reSee.it - Related Video Feed

I'm aligned with the USA and the world, and I want this conflict resolved. It's tough to deal with the hatred involved, but I want to see a deal done in Europe. I can be tough, but that won't get us a deal. For four years, tough talk didn't stop Putin. Diplomacy is the path. During Obama, Trump and Biden's terms, nobody stopped Putin from occupying parts of Ukraine. We signed ceasefire and gas contracts, but he broke them. What kind of diplomacy are we talking about? It is disrespectful to come into the Oval Office and litigate this in front of the American media. Everyone has problems during war. You are gambling with World War Three and disrespecting a country that has backed you. Have you said thank you? You are running low on soldiers. We gave you $350 billion and military equipment. Without us, this war would have been over in two weeks. If you can get a ceasefire right now, I tell you you take it so the bullets stop flying and you meant stop getting. I gave you javelins. Obama gave sheets. He didn't break deals with me. If Russia breaks a ceasefire, what if a bomb drops on your head right now? I've empowered you to be a tough guy, and I don't think you'd be a tough guy without The United States. You're either gonna make a deal, or we're out.

I claimed that I could end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours. I have a good relationship with Zelensky and Putin, and I believe I can use that to negotiate a deal. Zelensky denied any knowledge of the controversial phone call, which I found honorable. However, I clarified that simply feeling threatened would not be enough to stop Putin from bombing Ukraine. My plan is to tell Zelensky to make a deal and warn Putin that if he doesn't, we will provide more support to Ukraine than ever before.

Speaker 1 said they supported Ukraine and supported president Trump initiative for a peace process. They have met two times in Saudi Arabia, two times in Europe (Paris and London), and participated in three meetings in Turkey. They are currently continuing the humanitarian work of releasing and exchanging prisoners of war. European leaders and President Zelensky visited Washington, and there was agreement that trilateral and bilateral meetings will be done upon Washington visit. At this stage, they are waiting to see when the trilateral and bilateral meetings will be done. Speaker 0 noted that it sounds very formal, but it seems to be the result is no real well, no negotiations to end the war and to implement a ceasefire between

It's an honor to have President Zelenskyy of Ukraine here. We've been working closely together, and we've reached a very fair deal involving rare earth minerals that will benefit both our countries and the world. We've also had good discussions with Russia, and I spoke with President Putin. We're working to bring the war to a close, focusing on reducing casualties and rebuilding Ukraine. The previous administration didn't engage with Russia, but if I were president, this war would have never happened. Your soldiers have been brave, and we've provided equipment. We want to stop the shooting and finalize a deal, which I believe is close. (Speaker 1): I hope this agreement is the first step toward real security guarantees for Ukraine. We count on America's continued support, including infrastructure and security guarantees, and assistance to help bring our children home.

In the past two weeks, we've probably had more progress in ending this war than we have in the past three and a half years. And I think the fact that we're around this table today is is very much symbolic in the sense that it's team Europe and team United States helping Ukraine. And the progress that we're looking out of this meeting is about the security guarantees.

So, we just had a very intense meeting between President Trump, Vice President Vance, and Zelensky. Vance suggested diplomacy for peace, but Zelensky quickly shot that down, bringing up a past broken deal with Putin, and questioned what kind of diplomacy Vance was even talking about. Vance responded by mentioning that Zelensky was being disrespectful. Trump then intervened, telling Zelensky not to dictate how they should feel, pointing out Ukraine's weak position and the risk of gambling with World War III. I made it clear that my alignment is with the United States and the world's well-being. I need to be able to negotiate without the kind of hatred Zelensky has for Putin, which makes reaching a deal difficult. I reminded everyone that without the United States, Ukraine has no leverage.

We had a meeting with President Zelensky, and it didn't go as well as I'd hoped. I believe he overplayed his hand. I'm focused on achieving peace, not engaging in a prolonged war. Zelensky seems intent on continuing the fight, but I'm determined to end the bloodshed. Thousands have died this week, and I care about all lives involved. If we don't act, he'll eventually be forced to make peace, but he'll be in a weaker position. I want immediate peace, and Putin is ready to end this conflict. However, Zelensky appears to want us to sign up and continue fighting, which we won't do. We're setting economic records and the feeling about our country is great. Zelensky needs to express a desire for peace, not dwell on negative comments. I don't trust or distrust, I just want a deal done. A ceasefire should happen now, but he doesn't want it. Without us, he doesn't win.

