Loading summary
Transcript72 lines
- [00:04]
Venetia Rainey
The telegraph.
- [00:10]
Grainger Advertiser
If you're an H VAC technician and a call comes in, Grainger knows that you need a partner that helps you find the right product fast and hassle free. And you know that when the first problem of the day is a clanking blower motor, there's no need to break a sweat. With Grainger's easy to use use website and product details, you're confident you'll soon have everything humming right along. Call 1-800-GRAINGER click granger.com or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done.
- [00:40]
Roland Oliphant
Amazon One Medical presents painful Thoughts do.
- [00:45]
Connor Stringer
They ever actually clean the ball pit at these kids play gyms? Or is my kid just swimming in a vat of bacteria catching whatever cootie of the day is breeding in there? A cootie that'll probably take down our whole family.
- [00:59]
Roland Oliphant
Luckily, with Amazon One Medical 24.
- [01:01]
Connor Stringer
7 Virtual Care, you can get checked out for whatever ball pit itis you've contracted.
- [01:06]
Podcast Advertiser
Amazon One Medical Healthcare just got less painful.
- [01:17]
Philip Breedlove
It is so far from a tactic we should even consider. Just speaking of it is causing a lot of damage. We will measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars we end.
- [01:31]
Roland Oliphant
Right now all eyes are on Washington, but who's actually watching Europe at the moment?
- [01:40]
Venetia Rainey
The deepening ties between China, Russia and North Korea would certainly have some in Washington concerned.
- [01:46]
Roland Oliphant
And then daddy has to sometimes use strong language.
- [01:49]
Philip Breedlove
We're going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.
- [01:55]
Grainger Advertiser
The IDF will continue to uphold the cease fire agreement and will respond firmly.
- [02:00]
Venetia Rainey
To any violation of it. I'm Venetia Rainey.
- [02:05]
Roland Oliphant
And I'm Roland Oliphant and this is Battle lions.
- [02:07]
Venetia Rainey
It's Monday, January 19, 2026. Well, lots to discuss this morning. Over the weekend, Trump escalated his threats to take Greenland. He said he would impose 10% tariffs on the UK and seven other European countries if the they didn't just let him have it. And those will escalate to 25% in June. This is really testing NATO and the transatlantic relationship to the max. Roland, what did you make of the events over the weekend?
- [02:35]
Roland Oliphant
So kind of very Trump in a way. I mean jacking up tariff, setting a deadline. I think this far into his term we can identify patterns of behavior and that's definitely something that's familiar. Definitely an escalation to get what he wants. Interesting division on how to respond. It's kind of two ways to respond. So Europeans, they're talking about activating something, I think they call it the anti coercion law or something, which allows the European Union to impose retaliatory tariffs on anybody who's trying to coerce them into doing something. Amazingly, they seem to be doing it against their main ally, the United States. You have Emmanuel Macron on the hawkish right wing of this, saying, Donald Trump only understands strength. Keir Starmer has been speaking this morning, and he indicates that he would rather keep calm and avoid any retaliatory tariffs from at least the uk. The UK is outside the European Union, so they're in a slightly trickier position. But you also see that debate going on inside Europe as well. How do you respond? No one knows. But huge, huge, huge questions. I mean, you know, if this goes through, everyone tells me it's the end of NATO, but no one really seems to have thought through what that means, because that is such an enormous thing. No one really seems to have yet done the homework on what the world looks like without NATO.
- [03:52]
Venetia Rainey
Yeah, and it's extraordinary because, as ever, it feels like there's a very personal element to this. Ostensibly, this was off the back of Operation Arctic Endurance. Remember last week feels like a lifetime ago already. UK and some other European countries sent some troops, a small number of troops to Greenland to try and bolster security there. And it was supposed to, I think, show, from a European perspective, they were trying to show that they were taking Trump's concern, concerns that Europe wasn't doing enough to defend Greenland from Russian and Chinese interference, that Europe was taking those concerns seriously. But apparently it riled Trump or someone in his administration, and so they've decided to take these steps further. I'm just going to read out a letter that Trump wrote to the Norwegian Prime Minister. Dear Jonas, considering your country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped eight wars, plus, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of peace, although it will always be predominant, but now can think about what is good and what is proper for the United States of America. Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China. And why do they have a quote marks right of ownership anyway? There are no written documents. It's only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there. Also, I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding. And now NATO should do something for the United States. The world is not secure unless we have complete and total control of Greenland. Thank you, President djt. I mean, that is just the most extraordinary expression of coercion and also just Seems so petty. He wasn't given a Nobel Peace Prize, so he's decided to try and take his allies territory. How are you supposed to deal with that?
