Is Washington Negotiating Russia’s Terms to Ukraine? | EYES ON GEOPOLITICS

The Team House

This episode of 'Eyes on Geopolitics' examines U.S. diplomacy with Russia and Ukraine, focusing on the controversial visit by Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff to Moscow

Key takeaways

• The pattern of U.S. envoys visiting Moscow before Kiev raises concerns that Washington may be negotiating Russia's terms to Ukraine rather than advocating for Kyiv.
• Russia's release of American prisoner Robert Gilman appears to have been a strategic move, not a humanitarian gesture, with no public disclosure of what was exchanged.

Main topics

• U.S.-Russia diplomacy and the sequence of diplomatic visits
• The release of American prisoner Robert Gilman and potential quid pro quo

Notable quotes

"We're going to be old and we're going to be thinking about these as really good times. Like, bro, you're not leasing a strip mall, brother. This is, like, people dying."

"Putin's concessions are all theater. You know, Gilman's release, a weekend pause, that costs Russia nothing. It buys headlines."

Conclusion

The episode concludes with deep skepticism about current U.S. diplomatic strategy in Ukraine and Iran,

Transcript preview

Speaker 2 (0:00) Hey everybody, welcome to another episode of Eyes on Geopolitics. I'm here with Jonathan Hackett, Mick Mulroy, Andy Milburn, and myself. Andy's leaving. See you, Andy. Good seeing you. Mick, congratulations on your daughter getting married. Thank you. Sláinte. Sláinte. You're welcome. And we got a lot cooking, as usual. We just had... Speaker 2 (0:25) We just had Uncle Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner head over to Moscow to talk to Putin. And now they are in. Currently, we're shooting this at 11 a.m. on Sunday, Eastern Time. They are now in Ukraine talking with Zelensky. Speaker 2 (0:44) I didn't really see a lot of, like, the readout of what they really talked about in Russia and stuff like that. I did make a joke on Twitter that they went to get their marching orders from Putin and then are going to Ukraine to, like, give Zelensky a laundry list of stuff. I did see a little bit of some stuff, a clip of, like, Wyckoff kind of just glazing Putin, basically, which was incredible to me. Like, we're going to be old and we're going to be thinking about these as really good times. Like, bro, you're not leasing a strip mall, brother. This is, like, people dying. every single day in a legal invasion by Russia into Ukraine, into a sovereign country, democratic country. So not exactly like just a feel good thing to be talking about and like with such kind of. Very blasé, I'd say. Where are you guys at? What do you think is going to come out of this? Did you get any readout as to what they were talking about? Were there any specifics? Mick, you go ahead. John? Speaker 1 (1:43) On the substance of the meeting, also they discussed U.S. Marine veteran Robert Gilman, who had been imprisoned in Russia unlawfully for four years because he was teaching in Russia. He was held there as a political prisoner. And last month, the US negotiated for his release. And in this meeting, just this weekend, the delegation thanked Putin for releasing him. So the question is, what was exchanged? That's not been discussed, I don't think. What was exchanged for that person, that American to return home? So I think that's important for people to pay attention to as well, that these things aren't free. Russia is not releasing people for charity. There's absolutely something that was given in return, and it would be interesting to see what that thing was. Besides what you already mentioned, Mick, which are all very important strategic level things, there was a more tactical issue I noticed when Kushner was getting off the airplane. He was wearing white Nike tennis shoes, jeans, and a black t-shirt, and everybody else was in a suit, including Kirill Dmitriev, the presidential envoy, which is the equivalent of Witkoff. but on the Russian side, wearing a full black tailored suit, clearly indicating, you know, sartorial decisions are decisions and people choose to wear what they're wearing to send a message. If you remember when the CEO of Twitter was in Congress testifying, he famously refused to wear a suit, even though the dress code is a suit and refused to, you know, dress appropriately. I feel like Witkoff is, or I'm sorry, Kushner is doing something like that in this meeting where he's intentionally dressing down. Just something interesting that I noticed in the image, if you look at it. Speaker 1 (3:17) And also Dmitry I've said, so he took a bunch of pictures and released some pictures on his ex account. And he said, welcome to Moscow peacemakers. That was how it was advertised on the Russian side in Russian and through task media was that these are peacemakers arriving in Russia, which is something very interesting as well. Speaker 2 (3:34) I will say this. I hate Kushner as much as the next person does. He wore that like when he got off the plane, but in the meeting with Putin, he was suited up. Speaker 1 (3:43) True, true. I mean, if you've done these kind of flights when you're like, for example, when I was at the couple of embassies, we would get these diplomatic or these distinguished visitors coming in, you know, usually a secretary or somebody higher than that. There's a protocol. There's a dress code. There's very specific ways that you have to appear as soon as you get off the aircraft. You know, for example, one time we were receiving the secretary of state in a country I was in. and the secretary of defense as well. And the senior person on my side of the delegation forgot his tie. And because he forgot his tie, all of us had to remove our ties because we couldn't be dressed above his level. So like, this is like carefully orchestrated stuff that was not an accident. And it wasn't just because he wanted to be on casual Friday. There was, there was a choice in how he dressed. Speaker 5 (4:23) Yeah. I mean, I, I would say that is, that's such a pathetically minor gesture compared to, you know, the, The central part of this is this, that the pattern since, where are we now? So the pattern since last year, early last year, is that we send, we the United States, we send the same envoys to Moscow first. They come away with a gesture, right? In this case, the release of Yeoman. And then they carry the Russian framing to Kiev and to Europe. So, you know, whatever the intent, whatever Kushner is wearing, the sequence in which the United States is doing this makes Washington kind of the broker of Russia's terms, right, rather than the backer of the side it's supposedly allied with, which is Speaker 3 (5:20) Europeans and Speaker 5 (5:21) Ukraine. And so, you know, that's one thing I find disheartening. Putin's got no reason to stop, right? As long as we do it this way. He believes that time favors him. You know, I get it that absolutely the Russians are losing what to us is an incomprehensible amount of people in the front every month. But until that translates into some groundswell movement in Russia, and even then, it's hard to see it affecting Putin or putting him in a bind. I mean, In return, Ukraine is having a manpower crunch, something, by the way, I predicted on Substack two years ago. Western attention has been firmly on Iran, and the U.S. administration keeps showing up in Moscow. So, I mean, negotiation only works. I'm laughing a little bit here because we don't appear to be very adept at negotiation, the art of the deal. But negotiation only works when the other side thinks that continuing costs more than negotiating, right, or agreeing to a settlement. And nothing in our current approach changes that calculation for Putin. I mean, Putin's concessions are all theater. You know, Gilman's release, a weekend pause, that costs Russia nothing. It buys headlines. Speaker 5 (6:52) You know, they're just kind of treating them as goodwill rewards. And it just invites more. It really seeds ground again to the Russians. Speaker 2 (7:03) One thing I found kind of weird is every time that they would have a... It would be reported that we're talking with Zelensky or Zelensky's coming to America and stuff like that. President Trump would always have a phone call with Putin beforehand. And to me, just the layman, it looks like what it looks like when Wyckoff and Kushner go to Moscow first before they go to Ukraine. It kind of looks like they're getting their marching orders and essentially going to negotiate Russia's terms to Ukraine. Even with the phone calls with Trump, it's happened like multiple times before Trump met with Zelensky. Speaker 2 (7:42) I don't know if that's protocol or whatever, but like, it seems like, why the fuck do the Russians keep talking first? Why don't we get what the Ukrainians want and be like, this is what they want, bro. Like, and you're invading a country, dude. Like, who are you to dictate terms? You're not doing it well. Who are you to dictate terms? Speaker 5 (8:00) That's my, yeah, that's my point. You know, and there's another point too. Doubtless, our regional allies in the Middle East are watching, right? So Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, Doha. are probably Speaker 1 (8:12) drawing conclusions from how Washington treats Kiev. Also, the Iran negotiators are looking at this. Think about how differently we're approaching the Ukraine-Russia negotiation versus the Iran-US-Israel, because there's three countries on both of these conflicts that are negotiating in different ways. The US, first of all, would never visit Iran to negotiate before talking to Israel, first of all. They also don't call the Iranians first to talk about what they're going to talk to Israel about before talking to Israel. And Israel's on our side, and Ukraine's on our side. And just look how starkly contrasted those two approaches are to how the US is approaching both of these conflicts, neither of which are going in the US's favor to the exact degree that we want it to go. But it's just kind of interesting to look at that choice. And it's the same people, Wyckoff and Kushner, it's the same human beings on both of these teams, right? You Speaker 5 (9:01) know, in deference to... The section of our audience who are downhearted by the fact that we're always pointing out bad things and suggest that we are being overly pessimistic, I would say there's not a lot to be too optimistic about. But in terms of solutions, you know, I mean, it's simple here. Go to Kiev first, agree the terms with Zelensky and the Europeans, then present them in Moscow. And, you know, the other thing is put leverage. on the table before the talks right but say i mean look what we're doing against iran do the same against russia secondary sanctions on buyers of russian crude uh go after the russian shadow fleet the banks that uh that are aligned with russia um you know and for and enforce all of these things the same way that we're enforcing the iran blockade uh russia's you know and and john karemi from wrong but russia's budget, its war budget runs on oil revenue. And so the same tools that squeeze Iran will probably work against Russia. And then at the same time, restore the weapons pipeline and say so publicly, right? And I know I get it. I understand all the arguments. I've got a good friend, a senior executive, Lockheed Martin. So I understand all the arguments about Patriot Interceptors, but step it up. you know um still we could still be able to do that raise ukraine to a higher priority for patriots um and long-range long-range precision fires um you know all of these things and yeah as i said announce it and stop Speaker 5 (10:51) As far as Ukraine, stop leaning on Ukraine to pause the air war. I mean, Ukraine's deep strikes are the one lever that actually reaches Russian decision-making. And we've talked about the pressure they're putting on the Russians here. It's a significant amount of their oil refinery, their energy infrastructure based on oil is getting hit. Speaker 1 (11:17) And harassing the rear aerial in those deep strike scenarios, it's not just a one for one thing like you just strike and that's the damage. It also has a moral effect on the population. It demoralizes those who are connected to those industries. And it kind of it goes far deeper. It's got an exponential impact if you're able to strike something far, far inside the country versus at the front line. It brings the war. outside the theater into the place where the people think they're safe. And that has a huge impact. I Speaker 2 (11:45) have a question. If you're Ukraine, right? And you kind of see the messaging, right? Because like, obviously, US is, you know, pretty focused on Iran and what's going on there. But when you see like the like Scott Pescent go on the news and talk about how the reason oil is spiking up a little bit is because the Ukrainians are striking oil infrastructure Speaker 3 (12:12) in Russia Speaker 2 (12:14) as if that's like a bad thing and like kind of comparing Speaker 3 (12:17) Ukraine and what they're doing with those Speaker 2 (12:19) deep strikes on oil infrastructure to like Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz and blocking shipping essentially. The fact that like, I don't know if those are talking points that are given or this guy's just flailing because everything he's done is fucking hurt the economy more and more percent. But to like lump Iran and Ukraine into the same kind of basket, it's very different, right? Because on paper, Iran is our enemy, right? Like whether you believe that this war that we started was a good thing or not. You know, Ukraine's not the enemy. It's like very clear Russia's the enemy. And it's weird that this administration particularly does a lot of like spinning, for lack of a better word, for Russia. If you're Ukraine and you're seeing this, like I know we need, it's a delicate situation. They need the info. They need our intel and stuff like that. But at what point are you like, guys, whose fucking side are you really on? Speaker 1 (13:27) The problem with what the cent says is a lot of... Speaker 2 (13:30) Oh, yeah, sorry, Mick. You're a little lagged. I think you're like a few seconds back. Let's go Mick, and then John, you pick up right after Mick. Speaker 3 (13:39) Okay. Yeah, so what I was going to say is the Ukrainians don't have a choice. This is how Russia raises money to fight the war. So if they don't go after their ability to fund themselves, just like we're going after the Iranians' ability to fund ourselves, like we're having an effect. The Iranian economy is in a free fall right now. That's what the Ukrainians are trying to do. They're trying to cut off the source of funding for the Russians. And one thing I wanted to point out to like, you know, the Internet went down is Russia's help in Iran. They actually came out and announced relatively recently that they're going to do everything they can to help Iran get past the economic restrictions that the U.S. is putting on them. So the fact that they're not our friend is clear. And they're providing, I think, a lot of the intelligence that they're using to say, and I know we're going to get to it. target our military so uh ukraine has no choice they're fighting a war against a very large uh enemy who started it