Volodymyr Zelenskyy has given a wide-ranging interview to Sky News in which he was asked about the prospect of Russia attacking NATO, whether he would cede land as part of a peace deal and how to force Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table.
“We believe that, starting from 2030, Putin can have significantly greater capabilities,” he said. “Today, Ukraine is holding him up, he has no time to drill the army.”
But while Mr Zelenskyy conceded his ambition to join NATO “isn’t possible now”, he asserted long term “NATO needs Ukrainians”.
US support ‘may be reduced’
Asked about his views on the Israel-Iran conflict, and the impact of a wider Middle East war on Ukraine, Mr Zelenskyy accepted the “political focus is changing”.
“This means that aid from partners, above all from the United States, may be reduced,” he said.
“He [Putin] will increase strikes against us to use this opportunity, to use the fact that America’s focus is changing over to the Middle East.”
On the subject of Mr Putin’s close relationship with Iran, which has supplied Russia with attack drones, Mr Zelenskyy said: “The Russians will feel the advantage on the battlefield and it will be difficult for us.”
Image: Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelenskyy speaking to Mark Austin
Trump and Putin ‘will never be friends’
Mr Zelenskyy was sceptical about Mr Putin’s relationship with Donald Trump.
“I truly don’t know what relationship Trump has with Putin… but I am confident that President Trump understands that Ukrainians are allies to America, and the real existential enemy of America is Russia.
“They may be short-term partners, but they will never be friends.”
On his relationship with Mr Trump, Mr Zelenskyy was asked about whether he felt bullied by the US president during their spat in the Oval Office.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
“I believe I conducted myself honestly. I really wanted America to be a strong partner… and to be honest, I was counting on that,” he said.
In a sign of potential frustration, the Ukrainian president added: “Indeed, there were things that don’t bring us closer to ending the war. There were some media… standing around us… talking about some small things like my suit. It’s not the main thing.”
Mr Zelenskyy was clear he supported both a ceasefire and peace talks, adding that he would enter negotiations to understand “if real compromises are possible and if there is a real way to end the war”.
But he avoided directly saying whether he would be willing to surrender four annexed regions of Ukraine, as part of any peace deal.
“I don’t believe that he [Putin] is interested in these four regions. He wants to occupy Ukraine. Putin wants more,” he said.
“Putin is counting on a slow occupation of Ukraine, the reduction in European support and America standing back from this war completely… plus the removal of sanctions.
“But I think the strategy should be as follows: Pressure on Putin with political sanctions, with long-range weapons… to force him to the negotiating table.”
Russia ‘using UK tech for missiles’
On Monday, Mr Zelenskyy met Sir Keir Starmer and agreed to share battlefield technology, boosting Ukraine’s drone production, which Mr Zelenskyy described as a “strong step forward”.
But he also spoke about the failure to limit Russia’s access to crucial technology being used in military hardware.
He said “components for missiles and drones” from countries “including the UK” were being used by Russian companies who were not subject to sanctions.
“It is vitally important for us, and we’re handing these lists [of Russian companies] over to our partners and asking them to apply sanctions. Otherwise, the Russians will have missiles,” he added.
The leaders went home buoyed by the knowledge that they’d finally convinced the American president not to abandon Europe. He had committed to provide American “security guarantees” to Ukraine.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:49
European leaders sit down with Trump for talks
The details were sketchy, and sketched out only a little more through the week (we got some noise about American air cover), but regardless, the presidential commitment represented a clear shift from months of isolationist rhetoric on Ukraine – “it’s Europe’s problem” and all the rest of it.
Yet it was always the case that, beyond that clear achievement for the Europeans, Russiawould have a problem with it.
Trump’s envoy’s language last weekend – claiming that Putinhad agreed to Europe providing “Article 5-like” guarantees for Ukraine, essentially providing it with a NATO-like collective security blanket – was baffling.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:50
Trump: No US troops on ground in Ukraine
Russia gives two fingers to the president
And throughout this week, Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has repeatedly and predictably undermined the whole thing, pointing out that Russia would never accept any peace plan that involved any European or NATO troops in Ukraine.
