Politics: Can Divides Over War Be Bridged At The G7 Summit?

This message comes from the Southern Environmental Law Center. No one voted for dirty air and water. That's why SELC is fighting back to defend the healthy environment everyone depends on. Because it's not political, it's fundamental. Learn more at selc.org.

On the southern shores of Lake Geneva in France, leaders of the G7 countries gathered this. week for their annual summit. The group of seven of the world's largest economies was all but guaranteed to spend its time responding to the U.S. and Israel's war with Iran and the economic crisis that's followed. But news over the weekend about a breakthrough in the war and an agreement that could lead to a longer-term peace deal has shifted the focus to longer-term questions about the future of relations with Iran, its nuclear program, and the Persian Gulf. But leaders paired those questions with lots of smiles.

Well, I have to say I experienced this G7 summit as very constructive and really carried by a joint spirit, and at no point were there any personal disturbances. That's German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on Wednesday. I'm Jen White. You're listening to the 1A podcast. Today, what this G7 meeting reveals about the state of the U.S. relationship with its most important allies, especially after months of a war of choice with Iran. That's right after this.

This message comes from BetterHelp. People talk about mental health more openly now, but asking for help can still feel hard. BetterHelp's 26th State of Stigma report surveyed 2,000 Americans and found that 85% believe getting support is wise, yet 74% say society discourages people from doing so. Don't let stigma stand in the way of support. Start therapy with BetterHelp. Visit BetterHelp.com slash NPR. This message comes from Granger. For the ones who get it done, Granger offers the professional grade products you need to get the job done.

With fast delivery and access to technical product experts ready to help you meet any challenge. Call, click Granger.com or just stop by. For three weeks in 2020, part of my Seattle neighborhood was taken over by a protest occupation. We were here to protest police brutality. But it ended in tragedy. The whole space fell. darker and angrier. Join me as I investigate the unsolved killing of 16-year-old Antonio Mays Jr.

Listen to We Keep Us Safe on the Embedded podcast from NPR. Let's get into the conversation with our guests. In studio with us is Akbar Shahed Ahmed. He's diplomatic correspondent for the news outlet Notice and author of Crossing the Red Line, Biden, his advisors, and Israel's War in Gaza. It's out in September. Akbar, welcome back to 1A.

Thanks for having me, John. Also joining us is Will Toddman. He's a senior fellow in the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. It's a think tank in Washington, D.C., where he joined us from now. Will, welcome to the program. Thanks so much for having me. So Akbar, the G7 wraps up later today. What's come out of it that tells us the most about what's happening behind the scenes at the summit?

Certainly this kind of message of camaraderie, friendship, we don't have any issues with Trump. you know, this is a very different tone from last year where there was the shock of the second Trump election, this idea that the Trump administration was coming in, having last year said, they felt U.S. traditional allies were slipping away. They weren't happy with how their societies were changing. They weren't happy with how they were contributing to the alliance.

This year, the Trump administration didn't go in on the offense and Europeans went in with their own charm offensive. All of that said, Jen, this was papering over a lot of deep fundamental disagreements that are long term and are going to outlast this Trump presidency. And frankly, a lot of the leaders who were there. President Emmanuel Macron who was there is not going to be in office next year. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is on his way out.

Friedrich Merz, who can say in Germany what's going to happen? So for a lot of the leaders, this kind of message of, we trust the Trump administration on Iran. We're not, you know, breaking ranks. It did paper over things like, for instance, Trump not having a one-on-one with the British Prime Minister, traditionally America's closest ally, instead having one-on-ones with Arab states,

Arab leaders who were there at the summit. Where else has there been tension at this summit, especially between the president and the six other members? President Trump quite openly said, yet again, Ukraine is not our war. And that is not the message Europeans want to hear, particularly as I'm looking at Ukraine, looking to reach a deal, but to do so from a position of strength. So Europeans want to hear the U.S. is in Ukraine's corner. President Trump is saying, we sell them weapons, we want you, the Europeans to pay for it. We don't feel we have anything to do with this. that's a big sort of disagreement.

You also saw President Trump continue to kind of veer into these outlandish ideas that are really concerning for Europeans. So, for instance, Lebanon, a major element of the war of choice with Iran, a major element of any peace that happens, the Iranians have said, President Trump came out and said, maybe Syria should go invade Lebanon, an idea that's fraught with decades of occupation, violence, instability between those two countries.

And it's just not something that Europeans can see as feasible or positive for them, again, being much closer to the region. We'll talk more about Ukraine in a moment. But we'll given this provisional agreement, the U.S. and Iran finalized over the weekend, and we should say the official text is still unpublished. But what questions about this deal are allies likely still wanting answers about from President Trump? Yeah, well, they have probably not seen this deal either.

