In the latest episode of the MeidasTouch Podcast, host Ben Meiselas provides a compelling analysis of the ongoing dynamics between former President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. As the political landscape continues to evolve, Zelenskyy’s steadfast response to Trump’s aggressive tactics highlights a significant shift in the narrative surrounding their interactions. This podcast delves into the intricacies of international diplomacy and the implications of Zelenskyy’s refusal to be swayed by threats and intimidation, offering listeners an in-depth fact-check of the claims and counterclaims that have emerged. Join us as we break down the facts and provide clarity on this crucial geopolitical conversation.

All information as of 02/20/2025

Fact Check Analysis

Claim

Russian state media expressed excitement over the U.S. administration's willingness to make a deal that Russia wanted.

Veracity Rating: 4 out of 4

Facts

To evaluate the claim that **Russian state media expressed excitement over the U.S. administration's willingness to make a deal that Russia wanted**, we need to examine recent reports and statements from Russian media outlets and officials.

### Evidence Supporting the Claim

1. **Celebratory Tone in Russian Media**: Russian state media, officials, and prominent bloggers have been celebrating the news that U.S. President Donald Trump would negotiate with President Vladimir Putin to end the war in Ukraine without pushing for Kyiv's key peace demands to be met[3]. This suggests a positive reception of Trump's approach, which aligns with Russian interests.

2. **Perception of U.S. Concessions**: Russian state media outlets like RIA Novosti have published op-eds suggesting that the Trump administration's announcements were "merciless" to Zelensky and that Trump was "not at all interested in the opinions of Kyiv and Brussels"[3]. This indicates that Russian media perceive Trump's stance as favorable to Russia's position.

3. **Russian Officials' Optimism**: Kremlin foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov noted that the talks between the U.S. and Russia were "not bad," indicating a cautious optimism about the negotiations[1]. Additionally, Russian state media and officials have highlighted the exclusion of Europe from these negotiations, which they view as a strategic advantage[1][3].

### Context and Limitations

– **Negotiation Dynamics**: The negotiations between the U.S. and Russia have been criticized for excluding Ukraine and the European Union, which are key stakeholders in the conflict[1][5]. This exclusion has been seen as a strategic move by Russia to isolate Ukraine and gain leverage in negotiations.

– **Historical Context**: Previous peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine have been fraught with challenges, including Russia's insistence on Ukraine's demilitarization and neutrality[2][4]. The current U.S.-Russia talks have raised concerns about whether they will prioritize Ukrainian sovereignty and security.

### Conclusion

Based on the available evidence, the claim that **Russian state media expressed excitement over the U.S. administration's willingness to make a deal that Russia wanted** appears to be valid. Russian media outlets have celebrated the perceived alignment of U.S. positions with Russian interests, particularly in the context of negotiations that exclude Ukraine and Europe[1][3]. However, this excitement is set against a backdrop of complex geopolitical dynamics and ongoing tensions in the region.

Citations

Claim

Professor Michael McFaul suggested that the main goal of the Russian delegation in Riyadh was to restart U.S.-Russia relations.

Veracity Rating: 4 out of 4

Facts

## Evaluation of the Claim

The claim states that Professor Michael McFaul suggested the main goal of the Russian delegation in Riyadh was to restart U.S.-Russia relations. To evaluate this claim, we need to examine statements from reliable sources, particularly those involving Michael McFaul and the context of U.S.-Russia diplomatic engagements.

### Evidence Supporting the Claim

1. **Michael McFaul's Statement**: In an interview, Michael McFaul pointed out the contrasting goals of the U.S. and Russian delegations in Riyadh. He noted that the Russian delegation aimed to improve U.S.-Russia relations, while the American delegation focused on negotiating an end to the war in Ukraine[1][3]. This aligns with the claim that the Russian delegation's primary goal was to enhance relations with the U.S.

2. **Russian Delegation's Objectives**: Yuri Ushakov, a Kremlin foreign-policy aide, emphasized Moscow's interest in restoring relations with Washington during the talks in Riyadh[1][3]. This further supports the notion that improving U.S.-Russia relations was a key objective for the Russian delegation.

### Context and Implications

– **U.S.-Russia Relations**: The historical context of U.S.-Russia relations has been strained, with both countries having differing agendas and interests[2]. The Russian delegation's focus on improving relations reflects an effort to normalize ties, which have been complicated by geopolitical tensions and conflicts like the war in Ukraine.

– **Diplomatic Landscape**: The absence of Ukrainian representatives in these talks highlights the complex diplomatic dynamics at play. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been critical of any agreements made without Ukraine's involvement, underscoring the country's determination to protect its sovereignty[1][5].

### Conclusion

Based on the available evidence, the claim that Professor Michael McFaul suggested the main goal of the Russian delegation in Riyadh was to restart U.S.-Russia relations is **valid**. McFaul's statements and the context provided by other sources confirm that improving U.S.-Russia relations was indeed a primary objective for the Russian delegation during these diplomatic engagements[1][3].

Citations

Claim

Trump's team allegedly offered Putin concessions including no NATO membership for Ukraine and the withdrawal of U.S. soldiers from Europe.

Veracity Rating: 2 out of 4

Facts

To evaluate the claim that Trump's team allegedly offered Putin concessions including no NATO membership for Ukraine and the withdrawal of U.S. soldiers from Europe, we need to examine recent developments and statements from reliable sources.

## Claim Evaluation

1. **No NATO Membership for Ukraine:**
– The claim that Trump's team offered concessions regarding Ukraine's NATO membership is supported by recent reports. In a phone call with Putin, Trump described Ukraine's NATO membership as "impractical," which aligns with Putin's long-standing opposition to Ukraine joining NATO[1]. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also stated that NATO membership for Ukraine is unlikely[1]. This suggests that the Trump administration has signaled a willingness to accommodate Russia's stance on this issue.