“The presence of foreign troops in Ukraine is completely unacceptable for Russia,” he said yesterday, echoing similar statements stretching back years.
Remember that NATO’s “eastern encroachment” was the justification for Russia’s “special military operation” – the invasion of Ukraine – in the first place. All this makes Trump look rather weak.
It’s two fingers to the president, though interestingly, the Russian language has been carefully calibrated not to poke Trump but to mock European leaders instead. That’s telling.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:02
Europe ‘undermining’ Ukraine talks
The bilateral meeting (between Putin and Zelenskyy) hailed by Trump on Monday as agreed and close – “within two weeks” – looks decidedly doubtful.
Maybe that’s why he went along with Putin’s suggestion that there be a bilateral, not including Trump, first.
It’s easier for the American president to blame someone else if it’s not his meeting, and it doesn’t happen.
NATO defence chiefs met on Wednesday to discuss the details of how the security guarantees – the ones Russia won’t accept – will work.
European sources at the meeting have told me it was all a great success. And to the comments by Lavrov, a source said: “It’s not up to Lavrov to decide on security guarantees. Not up to the one doing the threatening to decide how to deter that threat!”
The argument goes that it’s not realistic for Russia to say from which countries Ukraine can and cannot host troops.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:57
Sky’s Mark Stone takes you inside Zelenskyy-Trump 2.0
Would Trump threaten force?
The problem is that if Europe and the White House want Russia to sign up to some sort of peace deal, then it would require agreement from all sides on the security arrangements.
The other way to get Russia to heel would be with an overwhelming threat of force. Something from Trump, like: “Vladimir – look what I did to Iran…”. But, of course, Iranisn’t a nuclear power.
Something else bothers me about all this. The core concept of a “security guarantee” is an ironclad obligation to defend Ukraine into the future.
Future guarantees would require treaties, not just a loose promise. I don’t see Trump’s America truly signing up to anything that obliges them to do anything.
A layered security guarantee which builds over time is an option, but from a Kremlin perspective, would probably only end up being a repeat of history and allow them another “justification” to push back.
Among Trump’s stream of social media posts this week was an image of him waving his finger at Putin in Alaska. It was one of the few non-effusive images from the summit.
He posted it next to an image of former president Richard Nixon confronting Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev – an image that came to reflect American dominance over the Soviet Union.
Image: Pic: Truth Social
That may be the image Trump wants to portray. But the events of the past week suggest image and reality just don’t match.
The past 24 hours in Ukraine have been among the most violent to date.
At least 17 people were killed after a car bombing and an attack on a police helicopter in Colombia, officials have said.
Authorities in the southwest city of Cali said a vehicle loaded with explosives detonated near a military aviation school, killing five people and injuring more than 30.
Image: Pics: AP
Authorities said at least 12 died in the attack on a helicopter transporting personnel to an area in Antioquia in northern Colombia, where they were to destroy coca leaf crops – the raw material used in the production of cocaine.
Antioquia governor Andres Julian said a drone attacked the helicopter as it flew over coca leaf crops.
Colombian President Gustavo Petro attributed both incidents to dissidents of the defunct Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).
He said the aircraft was targeted in retaliation for a cocaine seizure that allegedly belonged to the Gulf Clan.
Who are FARC, and are they still active?
The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, a Marxist guerrilla organisation, was the largest of the country’s rebel groups, and grew out of peasant self-defence forces.
It was formed in 1964 as the military wing of the Colombian Communist Party, carrying out a series of attacks against political and economic targets.
It officially ceased to be an armed group the following year – but some small dissident groups rejected the agreement and refused to disarm.
According to a report by Colombia’s Truth Commission in 2022, fighting between government forces, FARC, and the militant group National Liberation Army had killed around 450,000 people between 1985 and 2018.
Both FARC dissidents and members of the Gulf Clan operate in Antioquia.
It comes as a report from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime found that coca leaf cultivation is on the rise in Colombia.
The area under cultivation reached a record 253,000 hectares in 2023, according to the UN’s latest available report.
Follow The World
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday