‘President Putin is signalling he’s not interested in peace’: Ukraine’s consul general discusses Trump’s peace talks in Alaska

Video

Oleh Nikolenko, the consul general of Ukraine in Toronto, joins The Hub in studio to discuss the impasses to ending the war in Ukraine, including how Russia’s aggression after the Alaskan peace summit meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin is prohibiting a peaceful end to the conflict.

You can listen to this episode on Amazon, Apple, or Spotify.

Program Transcript

This is an automated transcript. Please check against delivery.

RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Well, with a consequential day underway in the United States, in the White House, important meetings between President Zelensky of the Ukraine with his European allies and colleagues and, yes, Donald J. Trump happening right now. We’re pleased to be joined in studio by Ukraine’s Consul General to Toronto, Olheg Nikolenko. Thank you so much for coming into the studio to speak with us.

OLEH NIKOLENKO: Thank you for having me.

RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: I want to begin just by offering my condolences overnight for the 10 citizens of your country that were killed in the latest round of Russian airstrikes. Let’s begin there. What signal do you think that sends to the meetings happening today that after Putin’s Alaska summit with Trump, not even 48 hours later, Russia is back to killing Ukrainian civilians?

OLEH NIKOLENKO: So the signal is that President Putin is sending that he’s not interested in peace because if he is interested in peace, he would cease immediately the hostilities. But to the contrary, we see that following the meeting in Alaska, the attacks have been intensified. You mentioned that 10 civilians have been killed. But unfortunately this is a daily reality for Ukraine. So if somebody wants really to achieve peace, he must stop the war. This is simple as that.

RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Let’s go to what will likely be the heart of today’s discussion. It is seemingly an intention, a desire on the part of President Trump to present a so called deal to your president which would involve Ukraine ceding territory to Russia beyond Crimea, beyond the lands currently occupied in your country illegally by Russian troops. If this deal was accepted, the one being proposed by the president, it would involve you and your fellow countrymen giving up regions of the Donetsk province that your forces are currently holding. If is that in any way a tenable outcome for bringing either about a ceasefire or a permanent peace agreement, as the president is suggesting?

OLEH NIKOLENKO: Well, let me put first in this way, since President Trump assumed his office, Ukraine has made it very clear that we support President Trump’s efforts to put an end to the war. However, those efforts have to lead to just end of the war, meaning that we need a lasting, just, fair peace for Ukraine, making sure that this war does not happen again. And the President Trump proclaimed his approach as peace through strength. And Ukraine has adopted this approach and supported it since day one. Then there were a process where his envoy visited Moscow several times, another envoy, General Kellogg, he visited Kyiv many times and I think as we speak, President Zelenskyy is meeting with General Kellogg in D.C. right now to discuss way further. First of all, on your point about the potential ceding of the territory. Well, the constitution of Ukraine does not allow that. And the people of Ukraine do not allow it.

RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: That is a critical point for people to understand that it’s not at President Zelenskyy’s discretion or power simply to agree to give up any lands, whether they’re occupied by Russian troops currently or not. This would require a national referendum, is that right?

OLEH NIKOLENKO: Well, of course, the constitution of Ukraine does not allow it, so President Zelensky cannot decide it because he does not have a power. But my question is, why should we think about Ukraine ceding land to Russia? I mean, what Russia did is a gross violation of international law. Use. You know, seizure of land by force is prohibited by international law. Russia has committed a crime of aggression. Russian troops have committed hundreds of thousands war crimes in Ukraine, including torture, raping, you know, abducting children. So at the end of the day, why should we speak about Ukraine ceding to demands by Russia, but not instead demanding Russia to put an end to the war, to withdraw from Ukraine? And as part of this process, we also have to ensure that all those responsible for those atrocities must be held accountable and reparations paid to Ukraine so we can restore what Russia has done to us.

RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: If you follow the chain of logic, though, it would suggest that, you know, the President and his advisers must know about the constitutional requirements of, that any negotiation would have to be achieved through, and that any final peace settlement would have to acknowledge, and that it isn’t in your president’s discretion in the Oval Office today to give up the entirety of the Donetsk province. You’d have to take that to a referendum. It seems like recent opinion polls suggest that upwards of 78, 80% of Ukrainians do not want to cede any land to Russians.

So I’m trying to understand how the Americans are thinking about putting the proverbial Humpty Dumpty back together again when it just looks like the pieces don’t fit. In terms of what they seem to be suggesting, which is jumping over a ceasefire to a permanent settlement that would involve at minimum, not simply the loss of Crimea, not the loss of Luhansk and other. Other territories currently occupied, but again, land that Russian troops do not occupy, but that they claim, under President Putin’s directive of two years ago, to be sovereign Russian lands. I agree. I understand that you’re a diplomat, you have to speak carefully, but for those of us on the outside looking in, none of this really makes a lot of sense.

OLEH NIKOLENKO: Well, I would say that for Putin, it would be ideal scenario if, if he can manage to convince others Not Ukrainians, of course, if he can get what he wants right now. But let’s look at this from another angle. So this war has been happening for 12 years already because the first day of war is occupation of Crimea back in March 2014. So since then, for 12 years, Putin has not been able to to conquer the territory that he wanted from the very beginning because he occupied Crimea, but also launched a war in Donbass. So now he’s trying to pursue probably somebody to have this land even he has not yet occupied, as we see from his intentions. So for him it would be ideal scenario that he cannot do it. He couldn’t do it for 12 years, but now he wants somehow to get it. And this will not happen because first of all, as we discussed, it’s not up to, you know, there is constitutional legislation that prohibits it, first of all. Second is, you know, I think that we have to rethink this situation from different angle.

Russia has created many myths in the world. Russian propaganda has been very strong since Soviet times. They created this myth that Russian army is the second strongest army in the world. And when the full scale invasion started, we actually proved this, but only in Ukraine. So Russia is second strongest army in Ukraine. So we really underestimate probably this propaganda created some myth of unconquerable country. And the might, yes, Russia has some might, of course, but if we compare GDP of Russia and GDP of Ukraine and its allies, it’s 50 times more. So what we are talking about, I mean, of course Russia is a dangerous enemy. We have to be careful. But there is a solution, how to defeat Russia. And I think my personal view is Russia’s defeat is the interest of the whole democratic world. Because if Russia is defeated in Ukraine is not allowed to succeed, our world will be much safer.

RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Penultimate question, and then I want to have you answer how Canadians can help, continue to help in this situation. But before we go to that, it seems as if the Trump administration is fixated on a theory of great powers, that the world should be governed by great powers. The status of great powers should be recognized over smaller powers, whether that’s China, Russia or the United States. And then in this case, to go back to that ill fated meeting between President Zelenskyy previously in the Oval Office and the president, the President’s kind of defining line was you have no cards. You, you have no cards to play. You are up against a country that has significantly more population than you.

But also I think in the President’s mind is a nuclear power is armed with 3,000, thermonuclear warheads. That is the reality of Russia and probably the reality of Russia in the President’s mind, that the position of Ukraine to Russia is so asymmetrical that there’s only one way forward, which is the weaker power must concede to the stronger power. That is that that’s a kind of imperial worldview. It dominated the 19th century. It dominated a lot of the 20th century. It seems to be coming back under this president. We’re certainly feeling it here in Canada in terms of many ways that this administration is talking about Canadian sovereignty and independence. What is your rebuttal to that argument, to the great power argument, to the imperial argument? Why should Ukraine not just concede that Russia is on metrics that matter in the President’s mind and in the mind of this new geopolitical reality that all of us seem to be in and a return of great powers. It’s regrettable, it’s unfortunate, but why is that not the direction of travel?