European leaders are not coming to rescue Zelensky from bullying; they are coming "because we've been working with the Europeans" and "the president invited them to come." The visit is not a stunt; there have been more meetings with Zelensky than with Putin, including "one meeting with Putin and, like, a dozen meetings with Zelensky." The White House says Zelensky told European leaders last week he wanted a cease-fire and that he would "walk out in two minutes" if Putin didn't agree; he spent three hours with Putin but "did not get one." The aim is "a peace agreement to end this war" and there was "enough progress" to move to the next phase. If peace isn't possible, "sanctions" are on the table, but "if he did this now, the moment the president puts those additional sanctions, that's the end of the talks." It will require concessions from both sides.

It's an honor to have President Zelenskyy of Ukraine here. We've been working closely together for a long time, and we've negotiated a fair deal that will benefit both our countries and the world. I've also had good discussions with President Putin, and we're trying to bring the conflict in Ukraine to a close. Too many soldiers are dying, and we want to see the money used for rebuilding instead. The previous administration didn't engage with Russia, but I believe if I were president, this war would have never happened. We're providing great equipment to Ukraine, and their soldiers have been incredibly brave. We're going to sign an agreement soon, and I think we're close to a deal to stop the shooting. It's an exciting moment, and I appreciate everyone being here.

There is concern from the Europeans that Zelensky is being bullied into signing something away, which is why European leaders are coming as backup tomorrow. They are coming here tomorrow because we've been working with the Europeans; the president invited them to come. The president told those European leaders last week that he wanted to cease fire, and he said on television he would walk out if Putin didn’t agree, with severe consequences if he didn’t. He spent three hours with Putin and did not get one. Our goal is a peace agreement to end this war. There was enough progress in the talks to move to the next phase. If peace is not possible and the war continues, thousands will die. The president could impose new sanctions, but that would end talks; it will require concessions from both sides.

It's an honor to have President Zelenskyy of Ukraine here. We've been working closely, and we have a fair deal to access rare earth resources. We've also had good discussions with Russia and President Putin to try and bring an end to the war. They're losing thousands of soldiers, and we want the fighting to stop so we can focus on rebuilding. The previous administration didn't speak to Russia, but I believe if I were president, this war would have never happened. We're going to sign an agreement, and I think we're fairly close to a deal.

President Zelenskyy needs to apologize for turning our meeting into a fiasco by being antagonistic. He undermined our efforts to bring about peace by attacking Putin and making maximalist demands. This makes us question whether he truly wants a peace deal. Our goal is to explore whether peace is possible and get Russia to the negotiating table. I question whether Zelenskyy is willing to do what's needed for a negotiation. Despite reports, we are coordinating with the Ukrainians. President Trump wants to bring an end to this unsustainable, bloody war. He's the only leader who has a chance of achieving this. Zelenskyy should be thanking and supporting President Trump for his efforts to help bring an end to this war.

The Alaska Summit reinforced my belief that while difficult pieces within reach, I believe that in a very significant step, President Putin agreed that Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine, and this is one of the key points that we need to consider. We're going to be considering that at the table, also, like who will do what, essentially. I'm optimistic that collectively we can reach an agreement.

Poland viewed the U.S. as a force for good, but now friends in Poland worry about alignment with Putin. I'm not aligned with anyone, only with the U.S. and the world's good. You can't make deals by saying terrible things. I want to get this over with, despite the hatred involved. I could be tougher, but deals require diplomacy. We had a president who talked tough, then Russia invaded Ukraine. Diplomacy is the path to peace. I'm trying to end the destruction of your country, but it's disrespectful to attack the administration trying to prevent it. You've allowed yourself to be in a bad position. You don't have the cards right now, but with us, you do. You're gambling with World War III and are being disrespectful. Have you said thank you once? You're not winning this. We gave you billions. If you didn't have our military equipment, this war would have been over quickly.

Okay, here's my perspective from the Oval Office press conference. The President was being very gracious to Zelensky, even when Zelensky was needling him and saying untrue things. Things went off the rails when a Polish journalist asked a question. After the President answered it, I answered it, and something about my answer set Zelensky off. I tried to diffuse the situation and suggested we continue the conversation in private, but the President wanted to have the conversation in public for the American people to see. There was a lack of respect and a sense of entitlement from Zelensky. Ultimately, the President wants the killing to stop, and Zelensky needs to come to the negotiating table. The real breakdown was Zelensky's unwillingness to engage in the peace process, and he wasn't there yet, but I think he'll get there eventually.

