Boris’s interview with Triggernometry

Just published:

The interview goes into a lot of detail on Ukraine. My notes on it:

1. Boris: “Not a snowball’s chance in hell of Ukraine joining NATO in 2022… or for decades”

Then why not just rule it out? Have hundreds of thousands died for the theoretical idea of an open-door policy?

2. Boris misstating what the Budapest Memorandum actually says:

“After all, in 1994, under the Budapest Memorandum, we had told the Ukrainians you’ve got to give up your 1,700 nuclear warheads, but we will protect you.”

Those who’ve studied the document know it is not a security guarantee.

Boris minutes later contradicts himself on this point:

“Back in 2008, at the Bucharest Summit, George Bush, the US President, had said very strongly: ‘Well, we’ve got a problem here with Ukraine. It doesn’t have a security guarantee. We should get them in [to NATO].’”

This is clearly doublethink. The Budapest Memorandum was one? [It wasn’t.] And in 2008 there was no security guarantee?

Please can fact-checkers at prominent publications stop allowing writers to refer to the Budapest Memorandum as a “security guarantee”. It was no such thing.

3. Konstantin is missing key information

Teeing up a question about the April 2022 Istanbul talks, Konstantin says:

“I came to this interview having heard that you went to Kyiv and told them not to sign whatever agreement was made in Istanbul… I came into this interview ready to ask you about that. Then I went and looked at where that claim comes from. And it comes from various right-wing publications online, that all link to an interview with David Arakhamia who was Ukraine’s chief negotiator. And I went and watched the video, and I speak Russian and understand Ukrainian; and he says no such thing.”

The David Arakhamia video he mentions is 24 November 2023.

I published a full chronology of what actually happened in October 2023:

https://listeningto.org/ukraine/2022-chronology/

The claim is not based on David Arakhamia’s comments at all.

It comes from:

• A pro-Ukrainian source, Ukrainian Pravda, in May 2022

• The former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett (who details exactly what happened in a 30-minute story), 4 February 2023

• And the second longest-serving Foreign Minister in Turkey’s history, 23 August 2022

There is abundant primary source material highlighting events.

Please can someone who reads this, and who knows Konstantin, send him this: https://listeningto.org/ukraine/2022-chronology/ He is unaware of a lot of important history.

It is not a Kremlin talking point. Here is Zelensky, the morning of 9 April 2022, hours before Boris went to see him – quoted by the Associated Press:

“People will accept peace in any case. People want this war to be over on our terms… I am sure there are people who won’t be satisfied with any kind of peace under any conditions at any time. Because it’s a huge wound and a huge tragedy to lose your loved ones. But if we speak without emotions, however hard it is, we have to understand that every war should end in peace or it will end with millions of victims. And even then, if there are millions of victims, eventually peace will come, the war will end. So from this, we have to draw conclusions. Yes we have to fight, but, fight for life. You can’t fight for dust when there is nothing and no people. That’s why it’s important to stop this war. It’s difficult, emotionally difficult. No one wants to negotiate with a person or people who tortured this nation. It’s all understandable. And as a man, as a father, I understand this very well. We should not lose. This is not a wish. We don’t want to lose opportunities, if we have them, for a diplomatic solution of this matter. We should not lose them. We cannot afford to decide for millions of people who want to stop the war. Decide for them and say, ‘No, we are not ready to speak with murderers’.”

How can anyone claim Zelensky was not willing to negotiate? (And this is after Bucha.)

4. Boris says that in April 2022 Russia occupied more land than it does today, and by implication, would have then held onto more land than it will today.

This is false.

Here’s Mykhailo Podolyak, a very senior adviser to Zelensky, 29 March 2022, on video for the New York Times in Istanbul:

“The Russian side has received this agreement, where the means of ending the war are clearly indicated, to study it and suggest their counter proposals. Of course, the agreement on security guarantees can only be signed after the cease-fire and the withdrawal of all Russian troops to the positions compromised upon, those as of 23 February, 2022. As for Crimea and Sevastopol we have agreed bilaterally with the Russian Federation to a 15-year pause and to conduct bilateral talks regarding the status of these territories. Today’s documents on the agreements about security guarantees are sufficient for announcing and holding the meeting between Presidents.”