And so it's interesting that in the statement that came out, they said they welcomed the announcement of a deal. and they praised President Trump's strong leadership, I think really trying to get in his good graces. But they ultimately probably do not know what is in it either, just like the rest of us. And so I think they would like more clarity on what it includes. But for them, their main priority is going to be reopening the Strait of Homoos,

having the resumption of maritime traffic that will start to bring down energy prices, which have affected Europe more. and Japan and other members of the G7, I think more than here in the US. And so I think they really want reassurances that this deal is real, and they are prepared to try to bolster it. The UK and France have come up with an initiative

to help secure the Strait of Hormuz by providing some of their naval assets and drones to help with demining. They want to show President Trump that they can share some of the burden, and so I think they're keen to articulate, the fact that they can play a role now, even though when the war itself was going on, they wanted nothing to do with it whatsoever because they were fiercely opposed to it.

So they're keen to show their support. But Akbar, what does the U.S. need from its G7 allies, including the EU, to make progress toward formally ending this war and Iran? So there's a lot of the U.S. seats, right? Because let's even think about what Iran is looking for to kind of end the war. The reality of this is that President Trump cut a deal with Iran as the weaker party, essentially the losing party. It was on Iran. It wasn't his terms of regime change. The Iranians want deep financial relief. That's going to be very tough from a U.S. perspective where Congress, where other players

can kind of hold up any money or sort of get in the way. Europeans have a lot more of that ability to either do business with Iran, trade by their oil, kind of give them this easing of pressure that they want. Europeans also have that technical nuclear expertise, Jen, that the U.S. government has pushed out en masse out of the energy department, out of the energy department, out of the State Department and not included in any of the diplomacy with Iran. So in prior deals with Iran, like the 2015 JCPOA under President Obama, the Europeans were key players, right, because they had that technical knowledge and they were seen as a little bit

of a bridge, as Will rightly pointed out, you know, Europeans are not feeling bought in yet into this process of diplomacy with Iran. Theoretically, we're entering a 60-day period, which is supposed to tackle highly enriched uranium, it's supposed to tackle this trait. you need their expertise, you need their buy-in. Just want to note here that Bloomberg News published a 14-point draft memorandum, whether it matches the official text of this memo of understanding is unclear, but if people want to read a little further, they can do so there.

Well, what other priorities were on the agenda for the G7 before the news over the weekend of this interim agreement? So they were also going to be talking about Ukraine, and I think President Trump wanted to see more commitments from the European to share more of the burden there. Of course, we've seen a real drop in U.S. support for Ukraine. And I think for the Europeans, they wanted to try and make sure that President Trump was on their side.

They feel that the tide is turning in Ukraine's favor. And they want to make sure that President Trump isn't going to do anything that could jeopardize the Ukrainian's ability to continue to bolster its position vis-à-vis Russia. But there are also questions about the economy. and Chinese exports. They discussed this idea that they think that China is unfairly dumping its exports around the world, damaging markets through its use of subsidies.

So I think that is another key piece. And then also AI as well. And we've seen tensions with AI between the US and its allies just in the past week with President Trump's decision to ban. Anthropic from using its users from using Fable, its most advanced software there to outside of the US. So there are real tensions bubbling away here, but I was struck that there were so many opportunities for issues to derail this,

for it to be a disaster of a summit. You'll remember last year President Trump left early. That does not seem to have happened. And I think that's in part because at this stage, President Trump realizes that he does need the support of other world powers, other global leaders, in his efforts as he continues to sell this deal that he has come to, or he says he has come to, with Iran. And ultimately, I think he thinks it's not in his interest now to have even more rifts as he's about to continue to face a lot of domestic opposition to the terms of the deal here

in the United States. We usually see a leader's statement signed by each of the seven countries. It typically comes out on the last day of the G7 summit. On Wednesday, the G7 leaders put out a joint statement that expressed strong support for Ukraine and for a final negotiated peace with Iran. Akbar, considering the fact that President Trump signed onto this statement and yet still says Ukraine is not the U.S. problem, what do you make between the distance between what he's saying and what he actually did at the G7? It really speaks to this philosophical disconnect.

that remains, right, where Washington still believes the president, Vladimir Putin, is a partner for peace. And Europeans feel not only is he trying to grab as much of Ukraine as he can, he's now looking at NATO members, he's not looking at the Baltic states, he might even be looking at Sweden. So there's that disconnect. And it gets to this point of that where there is opportunity for cooperation on Ukraine or even on China, the Europeans are actually moving in the Trump administration's direction, limiting trade with China. Sometimes the Trump administration's, administration's narrative, rhetoric, and ideas are making that really hard. And there's a stubbornness and inflexibility on the U.S. side where Europeans are often

bending over backwards for the U.S. Well, let's take a quick break. But coming up, how Ukraine's security and the U.S. midterm elections are showing up at this summit.