2. **Withdrawal of U.S. Soldiers from Europe:**
– There is no direct evidence from recent reports that Trump's team explicitly offered to withdraw U.S. soldiers from Europe as part of negotiations with Putin. However, Trump's return to the presidency has raised concerns about the future of U.S. involvement in Europe, including potential reductions in U.S. military presence[4]. This concern is based on Trump's past criticisms of European defense spending and his threats to reduce U.S. commitments if allies do not meet certain defense spending targets[4].

## Conclusion

The claim regarding no NATO membership for Ukraine appears to be supported by recent statements and actions from the Trump administration. However, there is no clear evidence to confirm that the withdrawal of U.S. soldiers from Europe was specifically offered as a concession to Putin. While Trump's policies have raised concerns about U.S. commitment to Europe, these concerns are more related to broader strategic shifts rather than specific concessions in the context of Ukraine-Russia negotiations.

## Evidence Summary

– **NATO Membership:** Trump's comments and Hegseth's statements indicate a shift away from supporting Ukraine's NATO membership, aligning with Russia's demands[1].
– **U.S. Military Presence in Europe:** While there are concerns about Trump's potential to reduce U.S. military presence in Europe due to past statements and policies, there is no direct evidence linking this to concessions in Ukraine-Russia negotiations[4].

Overall, the claim about NATO membership concessions has some basis in recent developments, but the claim about withdrawing U.S. soldiers from Europe lacks specific evidence in the context of these negotiations.

Citations

Claim

President Zelinsky said, 'the problem with what they presented… it's not in our interests today, not in the interest of sovereign Ukraine.'

Veracity Rating: 3 out of 4

Facts

To evaluate the claim that President Zelensky said, "the problem with what they presented… it's not in our interests today, not in the interest of sovereign Ukraine," we need to assess the context and available evidence.

## Context and Evidence

1. **Statement Context**: The statement is attributed to President Zelensky in the context of negotiations regarding Ukraine's resources and sovereignty. Specifically, it relates to a proposed agreement with the U.S. concerning access to Ukraine's mineral resources.

2. **Available Evidence**: In a recent news report, President Zelensky rejected a U.S. proposal for access to Ukraine's rare earth minerals, stating that the agreement did not align with Ukraine's interests. He emphasized the need for any agreement to guarantee investments in Ukraine and ensure a clear distribution of profits and security guarantees[2].

3. **Relevance to Sovereignty**: Zelensky's stance reflects his commitment to protecting Ukraine's sovereignty and ensuring that any agreements benefit the Ukrainian people. This aligns with his broader efforts to maintain control over Ukraine's resources and resist external pressures that might compromise national interests.

4. **Historical Context**: The relationship between Ukraine and external powers, including the U.S. and Russia, has been complex, especially during the ongoing conflict. Zelensky's position is influenced by the need to balance international support with the preservation of Ukrainian sovereignty and interests[1][3].

## Conclusion

Based on the available evidence, the claim that President Zelensky stated, "the problem with what they presented… it's not in our interests today, not in the interest of sovereign Ukraine," appears to be consistent with his publicly expressed views on protecting Ukraine's sovereignty and resources. While the exact wording might not be directly verified from the provided sources, the sentiment aligns with Zelensky's stance on similar issues[2].

Therefore, the claim is **likely true** in the context of Zelensky's opposition to agreements that do not serve Ukraine's interests, although the precise wording might vary in different reports or contexts.

Citations

Claim

Zelensky emphasized, 'If we didn't agree to all these ultimatums in the most difficult moment, where does this feeling come from that Ukraine will agree to them now?'

Veracity Rating: 4 out of 4

Facts

To evaluate the claim that Zelensky emphasized, "If we didn't agree to all these ultimatums in the most difficult moment, where does this feeling come from that Ukraine will agree to them now?" we need to verify if this statement aligns with his publicly expressed views and the context of ongoing negotiations involving Ukraine, Russia, and other international actors.

### Evidence Supporting the Claim

1. **Zelensky's Public Statements**: In recent public appearances, President Volodymyr Zelensky has consistently expressed his opposition to accepting Russian ultimatums. During a meeting at the Ukrainian Embassy in Ankara, Zelensky reiterated his stance against Russian demands, including those made at the start of the full-scale invasion and similar ones being discussed in negotiations between Russia and other countries without Ukraine's involvement[1][2]. He questioned why Ukraine would agree to such ultimatums now if it did not during the most challenging times[3].

2. **Context of Negotiations**: The statement is made in the context of recent U.S.-Russia talks, which Zelensky criticized for excluding Ukraine. He emphasized that any negotiations about Ukraine's future must include Ukraine itself to ensure that decisions are not made behind its back[1][2]. This aligns with his skepticism about why Ukraine would accept ultimatums now if it resisted them during harder times.

3. **Historical Context**: Zelensky's stance reflects Ukraine's historical resistance to Russian demands. Since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, Ukraine has rejected Russian ultimatums, including those presented in early negotiations in Belarus and Istanbul in 2022[3]. This historical context supports Zelensky's assertion that Ukraine's resolve has not weakened.

### Conclusion

The claim that Zelensky emphasized, "If we didn't agree to all these ultimatums in the most difficult moment, where does this feeling come from that Ukraine will agree to them now?" is **valid** based on available evidence. Zelensky's public statements and the context of ongoing negotiations align with this assertion, highlighting Ukraine's consistent opposition to Russian ultimatums and its insistence on being included in any negotiations about its future[1][2][3].

Citations

We believe in transparency and accuracy. That’s why this blog post was verified with CheckForFacts.
Start your fact-checking journey today and help create a smarter, more informed future!