OLEH NIKOLENKO: I think that Ukraine is a great power. We have great people. We have courage, determination, resilience. Unfortunately, we are lacking a bit of equipment and some financial resources. But I think that we have proved that this notion that there is a stronger power, a weaker power, so the weaker power must concede and do whatever it’s asked of. I think it’s wrong. We are not living in 19th, 20th century. We are in 21st century. And we have proven that Ukraine can be very successful in repelling Russian attacks, but liberating more of Ukrainian territories if we have all the resources. At the beginning of your question, you mentioned that the United States is a great power. It thinks in the format of great powers.

We don’t mind the United States to be a great power, and we would like to. I think there should be somebody who is firm with principles, who cannot allow other countries to do whatever they want, to kill civilians, to seize lands and, you know, to abduct children. I think there are high expectations on the United States that this country will continue to be this greatest power. And I think today’s meeting, you know, probably meetings ahead in the coming days, they have to prove it that the United States is capable to have this, to carry this flag. And again, we are not asking ourselves a question. How long can we continue to fight? Should we fight? Because Russia is obviously stronger country than Ukraine. For us, it’s existential war.

If we cease fighting, we’ll be eliminated. So also coming back to your question, that Russia wants even the territory in Donetsk oblast, which is not occupied by Russia yet. Imagine what will happen to those people. So as the Ukrainian army liberates territory that was previously occupied by Russia, what we find, we find torture chambers. We find mass graves of civilians. We cannot find children who were there but were abducted to Russia. Their identities have been changed, they have been placed in different families who brag on social media about the trophies that they have meaning real human beings. So what will happen to those people who are still living in Ukrainian controlled areas when Russia army comes in? It will be a disaster, it will be a catastrophe. And we cannot betray those people. So for us, we definitely, if the conditions are not right for us, we’ll definitely be fighting because this fight for our life and existence.

RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Let’s end then on what Canadians continue to do to help. You know, our new Prime Minister, Mark Carney has reiterated his support for your fight and has continued to allocate resources, some weapon systems that we can provide. They are modest in comparison to the Americans. Has Canada been a good ally to you in the struggle?

OLEH NIKOLENKO: It’s been a great ally. We are really grateful to Canada, Canadian government, but also to the people of Canada who have stood by Ukraine from day one and continues to stand by Canada, has provided Ukraine with many resources, military, financial, humanitarian. We really grateful to that. And of course, we count on Canada’s continuous support because as long as the war continues, we will need this support. And you know, we have learned to be grateful and we always use the opportunity. When there is an opportunity, we always say thank you. And when we say we need more, is not that because we are ungrateful, but because we, we need to. So Prime Minister Carney, he had several phone calls with President Zelensky over the past week. I think President Zelensky kept him informed about what is happening, about the discussions and talks and intentions and future plans.

Of course, I think that Ukraine’s victory in this war matters not only to Ukraine and Ukrainians, but also I think, including to Canada and Canadians. Because let’s imagine if Russia is allowed to succeed in Ukraine, what will happen in other parts of the world? So unfortunately, Russia is your neighbor. You have a shared region in the Arctic. So there may be potential increase of threats over there. And we see that there are some movements that are not playing into Canada’s security, but also what other countries would think that if Russia’s plan can be successful, then my plan to threat, to try to, I don’t know, annex or force or impose any types of pressure could, could be successful too. So I think that we are in the same boat. It is in our common interest to ensure that Russia is defeated strategically in Ukraine, that Ukraine restores its sovereignty and territorial integrity. But also Ukraine has means to ensure its security and means, I mean, that not only Ukraine works on this, but collectively with the support of European, Canadian and other allies.

RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Okay, important words. Oleh Nikolenko, Consul General for the Government of Ukraine to Toronto. Thank you so much for coming into the studio today. We’ll continue to watch these developments closely and we look forward to benefiting from your insight and analysis. It’s greatly appreciated.

OLEH NIKOLENKO: Thank you so much. I really enjoyed our conversation. Thank you.

