>>> TO THE WAR IN UKRAINE WHICH MARKED ITS THIRD ANNIVERSARY.

AS AMERICAN SUPPORT APPEARS TO BE UNCERTAIN THE FRENCH PRESIDENT MET WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP AND WARNED AGAINST ANY SURRENDER OF UKRAINE.

TO TALK ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE U.S.

ADMINISTRATIONS MOVES TO NEGOTIATE WITH VLADIMIR PUTIN, WALTER ISAACSON SAT DOWN WITH BILL BROWNER.

THE SHOW.

>> IT'S GREAT TO BE HERE.

>> THIS WEEK AT THE THIRD ANNIVERSARY OF THE INVASION, THINGS HAVE CHANGED NOT ONLY ON THE BATTLEFIELD BUT ON THE POLITICAL FIELD WITH DONALD TRUMP.

UNWILLING TO CONTINUE SUPPORT IT SEEMS, FOR UKRAINE WITH THE SUMMIT OF THE EUROPEAN LEADERS THIS WEEK.

DO YOU MAKE OF THE SITUATION NOW?

>> ESSENTIALLY IT'S GOTTEN WORSE THAN BEING UNWILLING TO SUPPORT UKRAINE.

BASED ON STATEMENTS DONALD TRUMP HAS MADE IT LOOKS LIKE HE'S THROWN HIS LOT IN WITH PUTIN.

WHAT I MEAN BY THIS, DONALD TRUMP HAS BLAMED UKRAINE FOR STARTING THE WAR WHICH OF COURSE, ANYONE WHO HAS TWO EYES KNOWS THAT'S NOT TRUE.

HE'S CALLED ZELENSKY A DICTATOR AND ALL OF HIS PEOPLE ON THE TALK SHOWS ARE BASICALLY SAYING THAT RUSSIA WAS NOT THE AGGRESSOR SO I THINK WHAT WE'VE GOT HAPPENING IS FAR WORSE THAN WASHING HIS HANDS OF UKRAINE, HE'S THROWN HIS LOT IN WITH PUTIN WHICH HAS UNBELIEVABLY NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES NOT ONLY FOR UKRAINE BUT FOR A LOT OF THE ISSUES AROUND THE WORLD.

>> DIDN'T WE SEE THIS COMING, HE HAD AN AFFINITY WORKING WITH VLADIMIR PUTIN OR WHO KNOWS WHAT IT IS, THAT THIS WOULD COME TO PASS?

>> WE ALL SAW THIS .

OF COURSE, THERE WAS THE INVESTIGATION INTO RUSSIAN COLLUSION AND ALL OF THIS, THE HELSINKI SUMMIT WHERE HE CITED WITH PUTIN OVER THE U.S. INTELLIGENCE SERVICE AND OFFERED TO HAND ME OVER TO PUTIN WHEN PUTIN ASKED HIM.

WE'VE SEEN THIS WITHIN MANY INTERVIEWS.

I THINK EVERYONE WAS HOPING AND PRAYING THAT THIS WOULD NOT WHATEVER HIS AFFINITY WAS, WOULD NOT CHANGE U.S. POLICY AND FOR THE MOST PART DURING HIS FIRST TERM AS PRESIDENT IT DIDN'T.

HE WAS SURROUNDED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO KEPT THE GUARDRAILS IN.

THIS TIME ROUND, HE'S COME OUT OF THE GATES SWINGING ON BEHALF OF VLADIMIR PUTIN AND AGAINST UKRAINE AND AGAINST A LOT OF THE REST OF THE WORLD AND PERHAPS , AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHEN IT COMES TO THIS ISSUE.

>> A LOT OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS HAVE GONE TO SAUDI ARABIA TRYING TO HAVE DIRECT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE RUSSIANS AND IT SEEMS PRESIDENT TRUMP WANTS TO HAVE DIRECT NEGOTIATIONS WITH PUTIN LEAVING OUT BOTH THE UKRAINIANS AND THE EUROPEANS.

WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT?

>> I THINK THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE A NEGOTIATION BETWEEN TWO WARRING PARTIES AND EXCLUDES ONE OF THE WARRING PARTIES.

>> THAT MAY HAPPEN THOUGH SO THAT MAY BE WHAT HAPPENS.

NEGOTIATION.

THE PURPOSE OF THESE MEETINGS IN SAUDI ARABIA IS NOT TO RESOLVE THE WAR, THE PURPOSE IS FOR TRUMP AND PUTIN TO RESET RELATIONS BETWEEN THEMSELVES.

THERE'S BEEN ALL THE TALK ABOUT LIFTING SANCTIONS, BRINGING RUSSIA INTO THE G-7, FOR AMERICAN BUSINESSES TO SHOW UP IN RUSSIA.

IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A PIECE NEGOTIATION BUT SOME TYPE OF RESET RELATIONS BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE UNITED STATES.

>> UKRAINE IN MY OPINION DOESN'T HAVE MUCH OF A CHOICE.

THEY SHOULD FIGHT, FIGHT THE RUSSIANS TO THE EXTENT THEY ARE CUTTING OFF MILITARY AID, UKRAINE SHOULD LOOK TO THE EUROPEANS TO INCREASE MILITARY AID AND IF THE EUROPEANS DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY WITHIN THEIR OWN RESOURCES, I SHOULD POINT OUT THE EUROPEANS HAVE PRODUCED BEFORE, FOR THEM TO DOUBLE DOWN WHITE BE DIFFICULT IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO CONTINUE OR TO DOUBLE DOWN.

THE EUROPEANS SHOULD DRAW ON THE $300 BILLION OF RUSSIAN MONEY WHICH HAS BEEN FROZEN MOSTLY IN EUROPE AND USE THIS MONEY TO SUPPORT THE UKRAINIANS.

IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, TRUMP DOESN'T REALLY HAVE THE LEVERAGE TO CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF THE WAR.

HE DOES NOT HAVE THE LEVERAGE TO FORCE UKRAINE INTO A SURRENDER WHICH IS EFFECTIVELY WHAT HE'S ATTEMPTING TO DO NOW.

>> YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE $300 BILLION IN FROZEN ASSETS FOR THREE YEARS.

YOU SAID THAT IT SHOULD BE CONFISCATED OR USED TO HELP UKRAINE.

IT SEEMS OBVIOUS TO ME THAT TRUMP WON'T GO ALONG WITH THAT.

TO WHAT EXTENT COULD THE DO THIS ON THEIR OWN AND WHY HAVEN'T THEY DONE IT?

>> THEY COULD ABSOLUTELY DO THIS ON THEIR OWN .

ONLY 13 BILLION IS THE UNITED STATES SO 287 BILLION IS IN EUROPE SO THEY COULD TAKE THAT MONEY.

HE SHOULD BE PAYING FOR THE UKRAINIANS, NOT ANYONE ELSE.

WHY HAVEN'T THEY DONE THIS?

THERE HASN'T BEEN THE POLITICAL WILL TO DO THIS UP UNTIL NOW.

THE EUROPEANS ARE IN A DIFFERENT WORLD THAT THEY WERE LIVING IN FROM TWO WEEKS AGO.

THEY'VE BEEN TOLD IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS BY THE PRESIDENT AND THE VICE PRESIDENT, J.D.

VANCE THAT THEY ARE ON THEIR OWN.

THE EUROPEANS ARE WAKING UP TO A NEW REALITY AND AS THEY WAKE UP TO THE NEW REALITY I BELIEVE THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF POLITICAL WILL TO SUPPORT UKRAINE AND I THINK THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF POLITICAL WILL TO HAVE PUTIN PAY FOR THIS BEFORE THEY TAXED THE TAXPAYERS THE EXTRA MONEY.

>> ON THE FROZEN ASSETS, DO YOU THINK THEY SHOULD SEES, HAVE YOU TALKED TO THE EUROPEAN LEADERS OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS ABOUT IT?

>> I WAS AT THE MUNICH SECURITY AGO .

I MET WITH SEVEN EUROPEAN FOREIGN MINISTERS FROM BOTH BIG AND SMALL COUNTRIES.

THIS WAS AT THE MOMENT WHEN J.D.

VANCE WAS GIVING HIS FAMOUS SPEECH, CRITICIZING OR ATTACKING EUROPE.

NOT ATTACKING RUSSIA.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE FOREIGN MINISTERS I MET WITH THOUGHT THIS WAS A NO-BRAINER.

OF COURSE THE MONEY SHOULD BE TAKEN.

THIS WAS ONE WEEK BEFORE THE GERMANS HAD THEIR ELECTIONS.

I DON'T THINK ANY BIG DECISION LIKE THAT COULD BE TAKEN WITHOUT A GERMAN CHANCELLOR SO WE'VE GOT A GERMAN CHANCELLOR, I THINK THEY WILL PROBABLY MOVE FORWARD QUICKLY WITHIN THAT DIRECTION.