This message comes from Granger. For the ones who get it done, Granger offers the professional-grade products you need to get the job done. With fast delivery and access to technical product experts ready to help you meet any challenge. Call, click Granger.com, or just stop by. Of all the protests in the summer of 2020, for a moment there, it was utopia. One took a unique turn. Somebody over there, they ain't seen a ought to use a gun.

This is the story of how violence came to occupy an anti-violence occupation in Seattle. Listen to We Keep Us Safe, a new true crime series on the show. the Embedded Podcast from NPR. This is Ira Glass of This American Life. Do you know our show? Okay, well, either way, I'm going to tell you about it. We make stories that hopefully pull you in at the beginning with funny moments and feelings and people in surprising situations, and then you just want to find out what is going to happen

and cannot stop listening. That's right. I'm talking about stories that make you miss appointments. This American Life, wherever you get your podcast. Hi, it's Terry Gross, host of Fresh. Air. Hey, take a break from the 24-hour news cycle with us and listen to long-form interviews with your favorite authors, actors, filmmakers, comedians, and musicians, the people making the art that nourishes us and speaks to our times. So listen to the Fresh Air podcast from NPR and WHY.

Back to our conversation on the G7 summit in France, the first G7 gathering of the world's major economies since the U.S. and Israel's war with Iran began. Well, bigger picture, what problems has this work created in the Middle East? Problems at the region, and the world will be dealing with for months, if not years to come. I think the biggest challenge is the total breakdown in security in the Gulf and the shattering of the sense of the Gulf being an island of stability in an otherwise troubled region. This is something that Arab Gulf states really fear.

This was their nightmare scenario. And so I think going forward, we will see them diversifying their security partnerships. To some degree, there will be opportunities for other members of the G7 there as they increase their security engagements with Arab Gulf states. I was in Qatar a few weeks ago and I heard interest in new deals with European states, with Canada, with South Korea and Japan. And so I think in some ways that indicates a shift away from the U.S. dominated security architecture. But I think ultimately this shows that in this current geopolitical environment we're in, there are very rarely clean outcomes from these conflicts. We've seen Ukraine be able to stand up to Russia.

We've now seen Iran be able to stand up to the United States. And so while various actors can impose costs and can try, to use their military power to undermine their adversaries, it's very, very difficult for any of them to forge a more stable order. And so ultimately what this shows is we're now in a much more unstable global system. This is a period of disorder. And I think that will really shift the incentives of different actors as they try to navigate it and try to secure their own interests,

sometimes working against the US, not in tandem with it. Well, well, I know we have to let you go in a moment, but we'll also talk about the NATO summit a bit later. What's the biggest issue you're watching for with that summit in July? So to me, it's the transformation of Turkey's role within NATO. I think if we go back a few years, Turkey was considered sort of the black sheep of NATO. It was seen as having too close a relationship with Russia, and there were real tensions between Turkey and its European allies as well over migration. and other issues. But now we see Turkey having transformed its role.

I think Turkey is now playing a much bigger role in the Middle East. It has forged an important partnership with Syria, but also there is growing alignment with Saudi Arabia, with Pakistan and with Qatar as well. And so I think we'll see a much more confident Turkey showing that it can play an important role in shaping the contours of, the new Middle East that emerges after this war between the U.S., Israel, and Iran.

And so I think that's going to be interesting. And the fact, of course, that the summit is in Turkey sort of adds to this. I think for Recep Tayyip Erdogan, he's really going to bask in the attention, and he's going to have a much easier time in engaging with the other members, other NATO leaders. Well, just a quick note here before we let you go, well, the Turkish opposition won a pretty shocking victory in local elections in spring 2020. and it was the first real loss Recep Tayyip Erdogan experience since his AKP party came to power. Does that shift the future of Turkey's role?

Well, I think unfortunately Turkey has continued down an authoritarian pathway, and we've seen Recep Tayyip Erdogan really clamp down on his opposition, including mayors of important Turkish cities. So I think he's sort of clamping down on opposition domestically, but at the same time, some of these developments that we've seen over the past few years do work in his favor. I think the fact that he now has a very strong relationship with Syria, the fact that large numbers of Syrians are returning to Syria as well, Syrian refugees who were in Turkey. I think this bolsters Recep Tayyip Erdogan standing. And again, I think this bolsters his utility to other NATO allies as well.

So I think they're probably likely to turn a blind eye to some of those authoritarian tendencies and to really seek new ways to partner with Turkey on securing their interests. And one of those is going to be the idea that Turkey could play a role in developing alternatives to the Strait of Hormuz with land trade routes for an energy routes through the Middle East. And I think this is something that we're going to see Turkey touting, and that's something that European states in particular are going to be very keen to see, because they really do worry that Iran has the ability to continue to threaten maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz again, no matter what President Trump says.

Well, Will Todman, thanks for speaking with us. Thanks so much for having me. Well, Todman is a senior fellow in the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. It's a think tank in Washington, D.C. We're still here with Akbar Shah-Had Ahmed of the news outlet notice. Akbar, I want to circle back to this question about the problems this war in Iran is created, not just in the Middle East, not just in the region, but for the world. And we heard we'll talk a lot about security, but what other issues are you watching?

I think the human toll of the war and the choice to embroil not just the people of Iran and the people of Lebanon who saw U.S. and Israeli assaults on them, but people globally who have paid a price, right? whether it's in Pakistan, whether it's in the Philippines, whether it's in Europe, where you've seen school closures, office closures, shortages of fertilizer driving our prices, that's all a choice with no clear strategic gain. And that's something you don't go back from, right? The reality that the U.S., even if it's now made a deal, put so many lives online, that's sort of now in the global DNA and global discussion about what does U.S.

global leadership mean? How much can you trust President Trump or anyone? And how is that perhaps compounded by the U.S.'s withdrawal from the international aid landscape? Right, of course. The U.S. would previously have been a development partner, and instead it's slashing what it's offering. So even in Lebanon, for example, where the U.S. has traditionally said it supports the Lebanese state against his blood, the Iran-backed militia, they're slashing the amount the Trump administration that they want to give the Lebanese military. So you are seeing the U.S. set back. And what's concerning their, Jen, is also with the withdrawal. of the US role, you're seeing a degradation of the broader international human rights standards.

Right? So with US and Israeli conduct in this war, for example, where schools and hospitals were hit in ways that we saw in Gaza, and then with countries saying, look, the US has openly violated international law so blatantly. Spain, for instance, a NATO member said this really openly. The French felt this. The Brits felt this. It was part of the reason why they couldn't align as President Trump wanted them to. So it gets to this question of, are we courting future instability by taking these short-termist approaches that are really costly and saying we can think about human rights tomorrow. And that gets to the Turkey question that will raise too. Even if Recep Tayyip Erdogan is seen as a little more of a reliable partner, the fact that he is clamping down at home and NATO

members are choosing to turn a blind eye while they're also claiming to be an alliance standing for liberal democratic values, what kind of danger are they according in the long run? I want to turn to energy because this war with Iran, like to Iran, like to Iran. preventing nearly all ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, again, a major source of oil, especially for Asia, essentially cutting it off. And it proved that Iran can control the flow of oil through the strait and shut it off if it wants. What can the U.S. and its allies decide at this summit that could get traffic back to normal? Going back is really, really hard, right? So, for instance, in the Babel Muntab Strait, in the Red Sea, where there were also taxed by the Yemeni militia, the Houthis backed by Iran over Israel's war in Gaza.

it's still just at 56% of where it was prior to October 7th, 223. And that's three years down the line. So the street of Hormuz, there's a huge backlog of shipping. And a lot of this also depends on confidence among private actors and companies, insurers, shipping companies, shipping crews, many of whom were stranded, isolated in the Strait of Hormuz for over 100 days. Right? So Europeans can kind of work with the Trump administration to say this isn't just about

the U.S. and Iran and whatever may happen there, which is very unpredictable, let's build a new framework that's functional here. But that will require close partnership, which again, there's a lot of derision from the U.S. side towards the idea that Europeans can add anything of value. Well, let's move from the Middle East to the other major war, one that's now in its fifth year. And of course, we're talking about Ukraine overnight on Monday. Russia fired a barrage of dozens of missiles and hundreds of drones at major Ukrainian cities. They could at least a left. people. At the same time, analysis from the front lines show Russia has lost more territory in Ukraine than it's gained this year, and it's continued to lose 30,000 to 35,000 soldiers

every month who were killed or injured during this campaign. Meanwhile, at the G7, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky was an invited guest. What are the UK and the European Union, especially key players like France and Germany, trying to accomplish here when it comes to Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine. There's some very specific asks that they would like the Trump administration to kind of ease up on. So for instance, the Trump administration has really limited the flow of patriot batteries to the Ukrainians. The Ukrainians are saying, can we co-produce those within our own country? Because again, an effect just of the war in Iran, everything is so interconnected, the U.S. has been running through its own stockpile of weaponry. You can't

necessarily buy it from them, and it takes a long time to produce. The Ukrainians want permission to produce. The Trump administration has all. also occasionally put limits, rhetorical or quiet, on where do Ukrainians can hit within Russia. And that's really symbolically important for that. You know, the number you cited of the loss of Russian soldiers, that's huge. And it speaks to how Russian society is starting to feel the effect of the war in a way they hadn't. When you saw President Vladimir Putin do his annual Military Victory Day parade this year, it was much more muted than anything we've ever seen. Why?

because they felt suddenly the Ukrainians could attack them. So the Russians certainly feel on the back foot. What the Europeans are hoping is, can the Americans let the Ukrainians press their advantage? On Tuesday, President Trump said the war in Ukraine has had, quote, no impact on the United States and the U.S. has nothing to do with the war happening thousands of miles away. I mean, first, fact-checked that for us, Akbar.

Is that true? Absolutely not. I mean, of course, the war in Ukraine has had a, significant impact on how the U.S. is perceived by its allies. So even if you just think about it from the point of view of America, sort of shielded by two oceans, relies for its defense often on allies further away closer to its adversaries, how the U.S. has chosen to behave towards Ukraine has become the barometer in countries like Germany, Italy, countries that host tens of thousands of U.S. troops, some of whom are

going withdrawn, and many of whom are thinking, do we want to invest in this alliance, or do we want to invest in European collective defense? Then, of course, there's a domestic impact of so many Americans feel deeply connected to the Ukrainians, right? And feel their plight, took in some Ukrainian refugees, feel that the U.S. should be standing up for human rights and basic values here. It's become a test of whether the U.S. stands for what it says it stands for. Another view emails, which you want to see from this G7 summit, quote, admit Ukraine to NATO and let Israel go forth alone. How is President Volodymyr Zelensky feeling on the other side of this NATO summit as it's close to wrapping up?

Certainly, it was not as bad as it could have been for President Volodymyr Zelensky, who didn't see the kind of flare-ups that we saw earlier in the Trump administration. All of that said, there's a lot of uncertainty for Ukraine now, because some of the traditional allies like President Emmanuel Macron-in France are on their way out. Democrats who are likely to take more power in the U.S. starting in November do have a more poor Ukrainian stance. Will that turn Ukraine into a domestic political punching bag in the U.S.? That becomes a risk for Volodymyr Zelensky.

President Trump has previously done that with unfounded claims of Ukrainian election meddling and claims of Biden administration corruption in Ukraine. For President Volodymyr Zelensky, too, he hasn't got any of the commitments yet that he's looking for, and it's unclear who in President Trump's very small and insular circle of advisors is really on Ukraine's side now. Meanwhile, you continue to see the Trump administration parrot some Russian government lines.

So, for instance, outgoing Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, this week, released intelligence she claimed, showed a US plot to use bio-weapons, very much a Russian narrative, right? And scientists came out and said that wasn't what was happening. But the fact is, people in President Trump's circle and his movement continue to parrot those lines. So this G7 summit and the NATO summit next month are two of the big international meetings

before the U.S. midterm elections in November. And the balance of power in Congress hangs on the outcome of those elections. How do you see domestic U.S. politics playing a role in the discussions happening at these meetings, not just on the U.S. side, but among foreign leaders as well? Certainly, I think a lot of capitals are quietly preparing for, a very different balance of power in the US. The Trump administration has, despite not winning an overwhelming mandate,

claimed it had that and governed as though they had mass approval. They're not going to be able to do that when Democrats in Congress are able to limit their funding, are able to stop their nominations, are able to haul up agency heads all the time and do oversight. So that leads to a fundamentally different dynamic. European allies, what I hear talking to kind of officials in that space is how can we almost America proof ourselves, right?

That's not going to change, regardless of what changes here. That trend is very, very clear. But will, for instance, the far right that's felt really supported by Washington and is hoping to rise up in France, even in the UK, will they feel, oh, we don't have that friend in the US anymore? Yes, I mean, those kind of dynamics are also possible. You mentioned the number of leaders who are essentially, on their way out. And I'm curious how

countries are thinking about the fact that in a few years, this could be a very different discussion depending upon who's in leadership in various countries. Right. But the scars, Jen, I think, are still there. These are like, you know, to put it in a body term, these are traumas that have come into the body of the alliance. And you will not forget, for instance, the Greenland kerfuffle. You will not forget President Trump turning around and saying,

I don't care about Ukraine, not my problem. We have to take a quick break, but when we come back, what to expect from the NATO summit happening next month in Turkey? More in just a moment.