The Hub Staff

The Hub’s mission is to create and curate news, analysis, and insights about a dynamic and better future for Canada in a…

Watch on

Hub AI

Oleh Nikolenko, the consul general of Ukraine in Toronto, joins The Hub in studio to discuss the impasses to ending the war in Ukraine, including how Russia’s aggression after the Alaskan peace summit meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin is prohibiting a peaceful end to the conflict. You can listen to this episode on Amazon, Apple, or Spotify. Program Transcript This is an automated transcript. Please check against delivery. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Well, with a consequential day underway in the United States, in the White House, important meetings between President Zelensky of the Ukraine with his European allies and colleagues and, yes, Donald J. Trump happening right now. We’re pleased to be joined in studio by Ukraine’s Consul General to Toronto, Olheg Nikolenko. Thank you so much for coming into the studio to speak with us. OLEH NIKOLENKO: Thank you for having me. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: I want to begin just by offering my condolences overnight for the 10 citizens of your country that were killed in the latest round of Russian airstrikes. Let’s begin there. What signal do you think that sends to the meetings happening today that after Putin’s Alaska summit with Trump, not even 48 hours later, Russia is back to killing Ukrainian civilians? OLEH NIKOLENKO: So the signal is that President Putin is sending that he’s not interested in peace because if he is interested in peace, he would cease immediately the hostilities. But to the contrary, we see that following the meeting in Alaska, the attacks have been intensified. You mentioned that 10 civilians have been killed. But unfortunately this is a daily reality for Ukraine. So if somebody wants really to achieve peace, he must stop the war. This is simple as that. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Let’s go to what will likely be the heart of today’s discussion. It is seemingly an intention, a desire on the part of President Trump to present a so called deal to your president which would involve Ukraine ceding territory to Russia beyond Crimea, beyond the lands currently occupied in your country illegally by Russian troops. If this deal was accepted, the one being proposed by the president, it would involve you and your fellow countrymen giving up regions of the Donetsk province that your forces are currently holding. If is that in any way a tenable outcome for bringing either about a ceasefire or a permanent peace agreement, as the president is suggesting? OLEH NIKOLENKO: Well, let me put first in this way, since President Trump assumed his office, Ukraine has made it very clear that we support President Trump’s efforts to put an end to the war. However, those efforts have to lead to just end of the war, meaning that we need a lasting, just, fair peace for Ukraine, making sure that this war does not happen again. And the President Trump proclaimed his approach as peace through strength. And Ukraine has adopted this approach and supported it since day one. Then there were a process where his envoy visited Moscow several times, another envoy, General Kellogg, he visited Kyiv many times and I think as we speak, President Zelenskyy is meeting with General Kellogg in D.C. right now to discuss way further. First of all, on your point about the potential ceding of the territory. Well, the constitution of Ukraine does not allow that. And the people of Ukraine do not allow it. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: That is a critical point for people to understand that it’s not at President Zelenskyy’s discretion or power simply to agree to give up any lands, whether they’re occupied by Russian troops currently or not. This would require a national referendum, is that right? OLEH NIKOLENKO: Well, of course, the constitution of Ukraine does not allow it, so President Zelensky cannot decide it because he does not have a power. But my question is, why should we think about Ukraine ceding land to Russia? I mean, what Russia did is a gross violation of international law. Use. You know, seizure of land by force is prohibited by international law. Russia has committed a crime of aggression. Russian troops have committed hundreds of thousands war crimes in Ukraine, including torture, raping, you know, abducting children. So at the end of the day, why should we speak about Ukraine ceding to demands by Russia, but not instead demanding Russia to put an end to the war, to withdraw from Ukraine? And as part of this process, we also have to ensure that all those responsible for those atrocities must be held accountable and reparations paid to Ukraine so we can restore what Russia has done to us. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: If you follow the chain of logic, though, it would suggest that, you know, the President and his advisers must know about the constitutional requirements of, that any negotiation would have to be achieved through, and that any final peace settlement would have to acknowledge, and that it isn’t in your president’s discretion in the Oval Office today to give up the entirety of the Donetsk province. You’d have to take that to a referendum. It seems like recent opinion polls suggest that upwards of 78, 80% of Ukrainians do not want to cede any land to Russians. So I’m trying to understand how the Americans are thinking about putting the proverbial Humpty Dumpty back together again when it just looks like the pieces don’t fit. In terms of what they seem to be suggesting, which is jumping over a ceasefire to a permanent settlement that would involve at minimum, not simply the loss of Crimea, not the loss of Luhansk and other. Other territories currently occupied, but again, land that Russian troops do not occupy, but that they claim, under President Putin’s directive of two years ago, to be sovereign Russian lands. I agree. I understand that you’re a diplomat, you have to speak carefully, but for those of us on the outside looking in, none of this really makes a lot of sense. OLEH NIKOLENKO: Well, I would say that for Putin, it would be ideal scenario if, if he can manage to convince others Not Ukrainians, of course, if he can get what he wants right now. But let’s look at this from another angle. So this war has been happening for 12 years already because the first day of war is occupation of Crimea back in March 2014. So since then, for 12 years, Putin has not been able to to conquer the territory that he wanted from the very beginning because he occupied Crimea, but also launched a war in Donbass. So now he’s trying to pursue probably somebody to have this land even he has not yet occupied, as we see from his intentions. So for him it would be ideal scenario that he cannot do it. He couldn’t do it for 12 years, but now he wants somehow to get it. And this will not happen because first of all, as we discussed, it’s not up to, you know, there is constitutional legislation that prohibits it, first of all. Second is, you know, I think that we have to rethink this situation from different angle. Russia has created many myths in the world. Russian propaganda has been very strong since Soviet times. They created this myth that Russian army is the second strongest army in the world. And when the full scale invasion started, we actually proved this, but only in Ukraine. So Russia is second strongest army in Ukraine. So we really underestimate probably this propaganda created some myth of unconquerable country. And the might, yes, Russia has some might, of course, but if we compare GDP of Russia and GDP of Ukraine and its allies, it’s 50 times more. So what we are talking about, I mean, of course Russia is a dangerous enemy. We have to be careful. But there is a solution, how to defeat Russia. And I think my personal view is Russia’s defeat is the interest of the whole democratic world. Because if Russia is defeated in Ukraine is not allowed to succeed, our world will be much safer. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Penultimate question, and then I want to have you answer how Canadians can help, continue to help in this situation. But before we go to that, it seems as if the Trump administration is fixated on a theory of great powers, that the world should be governed by great powers. The status of great powers should be recognized over smaller powers, whether that’s China, Russia or the United States. And then in this case, to go back to that ill fated meeting between President Zelenskyy previously in the Oval Office and the president, the President’s kind of defining line was you have no cards. You, you have no cards to play. You are up against a country that has significantly more population than you. But also I think in the President’s mind is a nuclear power is armed with 3,000, thermonuclear warheads. That is the reality of Russia and probably the reality of Russia in the President’s mind, that the position of Ukraine to Russia is so asymmetrical that there’s only one way forward, which is the weaker power must concede to the stronger power. That is that that’s a kind of imperial worldview. It dominated the 19th century. It dominated a lot of the 20th century. It seems to be coming back under this president. We’re certainly feeling it here in Canada in terms of many ways that this administration is talking about Canadian sovereignty and independence. What is your rebuttal to that argument, to the great power argument, to the imperial argument? Why should Ukraine not just concede that Russia is on metrics that matter in the President’s mind and in the mind of this new geopolitical reality that all of us seem to be in and a return of great powers. It’s regrettable, it’s unfortunate, but why is that not the direction of travel? OLEH NIKOLENKO: I think that Ukraine is a great power. We have great people. We have courage, determination, resilience. Unfortunately, we are lacking a bit of equipment