- [05:25]
Roland Oliphant
Well, as we discussed, there's two ways of dealing with it. Right. The Keir Starmerish approach, which.
- [05:29]
Venetia Rainey
And our keep calm and carry on.
- [05:31]
Roland Oliphant
Yeah, exactly. And to be fair to him, he's won plaudits for that. Keir Starmer takes a lot of flak for all kinds of things, but most of, you know, kind of foreign policy experts seem to think that he's been quite successful so far.
- [05:43]
Venetia Rainey
Yeah. I wonder if this is where you hit the limit.
- [05:45]
Roland Oliphant
Well, there we are, you know. Is it. It's another test of that approach. The alternative approach is, as we were saying on, on Friday's episode, you know, be quite direct and so on. I mean, is this really about the Nobel Prize? I suspect this is something, something you say when you're in a mood or angry. It's just, it's just something you reach for. I don't think it's really about that. It's an extraordinary crisis.
- [06:06]
Venetia Rainey
I mean, we do know that he wants it. I guess the really big question is he'll go as far as economic pressure now, clearly, to try and take it. Will he go as far as military action? Our colleague, political editor Ben Reilly Smith, asked Starmer exactly that question.
- [06:20]
Connor Stringer
Donald Trump and his team hint at military action in Greenland. Do you think that's a genuine possibility?
- [06:26]
Roland Oliphant
I don't, actually. I think that this can be resolved and should be resolved through calm discussion, but with the application of the principles and values that I've set out in terms of who decides the future of Greenland, making clear that the use of tariffs in this way is completely wrong. There's an important point here, though, about what Keir Star. Keir Starmer says. No, I don't think he's going for military escalation. But it's clear the Americans feel like they've got. They probably feel like they've got a kind of escalation dominance. They can go further and there's the tariffs, then there's other things. Then there's maybe cutting off aid to Ukraine, selectively withdrawing American troops from Europe, that there are all kinds of instruments that he has, short of an actual invasion, to put pressure on the Europeans in a way that they possibly think will force the Danish to sell eventually down the line. So even though Keir Starmer is saying no, I don't think we're talking about an American military intervention, it doesn't have to be a military intervention for this to get even more sticky and more serious than it is now?
- [07:30]
Venetia Rainey
Yeah, that's a really good point. For me, military action feels quite far off. It really would be extraordinary, but we just can't rule anything out. I was looking at some data from accled, the Global Conflict Monitor. They've tallied up all of the military action by the Trump administration in the first year of its second term and have compared it to the Biden administration over the total four years, 1038 military actions in total, compared to 1,648 by the Biden administration. And the way this breaks down is really interesting. So there have already been 685 air or drone drone strikes and individual US action, as opposed to coalition action, nearly 600. So the vast majority of those over the whole Biden administration, nearly 700. So Trump has nearly caught up already with what Biden did over four years. The violence stretches over 21 countries, an estimated 1,200 fatalities. That's compared to Biden 37 countries, 1,500 fatalities. And as we know, those countries include familiar theaters like Syria, Iraq, Yemen, but also newer targets like Iran, Nigeria and Venezuela. Are we going to add Denmark to that list this year? We genuinely can't rule it out at this stage. And then what would NATO do? I know this is something you're looking at the moment, Roland. What are the options on the table? Mark? Russ has been very quiet recently.
- [08:41]
Roland Oliphant
The Secretary General, well, Mark Ritter, can't say much because he's a Secretary General of NATO. And this is a dispute inside NATO. Right. So I think his. His hands are slightly tied, you know, a little bit in the same way that we see the United Nations Secretary General's hands tied in disputes of that type. I don't think anybody knows what NATO would do after that. We put that question to lots of people recently, and the answer seems to be NATO would be finished, or at least NATO with America, and it would be finished. Then the next thought down that road is, oh, well, the threat would remain from Russia that NATO exists to deter, so the Europeans would retain something. But beyond that, there has been very, very little serious work or serious thought about what actually happens here on the number of strikes. I think this is telling to a kind of larger point. There's a real contradiction what Donald Trump says he wants or has said he wants and what he can do. He wants to act like a global superpower, but also he kind of doesn't want to be a superpower going around the world telling people what to do. America is a global superpower. It has a global footprint and it projects its power around the world. That is a contradiction that goes to the heart of the American kind of MAGA project. They want to engage in the world using that force kind of selectively and so on. But you're not a global superpower unless you project your dominance globally.