This message comes from Granger. For the ones who get it done, Granger offers the professional grade products you need to get the job done. With fast delivery and access to technical product experts ready to help you meet any challenge. Call, clickgranger.com, or just stop by. Hi, it's Terry Gross, host of Fresh Air. Hey, take a break from the 24-hour news cycle with us and listen to long-form interviews with your favorite authors, actors,

filmmakers, comedians, and musicians, the people making the art that nourishes us and speaks to our times. So listen to the Fresh Air podcast from NPR and WHYY. Let's get back to our discussion by turning to the meeting of the NATO Defense Alliance. It's happening on July 7th and 8th in Ankara, Turkey. We've already heard some of your thoughts about the upcoming NATO summit.

We got this from Gary in St. Louis. I really hope when the NATO summit happens in Turkey soon, that the other NATO allies forcefully remind Mr. Trump that NATO is a defensive alliance and not an offensive alliance. He claimed we destroyed Iran's nuclear capability months ago, so the war starting in February was by no means a defensive war. Therefore, NATO had no obligation to help us. And let's add another voice to the discussion. Joining us now from Monterey, Virginia, is Ambassador Kurt Volker. He's a career diplomat who served as U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations from 2017 to 2019 under President Trump. He also served as the U.S. Ambassador to NATO from 2008 to 2009 under President Bush and Obama. He's now a distinguished fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis. Ambassador Volker, welcome back.

Hi, thank you very much. Great to be with you. So the U.S. and Israel's war with Iran has dominated the Trump administration's foreign policy focus since the U.S. and Israeli strikes began on February 28th. And yet there is still a very active war happening in Europe. Ambassador, what do European members of NATO want to talk about when it comes to Ukraine at the summit? Well, they would like to see the U.S. provide more support to Ukraine and put more pressure on Russia. throughout the course of the second term of President Trump, he's adopted a very neutral position. He's not provided any U.S. assistance to Ukraine. He has been reluctant to put any real pressure on Vladimir Putin. He's positioned the U.S. is something of a neutral mediator between two warring sides,

rather than seeing this as a Russian aggression against a European democracy and one in which we have a stake in how the outcome comes out here. we want to see Ukraine survive as a sovereign, independent European democracy. So they are looking to get a bit more from President Trump on support for Ukraine, sanctions on Russia. And if there's going to be a mediation, they want to be part of it as well, too. They want to have their interests on European security reflected in anything that's discussed. So that's what Europe wants to talk about. Then there's what President Trump wants, Akbar.

What do you expect the Trump administration will bring up with a? NATO allies. The Trump administration certainly thinks that their long-study demands on Greenland, the territory owned by Denmark, governed by Denmark, I should say, but adjacent to the United States, they're hoping that they can make progress there. It's very much a priority for Marco Rubio and his team. And I think that points to a fault line kind of in this whole summit, because it gets to these questions of, is President Trump seeing himself as aligned, or is he thinking of himself as Ambassador Volka points out a little similarly to Vladimir Putin and thinking in terms of spheres of influence. Is Ukraine in Vladimir Putin's sphere of influence and Greenland is in mind?

NATO will want to remind the Trump administration, we can work with you, we can have an alliance, we can address your concerns. You don't need to seize territory from your treaty ally, Denmark. It seems that that conversation has gotten quieter in the past several months, but are there still things happening under the surface that's less public? Very much so. the Trump administration thinks that they can get significant agreements from Denmark and from NATO members to address what they say are very real security concerns on which even some non-partisan experts do I identify as concerns as global warming means that there's more of a there's more vulnerability up in the Arctic. However, the way that that happens, right, is not going to be through President Trump, as he's often said, making Greenland part of the US, right?

So abandoning that is really important. None of that is possible, though, when you have a president who can change his mind any hour of the day, right? So you might have quiet diplomacy going along with Marco Rubio's team. What will President Trump tweet out, depending on the last person he talked to, is the big vulnerability. You mentioned scars before, and it sounds like that's a place where perhaps there's a scab that people are hoping remains intact. Ambassador Volker, the Trump administration stopped new U.S. financial support for Ukraine in 2025. It's only provided the country with aid that came from congressional appropriations before President Trump took office. But Ukraine has managed to continue to fight Russia.

Stop its advances in the Dombas region. It now regularly strikes infrastructure inside Russia that's reduced the country's ability to produce oil. So talk us through the dynamic here and how Ukraine is managing to continue fighting this war. Right. Well, while we have been focused on Iran, Ukraine has turned the tide of this conflict significantly. As you pointed out, they're able to strike long range into Russia, knocking out significant chunks of Russia's oil refining and oil export capacity, and that is the principal source of revenue for the Kremlin in how they continue to finance this war.