and some financial resources. But I think that we have proved that this notion that there is a stronger power, a weaker power, so the weaker power must concede and do whatever it’s asked of. I think it’s wrong. We are not living in 19th, 20th century. We are in 21st century. And we have proven that Ukraine can be very successful in repelling Russian attacks, but liberating more of Ukrainian territories if we have all the resources. At the beginning of your question, you mentioned that the United States is a great power. It thinks in the format of great powers. We don’t mind the United States to be a great power, and we would like to. I think there should be somebody who is firm with principles, who cannot allow other countries to do whatever they want, to kill civilians, to seize lands and, you know, to abduct children. I think there are high expectations on the United States that this country will continue to be this greatest power. And I think today’s meeting, you know, probably meetings ahead in the coming days, they have to prove it that the United States is capable to have this, to carry this flag. And again, we are not asking ourselves a question. How long can we continue to fight? Should we fight? Because Russia is obviously stronger country than Ukraine. For us, it’s existential war. If we cease fighting, we’ll be eliminated. So also coming back to your question, that Russia wants even the territory in Donetsk oblast, which is not occupied by Russia yet. Imagine what will happen to those people. So as the Ukrainian army liberates territory that was previously occupied by Russia, what we find, we find torture chambers. We find mass graves of civilians. We cannot find children who were there but were abducted to Russia. Their identities have been changed, they have been placed in different families who brag on social media about the trophies that they have meaning real human beings. So what will happen to those people who are still living in Ukrainian controlled areas when Russia army comes in? It will be a disaster, it will be a catastrophe. And we cannot betray those people. So for us, we definitely, if the conditions are not right for us, we’ll definitely be fighting because this fight for our life and existence. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Let’s end then on what Canadians continue to do to help. You know, our new Prime Minister, Mark Carney has reiterated his support for your fight and has continued to allocate resources, some weapon systems that we can provide. They are modest in comparison to the Americans. Has Canada been a good ally to you in the struggle? OLEH NIKOLENKO: It’s been a great ally. We are really grateful to Canada, Canadian government, but also to the people of Canada who have stood by Ukraine from day one and continues to stand by Canada, has provided Ukraine with many resources, military, financial, humanitarian. We really grateful to that. And of course, we count on Canada’s continuous support because as long as the war continues, we will need this support. And you know, we have learned to be grateful and we always use the opportunity. When there is an opportunity, we always say thank you. And when we say we need more, is not that because we are ungrateful, but because we, we need to. So Prime Minister Carney, he had several phone calls with President Zelensky over the past week. I think President Zelensky kept him informed about what is happening, about the discussions and talks and intentions and future plans. Of course, I think that Ukraine’s victory in this war matters not only to Ukraine and Ukrainians, but also I think, including to Canada and Canadians. Because let’s imagine if Russia is allowed to succeed in Ukraine, what will happen in other parts of the world? So unfortunately, Russia is your neighbor. You have a shared region in the Arctic. So there may be potential increase of threats over there. And we see that there are some movements that are not playing into Canada’s security, but also what other countries would think that if Russia’s plan can be successful, then my plan to threat, to try to, I don’t know, annex or force or impose any types of pressure could, could be successful too. So I think that we are in the same boat. It is in our common interest to ensure that Russia is defeated strategically in Ukraine, that Ukraine restores its sovereignty and territorial integrity. But also Ukraine has means to ensure its security and means, I mean, that not only Ukraine works on this, but collectively with the support of European, Canadian and other allies. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Okay, important words. Oleh Nikolenko, Consul General for the Government of Ukraine to Toronto. Thank you so much for coming into the studio today. We’ll continue to watch these developments closely and we look forward to benefiting from your insight and analysis. It’s greatly appreciated. OLEH NIKOLENKO: Thank you so much. I really enjoyed our conversation. Thank you.

Go to article

00:00:00

00:00:00