option to illustrate that such a situation is possible. But is it possible in the case of Ukraine and Russia? No, because to a large extent this situation depends on the will of a certain person. 

“If Putin can control the fate of millions of people, President Zelensky will not, and he has already shown this with this explosion of emotions on Friday, February 28.”

Note that, no matter what anyone says, the rhetoric of both Vance and Trump has changed. Vance was searching for words, just as Donald Trump was searching for words after this dispute. I can't imagine that Zelenskyy can sign a document that deals with Ukraine's surrender or trade of territory under any circumstances.

Therefore, we need to understand that if we are talking about President Benes of Czechoslovakia, recalling 1938, he was abandoned by Europe. He was left alone with the enemy and with a helpless Europe. Today, Europe is on the side of Ukraine, so I think it is necessary to ensure these communications, to unite them, to work out a proper dialogue with Washington, if you will, and to work out pressure on Washington in this situation, to ensure the full range of European defense capabilities.