In addition, they have become so good on the battlefield with drones, including drones powered by AI and counter drones, that the Russians are losing more troops on the battlefield than they can produce on a monthly base. So this is trended away from them. And then most recently, the Ukrainians have been very effectively hitting Russia's supply lines. So we've seen troops surrender because they don't have fuel. We've seen Ukraine take out bridges, rail lines, connectors that are connecting Crimea to Russia. So this is all turned very much against Vladimir Putin in the last six months or so.

And I think what we may now see coming in the next six months is, increasing demands for a ceasefire in place. And Vladimir Putin may be having to agree to that because he can't sustain as he is. And what do you think success looks like for Ukraine and Europe at the summit when it comes to Ukraine's not just short-term security, but really the country's long-term security? You know, let's not forget when we talk about the NATO summit, the G7 summit is going on right now, and they've already had some very interesting discussions about Ukraine. President Trump seems to be a bit more impressed with Ukraine's.

capabilities now and willing to align a little bit more with Europe on their desire to see Ukraine end the war on its terms rather than submit to Russia. And President Trump seems to have been more warm toward that, still adopting a neutral position, but a little bit more supportive there. I think if they can get President Trump to agree that Russia is the aggressor and needs to stop the war, that the U.S. will continue to sell arms. an ammunition to Europeans and to Ukraine directly for Ukraine's defense, maybe a little bit more air defense for Ukraine as well. I think this would be seen as a success. And over time, as I said,

I think this is all trending in Ukraine's favor right now. NATO was originally conceived as a defense alliance against the Soviet Union. Now, Russian aggression threatens other European countries besides Ukraine. Akbar, what will European members of NATO want the U.S. to when it comes to, for instance, Finland or the Baltic states have border Russia in northern Europe. Well, the Trump administration has often used U.S. deployments as a form of leverage. And they haven't committed to that as a strategic interest or as even just a promise, a pledge. They've said, when we're angry with you, we're pulling troops out of Poland and the Baltics might be vulnerable. So certainly Europeans want to see an end to that kind of yo-yoing.

Another risk that some European officials are trying to think about is, where is the popular buy-in for this alliance now, right? So certainly President Trump, personally, whether he warms or cools, has fostered a political movement that's really wary of America being involved in the world, has not been supportive of Ukraine, and has been more sympathetic to Russian narratives. Simultaneously, within France, within the UK, you see political movements that are either comparing the US to Israel and sort of tying this to Gaza-style concerns, right,

of how are we operating this hypocrisy double-standard question. Why do you care about Ukrainians but not Palestinians? I think there's a lot of public buyback that has to be built up by these leaders to sustain this alliance in the long run. It can't just hinge on the moods and who might be elected in the next election cycle. So what do you think the Trump administration will want from NATO members in Europe for reiterating Article 5 security guarantees for these smaller states? The Trump administration wants to moon, Jen.

And I mean, the Trump administration would love to see further commitments of investment. They would love to see Europeans align with them on China, which, as we discussed earlier, maybe happening a little bit more in terms of being more careful with trade there. They'd also like to see Europeans either make huge pledges on President Trump's other priorities, whether it's Iran. And they don't want to see Europeans questioning President Trump then. So, for instance, Europeans on Israel-Palestine have a bit of a different position and are moving towards that very openly.

the Trump administration sees all these things as connected. They're not going to silo them. So they don't want to see Europeans really flex their own sovereignty and independence. Ambassador, what are the most likely risks right now to NATO border states from Russia? Well, I'd say in the short term, in terms of a big conflict between NATO and Russia, there isn't much risk. Vladimir Putin is bogged down in Ukraine and not doing well there. He doesn't want to start another conflict with NATO on a large scale. The big risk, however, is that he might try something very, very limited.

Just grab a piece of land, say, in Estonia or Lithuania, and stop. Because then you're going to have many NATO members saying, well, we need to negotiate. There's no military solution. We don't want to escalate. We don't want to turn this into a bigger war. And the moment NATO members start doing that, then you have a real crisis in NATO over Article 5 and what it means. And I think one of the things that the European allies, particularly the Nordic-Baltic states within NATO, are going to insist on, is a very strong statement about Article 5 applies to every inch of NATO territory. We will not accept any incursions.