>> AS YOU LOOK AT THE GERMAN ELECTIONS AND THE NEW CHANCELLOR, IN WHICH BOTH THE FAR RIGHT.

YOU MAY HAVE A COALITION OF A CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT THERE, HOW DOES THIS AFFECT UKRAINE AND THE RELATIONSHIPS WITH RUSSIA?

>> IN MY OPINION, THE PREVIOUS CHANCELLOR WAS HALF IN AND HALF OUT.

ONE STEP FORWARD, ONE STEP BACK WHEN IT CAME TO UKRAINE.

DIDN'T HAVE THE APPETITE.

THE NEW GERMAN CHANCELLOR HAS THE APPETITE AND HIS WORDS ARE CLEAR, VERY STRONG.

SUPPORTIVE OF UKRAINE.

IN GERMAN POLITICS, IT'S NOT LIKE AMERICAN POLITICS WHERE IN ORDER FOR HIM TO FORM THE GOVERNMENT HE HAS TO DO SO WITH COALITION WITH OTHER PARTIES INCLUDING THE PARTY FROM THE PREVIOUS CHANCELLOR, SCHOLZ, AND THE SOCIAL DEMOCRATS.

SOME COMPROMISES WILL HAVE TO BE MADE AND I'M HOPING AND I THINK UKRAINIANS ARE HOPING AND PREDICTING THAT THERE WILL BE A MORE ROBUST POLICY IN FAVOR OF UKRAINE COMING FROM GERMANY WITH A NEW CHANCELLOR.

>> THE NEW INCOMING CHANCELLOR HAS TALKED ABOUT HAVING TO TAKE INDEPENDENCE FROM THE UNITED STATES.

HE, IN SOME WAYS, SEEMED TO BE GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS IN THE UNITED STATES BUT IS NOW REACTING AGAINST SOME OF WHAT TRUMP HAS SAID.

WHAT DO YOU THINK IS A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE U.S. WILL BE AND WITH PUTIN WILL BE?

>> I THINK THAT HIS RELATIONSHIPS WITH PUTIN WILL BE ADVERSARIAL, AS THEY SHOULD BE.

PUTIN IS AN ADVERSARY TO EUROPE AND I THINK HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE UNITED STATES WILL BE THE BEST HE COULD MAKE OF IT BUT UNDERSTANDING THE NEW REALITY.

I SHOULD POINT OUT, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REPUBLICANS AND THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

REPUBLICANS AND CONGRESS ARE VERY TRANSATLANTIC.

VERY MUCH SUPPORTING OF UKRAINE, AGAINST PUTIN.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A FEW THAT I KNOW IN CONGRESS WHO ARE FIRMLY ON THE SIDE OF UKRAINE.

IT'S THE NEW MAGA WING OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

THEY HAVE THIS STRANGE AND DIFFERENT VIEW WHICH I SHOULD POINT OUT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE AVERAGE AMERICAN.

AMERICANS WERE IN UKRAINE AS THEY THINK THAT HE'S A CRIMINAL AND A DICTATOR.

I THINK TRUMP IS TRYING TO CHANGE THE PUBLIC OPINION OF AMERICA AND CHANGING THE OPINION OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS BUT I THINK THEY WILL DO THE BEST THEY CAN TO HOLD IT ALL TOGETHER BUT I THINK THE MESSAGE IS CLEAR, J.D.

VANCE WAS VERY CLEAR , TRUMP HAS BEEN CLEAR THAT HE'S NOT A BIG FAN OF NATO.

HE DOESN'T BELIEVE THAT COUNTRY SHOULD BE DEFENDING WITH WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE ALL ABOUT IF THEY AREN'T PAYING THEIR WAY.

IS NOT GOING TO BE A SCENARIO WHERE EUROPE HAS TO GO ON ITS OWN AS FAR AS DEFENDING ITSELF.

I THINK THAT'S WHEN THE NEW CHANCELLOR WAS SAYING THIS IN HIS SPEECH.

IT'S PROBABLY IMPORTANT TO DO THIS UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.

I VERY MUCH DISAGREE WITH TRUMP BUT THE ONE PLACE I AGREE IS THAT EUROPE HAS BEEN LIVING IN THIS COZY COCOON, BEING PROTECTED BY AMERICA.

IT'S TIME FOR THEM TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN DEFENSE.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THAT.