Speaker 0 says the other side hates Putin and "I could be tougher than any human being you've ever seen. I'd be so tough, but you're never gonna get a deal that way," adding he's aligned with Europe and wants a deal. Speaker 1 argues four years of tough talk didn't stop Putin and "the path to peace and the path to prosperity is maybe engaging in diplomacy." Speaker 2 recalls 2014, when "he occupied it" in Ukraine, says "we signed ceasefire... We signed the exchange of prisoners, but he didn't do it," and that Putin broke the ceasefire and killed people. The dialogue covers diplomacy versus confrontation, conscription, and Western aid: "We gave you the javelins" and "Obama gave you sheets." They discuss a ceasefire and warn against gambling with "World War three," noting "without us, you don't have the cards."

I am not the pen pal, but the phone pal of Poroshenko and Arseny Yacineuk and now the speaker. For the past 4 years, I have been on the phone with them for 2 to 3 hours a week. Some in Europe argue that Russia already controlled Ukraine before these presidents came into power, so why bother with sanctions? Last year, I was authorized to say that we would provide $1 billion, but only if the chief prosecutor was fired. We are not playing games, we know that if we give the EU an excuse, at least 5 countries will want to leave. We are working on a detailed roadmap for Ukraine's political steps and security guarantees from Russia. It won't be easy, but I am convinced they will do it.

Speaker 1 says Putin must be confronted with strength: "the velvet glove, but I think the hammer needs to come, and it needs to come immediately." He urges welcoming Zelensky to the Oval Office and, "pick up the phone, and ask, majority leader, John Thune to to immediately pass, the secondary sanctions bill that is supported by virtually everyone in the United States Senate." He calls for "the combination of engagement, but also making it clear to Putin that we are prepared to take actions, that would literally break his economy" while redoubling our commitment to Ukraine and European allies. He notes Putin's history: "Putin has made it clear that he wants to reassert the old Soviet sphere of influence, what we used to call the evil empire Mhmm. In Eastern Europe." He concludes: "Putin's not going to stop until he stopped, until he understands that there's gonna be enormous cost to Russia, and there's an unflagging commitment to defending Ukraine's sovereignty by The United States and our allies."

I'm not sure about numerous calls, but there was at least one request to come back and continue the conversation. I felt that they were disrespectful and unwilling to discuss a peaceful settlement. You can't fund the war forever; the American people won't stand for it, and neither will the Europeans. We need to bring this to a peaceful settlement. I was trying to do that, and I'll continue to try, but it takes two to tango. The Ukrainians need to participate in the conversation, but they weren't willing to do that on Friday, so I sent them home. I expect the war will go on a very long time. I don't know where they're going to get the money to fund it.

And one of the things at the table was one of the gentlemen who's a great guy, but he said, I said I I hope I didn't insult him. 'let's meet in another month or two, and let's see if we can start, you know, making some what.' 'He that a month or two? You're gonna have another 40,000 people dead in a month or two. You have to do it tonight.' 'And I did, actually. I called, president Putin, and we're trying to work out a meeting with president Zelensky. We'll see what happens there.' 'And then if that works out if it works out, then I'll go to the trilap and close it up.'

It's tough to make a deal with the hatred some people have for Putin, but the other side isn't exactly in love with him either. I want to see this situation resolved and am aligned with Europe on this. I could be tougher than anyone, but that won't get us a deal. We had a president who talked tough about Putin, but then Putin invaded Ukraine. Diplomacy is the path to peace, not chest-thumping. Putin occupied parts of Ukraine back in 2014, and nobody stopped him. We signed ceasefire and gas contracts with him, but he broke the ceasefire and didn't exchange prisoners. What kind of diplomacy is that? I'm talking about diplomacy that ends the destruction. It's disrespectful to come here and attack the administration trying to prevent the destruction of your country.

Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Rabkinov said that documents related to attacks on Saint Petersburg could prompt Russia to use nuclear weapons in a worst-case scenario, including against countries that possess nuclear weapons, not only against Ukraine. The transcript argues that NATO is launching the attacks and that Ukraine lacks nuclear weapons. The claims are tied to events during the Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum, attended by over 130 countries and more than 22,000 people. The transcript describes drone strikes beginning as the forum was taking place, including video said to show drones crossing the city and targeting a highly populated civilian area. It also cites reports of a civilian bus being attacked and states seven civilian casualties and eleven injured from a Ukrainian Armed Forces drone strike. The discussion contrasts Russia’s nuclear signaling with President Volodymyr Zelensky’s stance that he has been open to peace negotiations and is meeting with NATO head Mark Rutte. The transcript criticizes Zelensky’s messaging style, reiterates that he continues promoting NATO membership, and describes his warning that “big trouble” would come if Ukraine is denied membership. It also says Zelensky claims readiness for direct negotiations with Putin while purportedly maintaining obstacles to those talks. Professor Robert Pape, director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats at the University of Chicago, argues that an “escalation trap” has been unfolding for about three years, with parallels to earlier dynamics seen in other conflicts. He says Putin pursued what he expected to be a quick victory but Ukraine “stiffened,” and that both sides have nearly irreconcilable objectives. Pape highlights that Putin has nuclear weapons and that Ukraine now has the capability to strike deep into Russia, which he frames as making escalation extremely dangerous. The transcript connects escalation risk to Ukraine’s increased drone capacity, stating Ukraine has drone manufacturing capabilities and that donor involvement—specifically mentioning Jennifer Pritzker—is part of how drone production and precision targeting have expanded. It emphasizes that drones are relatively inexpensive and that smaller funding streams could still enable effective drone campaigns, describing long-distance precision and the ability to steer drones directly into targets. The conversation also draws parallels to the Iran conflict, describing how the use of drones disrupted business and civilian-linked activities around the Gulf and how the Saint Petersburg Economic Forum is likened to Russia’s “Davos,” with an aim described as disrupting strategic investors rather than targeting the forum’s attendees directly. Pape and others argue for restraint and off-ramps to prevent being dragged into escalation traps. The transcript argues that Europe should push for a clear line to end the war, comparing it to ending the Korean War through a defined line of contact rather than leaving it to the decision of one party. It claims the “line of contact” has not moved meaningfully over several years and says Europe should publicly decide what line it supports, tying funding to an armistice and freezing the conflict. The transcript also references the idea that an earlier peace framework around the Ankara agreement was scuttled, and it concludes by arguing that without a defined settlement line, multiple actors keep escalation traps active, with repeated calls to ask why Europe and others are not publicly demanding the needed end conditions.

I met with the opposition and the foreign minister this weekend. It's up to the Ukrainian people to decide the path forward, but discussions are happening. These are more than discussions. Top US officials are on the ground, discussing a plan to broker a future government, involving the UN. The US is midwifing the process. These are private diplomatic conversations where we discuss UN involvement. It's dishonest to say we don't have an opinion. There's a difference between private discussions and our public position. As diplomats, we discuss a range of options. Saying privately you're cooking up a deal, then saying publicly it's up to Ukrainians, those are different positions. Diplomatic discussions are sensitive, but those are totally different positions. You're overstating a private phone call.

The Alaska summit reinforced my belief that “president Putin agreed that Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine,” a key point to consider. “I'm optimistic that, collectively, we can reach an agreement that would deter any future aggression against Ukraine,” though I also note, “I actually think there won't be. I think that's even over overrated, largely overrated.” European nations are gonna take a lot of the burden; “we're gonna help them, and we're gonna make it very secure.” We also need to discuss “the possible exchanges of territory taken into consideration the current line of contact.” That means “the war zone, the war lines that are pretty obvious, very sad, actually, to look at them.” The next step: “a trilateral meeting, and that will be worked out.” “I have a feeling you and president Putin are gonna work something out.” Ultimately, Zelensky and the Ukrainian people, with Putin, must decide. “I'll set up a meeting with President Putin.” “All of us would obviously prefer an immediate ceasefire … maybe something like that could happen.” “As of this moment, it's not happening.” “I believe a peace agreement … is very attainable,” and “The next step would be for a trilateral meeting, and that will be worked out.”

Speaker 0: This thing over with. You see the hatred he's got for Putin. It's very tough for me to make a deal with that kind of hate. I'm aligned with the world. I wanna get the things set. If you want me to be tough? I could be tougher than any human being you've ever seen, but you're never gonna get a deal that way. Speaker 1: For four years in The United States Of America... we had a president who stood up at press conferences and talked tough about Vladimir Putin, and then Putin invaded Ukraine. The path to peace... is engaging in diplomacy. Speaker 2: He occupied it, our parts, big parts of Ukraine, parts of East and Crimea. So 2014. We signed ceasefire, gas contract, but after that, he broken the ceasefire, he killed our people, and he didn't exchange prisoners. What kind of diplomacy? Speaker 0: You should be thanking the president for trying to bring it into this conference. Speaker 2: We have problems. Speaker 0: You're gambling with World War three. You have the cards. With us, you have the cards. Without us you don't have any cards. I gave you the javelins to take out all those tanks. Obama gave you sheets. What if Russia breaks his fire?