There are reasonable criticisms one can make of the Istanbul agreement, and Naftali Bennett clearly states he’s not sure how his own deal would have played out, but Boris misstates what had been agreed on territory.

5. Boris: “People can judge whether or not Zelensky did the right thing in fighting on”

Here’s the late Dr. Kissinger in summer 2022:

“Negotiations need to begin in the next two months before it creates upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome… Ideally, the dividing line should be a return to the status quo ante,” he added, apparently referring to a restoration of Ukraine’s borders as they were before the war began in February. “Pursuing the war beyond that point would not be about the freedom of Ukraine, but a new war against Russia itself.”

Despite his very old age, Kissinger called this better than anyone. (He was denounced at Davos for his remarks.)

I personally came to realise this much later, and came to argue forcefully for talks in August 2023:

Writing in June 2023:

Every UK editor ignored it. And there was an omertà on even the suggestion of diplomacy. (A dozen+ writers at prominent publications wrote to me in 2023 saying this.)

To those now saying “We welcome today’s news from Jeddah on the U.S.-Ukraine talks, including the proposal for a ceasefire agreement” – I personally think hundreds of thousands have died needlessly in the past 20 months, for what will be a worse territorial outcome.

6. Konstantin to Boris: “I have a lot of friends in Ukraine who think you were right”

Look to history. The fighting/defending party often cannot best judge when to stop and sue for peace. Chiang-Kai Shek didn’t stop for an armistice, and got mauled by Mao.

The South Korean President did not want an Armistice. But it’s stood for 72 years and counting, from his General being strong-armed by Eisenhower to sign it.

Leaving the decision to the smaller defending country is a historically ignorant principle on which to base diplomacy. And it’s actively irresponsible when supplying it with weapons that are making its fate worse.

External (allied) countries ought to be able to see situations dispassionately. The entire UK media system let Ukraine down here.

7. I personally think Starmer’s “reassurance force” is not going to fly.

The UK today needs something that looks at lot more like this: https://artofthedeal.org/ukraine/FRUKUS/ (without putting effectively NATO troops into Ukraine)

Dominic kind enough to publicly confirm about this plan:

“It is being examined in DC”

8. Boris: “We didn’t have a plan. What was the objective? We never said… We hadn’t got a clear strategy”

This has been evident for quite some time. Why were editors not allowing the groupthink of Ukraine policy to be challenged in 2023?

This immediately after the need for “red teams” had been championed ad nauseam post-Covid.

How do editors reflect on their coverage over the past three years?

9. Tactical nukes

There’s an assumption pervading all of Boris’s thinking that the only way Putin might have escalated is nuclear weapons.

There are myriad other ways Russia has escalated. How great is it that Russia has signed an intimate defence partnership with North Korea? Iran too. And deployed its Oreshnik missile.

Russia has already escalated in extremely undesirable ways. But the British commentariat are blind to this bigger picture.

---

One can believe all of the above without defending Putin’s actions.

Russia is dangerous. Europe needs to be extremely vigilant. We should boost our deterrent credibility.

But President Trump said himself that Biden could have stopped Russia’s invasion with diplomacy. This was also stated in 2022 by Jared Kushner.

Instead of going along with Joe Biden’s awful tepid middle-ground policy, the UK could have done something – but it squandered the opportunity.

Rishi could have played a much bigger role in commencing diplomatic talks in 2023. And to anyone who thinks an outcome negotiated now by President Trump is unfavourable to Ukraine: the UK had three years to step up and do something when Ukraine had more cards.

Our leaders chose not to. Our entire media remained silent, and ignored calls from those arguing otherwise. President Trump and his team now have a worse hand to play as arbiters – but are attempting the correct and admirable course.

Zelensky signed a decree in October 2022 outright banning diplomacy from Ukraine – making it an illegal act. No British editor was willing to report on this.

The one thing I concur with Boris on: “It’s a tragedy.”