>> PRESIDENT TRUMP AND SOME OF THE ADMINISTRATION HAVE CALLED FOR THE USE OF UKRAINE'S RARE EARTH MINERALS AND MINERAL RIGHTS TO FUND OR PAY BACK TO THE UNITED STATES.

I THINK THE TREASURY SECRETARY WALKED IT BACK A LITTLE IN THE FINANCIAL TIMES OP-ED IN WHICH TO TALKED ABOUT CREATING A FUND FOCUSED ON LONG-TERM RECONSTRUCTION BUT WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT WHOLE IDEA?

>> IT'S OUTRAGEOUS.

SO THE UNITED STATES, IN THE FORM OF A GRANT, A GIFT, HAS GIVEN UKRAINE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, $100 BILLION IN MILITARY AID.

THE U.S. SECRETARY OF TREASURY SAYS THAT WASN'T A GRANT, THAT WAS ALONE AND WE WOULD LIKE THIS BACK BUT WE DON'T WANT $100 BILLION BACK WE WANT $500 BILLION BACK AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE REQUIRE TO TO SIGN OVER YOUR MINERAL WELLS, 50% OF THIS INTO PERPETUITY.

IT'S AN INDECENT PROPOSAL OF THE MOST MAXIMUM SCALE FOR HIM TO DO THAT ON ANY LEVEL.

AND ON TOP OF ALL THIS, IN EXCHANGE FOR NOTHING SO THE UNITED STATES WASN'T GOING TO SAY IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT WE WILL GUARANTEE YOUR SECURITY INTO PERPETUITY, THIS IS TO PAY BACK THE $100 BILLION THAT WAS SPENT IN THE FORM OF A $500 BILLION PAYMENT.

ANYONE WHO LOOKS AT THIS FOR TWO SECONDS UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS IS A CRAZY INSANE INSULT.

THAT OP-ED.

HE PUTS A FEW FANCY WORDS ON THIS INDECENT PROPOSAL.

ZELENSKY WAS RIGHT TO REJECT IT AND I HOPE YOU NEVER FEELS PRESSURE TO ACCEPT BECAUSE THIS DOES NOTHING TOWARD FIXING THE PROBLEM WHICH IS PUTIN'S INVASION OF UKRAINE.

>> HOW COULD THIS BE RESOLVED, NATO, WITH THE U.S. NOT WILLING, IT SEEMS TO SUPPORT UKRAINE AND ZELENSKY?

COULD THERE BE A CEASE-FIRE IN PLACE THAT WOULD HOLD OR IS THERE NO SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM?

>> THE OTHER PROBLEM NO ONE SEEMS TO SPEND TIME ON IS THAT PUTIN DOESN'T REALLY WANT TO RESOLVE IT.

HE WANTS SANCTIONS LIFTED WITH BETTER RELATIONS WITH AMERICA AND OTHER COUNTRIES HE WANTS TO GO BACK TO THE MAINSTREAM.

HE DOESN'T WANT JUSTICE TO BE DONE FOR WHAT HE HAS DONE BEFORE AND HE DOESN'T WANT TO STOP FIGHTING AND FOR A SIMPLE REASON HE DOESN'T WANT TO STOP FIGHTING, HE'S NOW A WAR FOR HIM TO STOP HALFWAY, IT DOESN'T ACCOMPLISH ANY OBJECTIVES.

THE REASON HE'S DOING THIS WAR, IN MY OPINION, IT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH NATO OR TERRITORY.

IT HAS TO DO WITH A MAN WHOSE BEEN AROUND TOO LONG IS DESPERATE TO REMAIN IN POWER BECAUSE HE UNDERSTANDS IF HE LOSES POWER HE GOES TO JAIL, LOSES ALL OF HIS MONEY, AND DYING.

SO YOU'VE GOT THIS DICTATOR WHO IS DESPERATE TO REMAIN ALIVE.

HE WILL THROW HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF HIS OWN SOLDIERS TO THEIR DEATHS, SPENDING HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WITH NO INTENTION OF BACKING DOWN.

THE ONLY THING THAT COULD HAPPEN IS A SHORT PAUSE FOR HIM TO REARM AND CARRY ON WITH HIS MISSION.

>> I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT SOLUTION WOULD YOU SUGGEST FOR UKRAINE?

>> MY SOLUTION IS VERY SIMPLE, GIVE THE UKRAINIANS ALL OF THE TOOLS THEY NEED .

>> THEY ESTABLISH THAT'S NOT >> IT COULD ABSOLUTELY HAPPEN WITH THE EUROPEANS.

