Bloomberg Television · published 16 h ago ·
found by searching “Ukrainos parama pavogta milijardai”
Ukraine Peace Push Turns to NATO and Donbas
What the site found
Not propaganda · agenda: US-Russia talks decide Ukraine's fate
Belief the Pravda network pushes: Russia and the United States should negotiate Ukraine's future without Europe, while Ukraine and the West block peace and threaten Russia.
A Bloomberg analyst discusses a reported US proposal tying NATO-style security guarantees for Ukraine to concessions in the Donbas, the obstacles to it, battlefield pressures and the future US posture in the Middle East.
The video says · at 3:45 · quote checked against the transcript
“everyone wants the conflict to end, but it needs to end on terms that do not compromise Ukraine sovereignty as well as European security architecture.”
everyone wants the conflict to end, but it needs to end on terms that do not compromise Ukraine sovereignty as well as European security architecture.
The video is mainstream analysis that treats Europe and Ukraine as stakeholders in the talks and says peace must not compromise Ukraine's sovereignty, so it does not argue that the US and Russia should decide Ukraine's fate without Europe or that Ukraine and the West are blocking peace.
The Pravda stories it echoes
Closest stories from the Pravda network, by meaning. Each links to the site’s comparison with trusted Lithuanian news.
20 days ago · Michailas Onufrienko: Trump's special envoy Kellogg on Zelensky's proposal to freeze the conflict
M low
F low
2 verified differences
26 days ago · Western Voices: USA Softens Sanctions and Reviews Energy and Ukraine Relations Policy
M low
F low
3 verified differences
27 days ago · October 18 night strikes summary: RF and Ukraine news with front and video. Zelenskyy complaints and Rubio's response on Starshield
M low
F medium
2 verified differences
6 days ago · Clear sign of upcoming negotiations in UAE appeared
M low
F medium
2 verified differences
4 days ago · While negotiations on Ukraine take place in Abu Dhabi, the West continues to pump military aid into Ukraine
M low
F medium
5 verified differences
4 days ago · American TV channel PBS stated before negotiations in Abu Dhabi that it knows the main paragraphs of Ukraine's peace plan
M high
F medium
4 verified differences
Transcript (en, 305 lines)
0:00 New this morning, Ukrainian President
0:02 Vladimir Zolinsky has said American
0:04 envoys offered a peace trade that could
0:07 make potentially the country a member of
0:09 NATO. The cost of admission would be
0:11 Ukraine giving up its entire Donbos
0:13 region to Russia.
0:15 >> This comes after Steve Witco and Jared
0:16 Kushner spent time this week in Moscow
0:18 with Russian President Putin and then in
0:20 Dublin with President Zalinsky. Becca
0:22 Wasser, Bloomberg Economics defense lead
0:24 joins us now to discuss if this latest
0:25 offer could lead to a truce. Becca, also
0:28 in the pages of the New York Times
0:30 >> this morning. We're gonna talk about
0:32 that in just a little bit. I don't want
0:33 to bury that lead. We're gonna get there
0:35 as well. Yes, we're back. Exactly. Let's
0:36 stick with Ukraine first. What do you
0:38 make of this announcement? We did hear
0:39 from President Zullinsky. He spoke with
0:40 reporters just a few hours ago. He said,
0:42 quote, "It was the first time this had
0:44 been raised. We're discussing it with
0:45 our partners, a comprehensive security
0:47 package that could be offered to us in
0:49 these negotiations." What do you make of
0:51 this news and and do you think that it
0:53 has any likelihood of coming to pass?
0:55 I think Ukraine has been looking for a
0:57 wide array of security guarantees in a
1:01 potential post-war environment. And one
1:03 of the ones that has been very essential
1:05 has been this idea of NATO membership or
1:08 NATO like guarantees. Because at the end
1:11 of the day, no matter how this war ends,
1:13 Ukraine is going to need to ensure its
1:16 future territorial sovereignty and
1:18 security and stave off uh any threat of
1:22 potential future Russian aggression
1:24 again. So really that is something that
1:27 has been top of mind for President
1:29 Zilinski. But it is worth noting that he
1:31 said it is not his decision to make a
1:34 loan to essentially trade Ukrainian
1:37 territory, the Donbass, for security
1:40 guarantees. Um, and he would have to put
1:43 that forward to the Ukrainian people. So
1:45 I think ultimately it is not only up to
1:47 the Ukrainian people whether this moves
1:49 forward, but truly it is also up to what
1:52 happens right now on the battlefield in
1:55 Ukraine as essentially Russia is trying
1:57 to set the conditions so it can sue for
1:59 peace at the negotiating table.
2:01 >> And even that in itself is complicated.
2:03 How do you hold a referendum in a
2:05 country at war? This is one of the
2:06 debate. I mean there hasn't been an
2:07 election for this reason since the
2:09 combat started. Becca, I reached out to
2:11 some European diplomats who were in
2:13 Dublin. Um, and they had a couple
2:14 thoughts on this. One, that the Donbos
2:16 is too big of an ask. That's too much
2:18 territory. Ukraine could not agree to
2:21 see that entire part. The other was that
2:23 NATO cannot agree to allow Ukraine into
2:27 its territory while it is still in
2:29 conflict in the current situation. This
2:31 was one of the arguments in the Biden
2:32 administration. They kept promising
2:34 Ukraine would become a NATO member of
2:35 NATO. And on its face, European allies
2:38 were okay with it. But you can't, if you
2:39 have article 5, which is a mutual
2:41 defense pact, you can't admit a country
2:43 that's actively at war. There's a lot of
2:44 complications there. I don't know how
2:46 realistic this is and I don't know if
2:48 Europeans would get on board with this.
2:50 I'm wondering what your take is.
2:52 >> I mean, I think Russia knows all of this
2:53 as well and it's that's why it's
2:55 entertaining this deal, which frankly
2:58 could actually end up in Moscow's favor
3:01 more than Ukraine's. Uh, but for Europe,
3:04 it is a big question. And also let's be
3:07 honest you know NATO is not necessarily
3:09 in lock step. It is not this uh solely
3:12 unified uh you know brain that thinks
3:15 alike these are all individual nations
3:17 that have different threat perceptions
3:18 and different risk tolerances. So it
3:21 will be really difficult to get all NATO
3:23 members on board with everything. So it
3:26 is a proposal that is new and is
3:28 different and is showing some type of
3:30 progress uh you know at the negotiating
3:33 table but whether it is realistic and
3:35 whether it can be achieved is really the
3:38 open question right here. However, these
3:41 discussions are worth having because
3:43 Ukraine is coming up at the end of its
3:45 fifth year and at this point, everyone
3:48 wants the conflict to end, but it needs
3:51 to end on terms that do not compromise
3:54 Ukraine sovereignty as well as European
3:57 security architecture.
3:58 >> Becca, I'd like to get your observations
3:59 of the shuttle diplomacy that's been
4:01 taking place here, led by Steve Witoff
4:02 and Jared Kushner, aside from the fact
4:04 that we can all remark on Jared Kushner
4:06 dressing inappropriately for the weather
4:07 in Moscow. Donnie,
4:08 >> David is very upset. V-neck when the
4:11 snow was falling on the tarmac there in
4:13 in Moscow. What do you make of the
4:15 status of those talks? Do they show any
4:17 signs of bearing fruit um to you? What
4:20 are you watching for as they continue to
4:21 play out here uh in in in capitals
4:23 around the world?
4:25 >> Well, definitely watching to see what
4:26 Jared is wearing. Obviously, that's the
4:28 first and foremost uh thing top of mind.
4:31 >> You know, actually, I enjoy that we're
4:32 discussing what a man is wearing for
4:33 once on television. So, I'm going to
4:35 endorse this conversation. Becca, please
4:36 [laughter] continue.
4:37 But you know there is progress being
4:39 made and it is good for these
4:40 conversations to be had but they need to
4:42 be had in good faith and all of this is
4:45 not happening in a vacuum. It is not
4:46 like there is a standstill on the
4:48 battlefield as these conversations are
4:50 taking place. There is still a war of
4:52 grinding attrition going on. There are
4:54 still barges of missiles and drones that
4:57 are hitting capital cities every
4:59 evening. And this is important to keep
5:01 in mind as these conversations are
5:04 happening. you know, there is this
5:05 renewed flurry of diplomacy as you know,
5:08 Jared Kushner and Steve Woodco are back
5:11 at it, but whether they can actually be
5:13 successful in changing anything on the
5:16 ground, particularly as we are
5:18 continuing to see not only, you know,
5:21 nightly territorial uh barges, we are
5:25 also continuing to see things like
5:27 outages of Star Shield and Starlink that
5:30 are having a material effect. Becca, I
5:33 wanted to ask you about that because as
5:34 I was doing a sweep of headlines uh in
5:35 the we early hours of this morning, one
5:38 of the ones that came across was pretty
5:39 frank. Ukraine is running out of options
5:41 and Russia knows it. And one of the
5:44 things playing into that, of course, is
5:46 this star shield. More accusations that
5:47 it was throttled again this last week
5:49 from President Sinsky,
5:51 denials from Elon Musk and the White
5:53 House. Do we know what's going on there
5:55 and why this seems to be a habitual
5:56 issue?
5:58 uh you know open question as to why it
6:00 keeps on happening and who is uh at
6:03 fault with last time this occurred you
6:05 know there was a bit of a pointing the
6:07 fingers and blame game from uh you know
6:10 Elon Musk and the White House both
6:12 pointing fingers at each other uh but
6:15 you know it is very clear that this
6:16 keeps on happening uh in a way to
6:20 essentially halt some of Ukraine's
6:23 momentum uh Russian advances at the you
6:27 know at the line of battle essentially
6:30 have slowed. They have not been able to
6:31 take as much territory as they have in
6:33 years past. They are also having uh
6:36 significant recruitment uh challenges as
6:40 frankly losses are outpacing
6:42 recruitment. Um and things aren't
6:44 looking great for Russia along the front
6:47 lines. Um, and some of these outages and
6:49 some of these efforts are slowing down
6:52 Ukraine's ability to not only uh defend
6:55 that front line, but also defend further
6:58 back and pursue some of its strategy to
7:01 try and hold Russia at risk. So, all of
7:04 this means that uh it shifts things on
7:07 the battlefield in Russia's favor, which
7:09 allows Russia to have a more
7:11 advantageous position at the negotiating
7:13 table.
7:14 >> There are wars on two fronts. This is an
7:16 interview on two fronts as well. I
7:17 promised we'd get to the Middle East, so
7:18 let's let's go there. We had President
7:19 Trump on Truth Social this week writing,
7:21 "We don't need a deal with Iran. Those
7:23 days have long since passed. We got
7:25 their money. Hundreds of billions of
7:26 dollars, and we've got their straight."
7:28 And days later, he said this to Stephen
7:30 A. Smith. Let's take a listen.
7:31 >> It's an evil empire, and we've knocked
7:34 the hell out of them, and they won't
7:36 have a nuclear weapon. We've taken that
7:38 away, and we'll make sure we take it
7:39 away. That's why I'm there.
7:41 >> Why is it still going on? Why haven't
7:42 they been finished? Because I've heard
7:44 you say you could take them out. You can
7:46 end this. Why haven't you?
7:48 >> Uh I could end it immediately at the
7:52 request of the nations that I'm looking
7:54 to protect. We are uh doing it a little
7:57 bit longer way, a little bit more
7:59 civily. Uh Saudi Arabia has asked me to
8:03 please just let it be the way it is now
8:06 for a while because they're
8:07 disintegrating.
8:09 >> Stephen I Smith asking about the
8:10 conclusion of this war and I mentioned
8:11 that piece that you've written with Dina
8:13 in in the New York Times. you're
8:14 thinking about the region after this
8:16 war. Here you go. Hold it up. The region
8:18 after this war ends. Talk a bit about
8:20 sort of the the way that you're thinking
8:22 about what US involvement in the Middle
8:24 East might look like after this conflict
8:25 comes to an end when indeed that
8:27 happens.
8:28 >> You know, whenever that happens and
8:30 however it happens, the US is not just
8:32 going to walk away. And I think that is
8:35 a bit of a misconception that a lot of
8:37 folks have. The US is going to remain
8:39 engaged in the region, but its terms are
8:42 going to be quite different. And I do
8:44 think it is going to be a more narrow
8:46 definition of protecting its core
8:48 interests. But there's also operational
8:51 reasons why the US military is not going
8:54 to go back to the bases uh where it once
8:57 stood in really large formations with
9:00 really expensive equipment just sitting
9:01 there. And part of that is the
9:03 operational risks to them based on uh
9:07 Iran's ability to uh threaten those
9:10 bases and those locations. And so it
9:13 provides an opportunity, as you know,
9:15 inverse as that might seem, [snorts] an
9:17 opportunity for the United States to
9:19 remake its posture to reset its line so
9:22 that it has a more resilient approach
9:25 within the Middle East. But it also
9:27 allows for the Gulf states in particular
9:29 to take greater agency and to take
9:32 greater responsibility for their own
9:33 security. And that is frankly the way in
9:37 which the region ought to move forward.
9:39 It requires a regional security
9:41 architecture, not one that is
9:43 essentially protected from afar by the
9:45 United States. You and our colleague uh
9:47 Dina Fandieri argue that what that looks
9:50 like instead of these behemoth bases
9:53 that are almost indefensible because
9:54 they're so big and outdated, smaller
9:56 installations and allied nations like
9:58 Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, as you're
10:01 just talking about a more diffuse
10:02 presence. My question for you is those
10:05 things made those countries a target for
10:06 Iran in this latest conflict. Do you
10:08 think the willingness is there for them
10:10 to host such diplomatic outposts for the
10:12 US? I think you hit on the most
10:15 important part in what we wrote, which
10:17 is the US can have all of these plans,
10:19 but ultimately they are not the ones who
10:21 fully get to decide. All of this hinges
10:23 on allies and partners providing access,
10:26 overflight, basing opportunities. And
10:29 frankly, it's not just in the Middle
10:30 East. It also is very relevant to
10:33 Europe. If I want to bring this
10:34 conversation back to where we started,
10:37 if the United States is going to have a
10:39 smaller, more distributed presence in
10:41 the Middle East, it's going to need to
10:43 project power from Europe. And that
10:45 means having access and overflight at
10:48 European bases at the very same time
10:50 that the US is trying to reduce some of
10:53 its commitments to NATO.
Judged by claude-sonnet-5.5-eu on 2026-11-14 15:19 UTC. A flag means “worth a look”; a person decides.