We got this for Mark, who emails failure to get Russia completely out of Ukraine and Crimea will constitute a complete failure by our current leadership. Akbar, is that part of the conversation right now? the Trump administration, I don't think, is going to push on matters like Crimea, which Russia has now occupied, going back almost a decade. So in violation of international law, I should point out, the Trump administration has often kind of echoed these Russian-style narratives of are these fake borders, are these fake countries, were these part of Russia? Now, of course, strong Lithuanian nationalists, Ukrainian nationalists would say,

absolutely not. We have a separate identity. but you see that kind of vagueness on the Trump side, right? And you see it in the political movement behind him. So I don't see an appetite really from Washington to, for instance, demand a full Russian withdrawal of all Ukrainian territory and go back to 1991 Ukraine borders. Well, the Pentagon has made various announcements about changing troop levels in Europe, including removing 5,000 troops from Germany over the next 6 to 12 months. That announcement came after President Trump and the German Chancellor traded criticism over the Iran war. On the ground, what we're really talking about is moving thousands of troops and their families out of longstanding military communities and cost of millions of dollars. Ambassador Volcker, how much dock do you put in these announced changes in troop levels?

I think we have to separate the statements from the reality. As Ahmed pointed out, sometimes you have emotional statements from President Trump saying we're going to withdraw troops as a punishment for a NATO ally. But the reality is that the U.S. military is constantly looking at the desired force posture. What do we want to have in Europe, given the threats that we face there and may have to face in the future, given the need to project force from Europe, for instance, to the Middle East? And so we saw President Trump say we were taking troops out of Germany. Then we saw the Pentagon say we're going to take some out of Poland. Then President Trump said, no, no, no, no, Poland's our friend. We're going to keep them there.

Then he said that we're going to increase, but in fact, what we're doing is we're just doing a rotation. So the statements are all over the place. The reality is a much more measured and thought out process run by the Pentagon on adapting our force posture over time and on a constantly adapting basis, given the changing nature of threats. And I'll just add, Jen, that Congress pays the big role here, too. You've seen congressional Republicans repeatedly on this issue stand up to the Trump administration. they were doing that even before several of them were unseeded by President Trump in the primary cycle now. So some of them are retiring, some no longer have careers to think about that Trump could influence. I think you will see lawmakers push back.

And of course, Democrats are quite united against these troop withdrawals. Well, I'm curious to hear from both of you briefly what you think non-NATO superpowers like China and Russia are watching for at the NATO and G7 summit. Ambassador? Well, the number one thing that a country like China is going to look for is unity or disunity. Are we showing that the West is together and we can act somewhat coherently, or are we fighting among ourselves and weakening the West? That's the big thing from a Chinese perspective. And I just have to say, I think this time around, in contrast to previous NATO summits, I think President Trump wants this to be a success. He wants it to be a success for Recep Tayyip Erdogan,

who's the host. He wants to show that NATO is helping the U.S. on things like Iran, for example. And the European allies want to show unity as well. Akbar, I'll give you the last word. From a Russian-Chinese standpoint, while NATO and G7 will project unity, this is a great posture to be in. They're always hoping for a more multipolar world. And even as you have these alliances coming together, the sense of hedging away from the U.S.,

looking at alternatives, that's throughout all the allies. And that's a big risk for Washington's deal with. That's Akbar Shahed Ahmed. He's a diplomatic correspondent at the news outlet notice. He's author of the forthcoming book, Crossing the Red Line, Biden, his advisors, and Israel's war in Gaza. It's out in September. Also with us, Kurt Volker, a career diplomat who served as U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations from 2017 to 2019 under President Trump. He was also the U.S. Ambassador to NATO from 2008 to 2009 under President Bush and Obama. He's now a distinguished fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis. Ambassador Volker, Akbar, thank you so much for your time. Today's producer was Michael Fowlero. This program

comes to you from WAMU, part of American University in Washington, distributed by NPR. I'm Jen White. Thanks for listening. We'll have more for you tomorrow. Be sure to tune in. This is 1A. This message comes from NPR sponsor Charles Schwab with its original podcast on investing. It's hosted by Liz Ann Saunders, Schwab's chief investment strategist and Colin Martin, head of fixed income research and strategy for the Schwab Center for Financial Revenue. research. Each week, Liz Ann, Colin, and their guests analyze economic developments and bring context to conversations around stocks, fixed income, the economy, and more. Download the latest episode and subscribe at Schwab.com slash oninvesting or wherever you get your podcasts.

Hi, it's Terry Gross, host of fresh air. Hey, take a break from the 24-hour news cycle with us and listen to long-form interviews with your favorite authors, actors, actors, filmmakers, comedians, and musicians. the people making the art that nourishes us and speaks to our times. So listen to the Fresh Air podcast from NPR and WHYY.