$300 BILLION OF MONEY TO SPEND ON WEAPONS.

LET THE UKRAINIANS FIGHT BACK THE RUSSIANS TO THE POINT WHERE THEY HAVE THEIR PUTIN THEIR BOOT ON PUTIN'S THROAT.

THEN THEY COULD NEGOTIATE A CEASE-FIRE.

HE WILL NEVER NEGOTIATE FROM A POSITION OF STRENGTH BUT A POSITION OF WEAKNESS.

>> AS EVE SAID , WITH TALKS THAT HE WANTS TO HAVE SANCTIONS LIFTED, THAT'S HIS LONG-TERM GOAL.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE GAVE A TALK ABOUT HOW YOU COULD LIFT SANCTIONS AND BRING RUSSIA INTO THE WORLD COMMUNITY.

IS THAT A FANTASY OR COULD THIS BE A NEW OPENING FOR RUSSIA?

>> IT'S OUTRAGEOUS IF THEY DO THIS.

PUTIN HAS LAUNCHED A WAR OF AGGRESSION AND HAS TAKEN A LARGE PART OF A NEIGHBORING COUNTRY THAT DID NOTHING TO PROVOKE THIS CONQUEST.

THEN TO LIFT SANCTIONS AND BRING THEM INTO THE WORLD, THAT WOULD BRING A TERRIBLE MESSAGE.

HE COULD DO THE SAME THING IN TAIWAN AND EVERY DICTATOR AROUND THE WORLD, THIS IS NOT THE MESSAGE WE WOULD WANT TO SEND ANYONE.

IT CERTAINLY WOULD BE THE BIGGEST SLAP IN THE FACE FOR THE UKRAINIANS IF WE WERE TO DO THAT.

>> IF THE SANCTIONS LIFTING , AMERICAN COMPANIES AND BUSINESSES COULD DO BUSINESS IN RUSSIA.

YOU ARE ONE OF THE BIGGEST INVESTORS OF NOT THE BIGGEST INVESTOR IN RUSSIA BACK IN THE DAY.

WHAT ADVICE WOULD YOU GIVE TO AMERICAN CORPORATIONS AND PEOPLE THINKING OF DOING BUSINESS IN RUSSIA?

>> STAYAWAY.

I WAS THE LARGEST FOREIGN INVESTOR IN THEIR COUNTRY .

THEY EXPELLED ME FROM THE COUNTRY AND RAIDED MY OFFICE, SEIZING OUR DOCUMENTS, MY LAWYER DISCOVERED A FRAUD CONNECTED WITH THE SEIZURE OF HE EXPOSED IT AND HE WAS ARRESTED.

ARRESTED BY THE SAME PEOPLE WHO DID THE CRIME, HE WAS TORTURED FOR 358 DAYS AND HE WAS MURDERED.

NOVEMBER 16, 2009.

MY MESSAGE TO AMERICAN BUSINESSMEN, YOU NOT ONLY RISK YOUR MONEY, YOU RISK YOUR LIFE.

IF THAT'S WHAT THEY DID TO THE LARGEST FOREIGN INVESTOR IN THE COUNTRY THEY WILL DO THIS TO YOU TOO.

>> WE TALKED TWO YEARS AGO ON THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY OF THIS LATEST INVASION BY RUSSIA INTO UKRAINE.

YOU SAID YOU THOUGHT PUTIN'S IDEA, HIS PLAN WAS HE COULD WAIT OUT THE U.S.

WAIT US OUT UNTIL THE U.S. GOT TIRED OF IT ALL , OF SUPPORTING UKRAINE.

WELL, THAT SEEMS TO BE A BIT OF WHAT'S HAPPENED.

AT LEAST THE U.S. PRESIDENT AND HIS ADMINISTRATION FEEL THAT.

SHOULD WE HAVE TRIED TO SETTLE YEAR AGO?

>> I'VE GOT A LOT OF CRITICISM FOR HOW THIS WAS HANDLED BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT BEFORE TRUMP .

BIDEN WAS RUNNING A WAR WHERE HE WAS GIVING UKRAINIANS ENOUGH EQUIPMENT SO THAT THEY DIDN'T LOSE BUT WAS CONSCIOUS AND EXPLICIT AND NOT GIVING THE EQUIPMENT THEY NEEDED TO WIN.

HAD HE DONE SO, WE COULD BE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE RIGHT NOW.

>> BILL BROWNER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US AGAIN.

>> THANK YOU