SCOTT DETROW, HOST:
Tomorrow President Trump says he will hold phone calls with both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump's goal, he says, is to bring about a ceasefire, something that Trump promised he would do the first day of his administration but has struggle to put into action. Trump has been more critical of Putin lately, but by and large, he's sided more with Russia than Ukraine as he has pushed for an end to the three-year conflict. And that is one reason why the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Bridget Brink, recently stepped down.
In a recent op-ed in the Detroit Free Press, Brink wrote, quote, "the policy since the beginning of the Trump administration has been to put pressure on the victim, Ukraine, rather than on the aggressor, Russia." Here to talk more about her decision, as well as what is at stake in tomorrow's talks, is former ambassador Bridget Brink. Welcome to ALL THINGS CONSIDERED.
BRIDGET BRINK: Thanks, Scott. Thanks for having me on.
DETROW: I think it's important to say you are a career diplomat. You were President Biden's ambassador to Ukraine, but it's worth pointing out you were nominated for a different post by President Trump during his first term. What pushed you to resign?
BRINK: Well, for three years, I was there as Russia launched missiles and drones that killed men, women and children in their homes, on playgrounds, in churches. For three years, Russia tried to take down the energy grid in Ukraine, to take the power, heat and light out for millions of people in the dead of Ukrainian winter. And also, Russia committed atrocities and war crimes at a level that we have not seen in Europe since World War II. So in that context, as the administration began, the policy was to put pressure on Ukraine, the victim, rather than on Russia, the aggressor. And for this reason, I felt I couldn't execute the president's policy in good faith, and I had to step down.
DETROW: You stepped down in April. Was there a specific moment that pushed you over the edge?
BRINK: Yes. There were many moments, some I can talk about, some I can't. But the first moment was the Oval Office meeting, which was horrifying.
DETROW: Right. This is when President Trump and Vice President Vance essentially berated Zelenskyy in the Oval Office.
BRINK: In February. So it was a number of different reasons, but starting with the Oval Office meeting.
DETROW: In public, in the last few weeks at least, President Trump seems to have been more critical of President Putin. What do you make of that shift? Do you put any stock in it? Do you think that is a meaningful shift?
BRINK: My view is that what we need to do to achieve the objectives of the administration, which is to end the war, is to end it in a way that also is good for the United States, and that requires us putting more pressure on Putin, active pressure. So first, it requires more sanctions in the energy sector, in the banking sector, together with partners and allies. Second, I think we shouldn't give any concession to Putin - not a meeting, not any legitimacy, not anything - until he actually agrees to an unconditional, verifiable ceasefire. And third, we should get the $300 billion that are in Europe that are Russian sovereign assets, and we should use those to enable Ukraine to defend itself.
DETROW: That's largely continuing a lot of the policies of the Biden administration. Were those policies working? This war was in its third year, and the battle lines have essentially been frozen into place for a very long period of time now.
BRINK: I think it's quite remarkable that Ukraine has been able to hold its position in the context of a - Russia launching a full assault on the country in every possible way. Just last night, for example, Russia sent 300 drones to Ukraine. That's the largest number that has been sent since the start of the war, and I think it indicates that Putin is not at all interested in peace.
DETROW: I understand that, but I guess I'm trying to get a sense of, do you think there is - can you give me more details on a realistic path that does more than drag out the continued conflict in a stalemate kind of way until those negotiations begin?
BRINK: I think we have to put more pressure on Russia, and do it together...
DETROW: Is that military pressure?
BRINK: It's every kind of pressure, starting with sanctions; more pressure on the energy side, more pressure on the banking side. Interest rates in Russia are at 21%. Inflation's at 10%. Russia's economy is really hurting, and Putin's looking for ways to relieve that pressure, and that's why he's dragging out this process and dragging out this war. If he were as strong as what I think he wants to portray, he would have been successful a long time ago. So Russia's much weaker than people think, and Ukraine is much stronger.
DETROW: You're saying Russia's economy is damaged, and it's definitely true, but Russia did not seem to change its approach in any way after years and years of those tough sanctions from the Biden administration.
BRINK: I believe the sanctions are working, and I think that's why the Russian economy is having trouble right now. I think they need to continue. They can be increased. We can do more in support of Ukraine's ability to defend itself. But not just us. I think also having Europeans step up and do more, NATO contribute more and also in the context of, how do you secure a peace? But to do it collectively is very important. I think our role is absolutely critical and key.
DETROW: Can I ask what you personally thought of the minerals deal that has been central to the conversation in the last few months - the Trump administration putting a lot of pressure on Ukraine to essentially sign away rights to much of the minerals under its ground. I have heard this criticized as, you know, effective colonization-type policy. I have heard that also people say, look, the United States has spent billions and billions and billions of dollars on this country. It's not wrong to try to want something out of it. Where did you personally stand on this agreement and the pressure that the U.S. put on it being signed?
BRINK: I think the negotiated agreement is a positive thing, and it does give us an economic link and partnership with Ukraine. I think important to this agreement is going to be also security for the U.S. businesses that potentially would invest in Ukraine. And so, again, ending the war in a way that gives Ukraine security and is a just and durable peace is deeply important to the United States.
DETROW: You've said that several times, and I think you've seen the public opinion polls. I think there's a lot of people in this country who either don't care about what is happening in Ukraine or they care about it, but it's not top of mind compared to other issues. Since you have come back to this point so many times, I'd love to ask you to make the case of why what happens in Ukraine matters to the U.S. and why the United States government's stance on what happens to Ukraine matters to Americans.
BRINK: Sure. I mean, there are policy reasons, foreign policy reasons. No. 1, if Putin is successful in his effort to subjugate and take a country of 40 million people in Europe, I think his ambition is much wider. He wants to recreate an imperial past. He also wants to weaken and divide Europe and the United States. In addition to that, there's the signal that any action, if Putin is successful, what signal that sends to China and its actions in Asia and other aggressors around the world. As the leader of the free world, it is not in our interest to see borders changed by force. It is not in our interest to see democracies undermined and bombarded. It's not in our interest to see free people subjugated.
DETROW: That is Bridget Brink, now the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. Thank you so much for talking to us.
BRINK: Thank you. Thank you, Scott. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