- [10:01]
Venetia Rainey
I think you make such a good point about the strength of feeling around this. I interviewed Philip Breedlove last night. He's a retired four star US Air Force general who was Supreme Allied Commander Europe from 2013 to 2016, known as Sakur, for those in the know. And I was really struck by the fact that he repeatedly said he doesn't do politics. But he clearly felt so strongly about this issue of what Trump is doing to NATO and how wrongheaded it is to be threatening an ally that despite saying he didn't do politics, he did get quite political. Let's hear that conversation. Europe is on edge at the moment, shall we say, over Trump's repeated threats to take Greenland, which a lot of people say would break NATO. What are your views on that?
- [10:45]
Philip Breedlove
I'm already on record. I'm already on record, so I couldn't get myself in any more trouble than I'm already in. But the idea that America would attack an ally or the, or the property of an ally, or use force to try to coerce an American ally, it is a non starter. It is so far from a tactic we should even consider. Just speaking of it is causing a lot of damage. A lot of people talk about our president's book, which is in chapter six. He talks about how you start a negotiation, you set a very high bar and you go in hard, and then when you negotiate back from that, you're seen to be a good guy. I have no idea why he's doing what he's doing, but I will just say what I have said in the past. The idea that America would use force on a NATO ally is, is beyond the pale. I mean, it's just, it makes no sense whatsoever. And I'll, I'll say also what I've already said about this. We can do everything we need to do in a defense sense right now. I would offer you and other reporters to go look at the garrison size of America's in Greenland. We have over the years brought our garrison size down because we're not worried. And now all of a sudden we're worried to a degree that we're thinking about doing some rather radical things that it all doesn't add up. We have the right kind of agreements to put and get and prepare all the defensive capabilities we need in Greenland. I think Greenland already has said they would welcome US Investment and US Increases in, in security. I don't think this is about security.
- [12:48]
Venetia Rainey
What do you think it's about?
- [12:49]
Philip Breedlove
There are other things in Greenland that any nation would like to have. We'll just leave it at that.
- [12:56]
Venetia Rainey
Minerals, natural resources, things like that. I assume you're alluding to this clearly really bothers you. What do you think the consequences would be? What is it that worries you about it?
- [13:06]
Philip Breedlove
NATO is the most successful alliance in the history of the world. We've had a couple of skirmishes, but we've had over 70 years of relative peace. When you talk about wars, NATO is responsible for that. And until Russia invaded Ukraine in a war that was completely contrived to serve Mr. Putin's purposes, until that war, we didn't have any theater level wars like that. I've said it before and I teach it in class when I teach NATO will be more important across the next 75 years than they were about the preceding 75 years. We have built expectations among very bad people that they can invade their neighbors and get away with it. And the world is going to have to come to grips with that. If you've raised children, you, you know a few things that are, that don't change when it comes to war. One of them is if you reward bad behavior, you're going to get more bad behavior. Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. Russia has an invaded now, Ukraine, three times. Twice in the spring, spring of winter, then spring of 2014, and then later in this full scale invasion. And up until now, in every instance when Russia has invaded, we have rewarded their bad behavior by allowing it to stand and get. And now we're considering giving them more reward for their bad behavior to come to some sort of a peace agreement. Here's something that any mother who's raised a child could tell you. If you reward bad behavior, Georgia, if you reward bad behavior, Crimea, if you reward bad behavior. Don Boss, if you reward bad behavior three times in a row, you are not going to get good behavior. Next. At some point, Mr. Putin is going to have to be brought to heel.
- [15:30]
Venetia Rainey
Do you think Trump's the man to do that? There were high hopes that he would be able to crack this conflict, but if anything, he's coming across as more pro Russia than pro Ukraine.
- [15:39]
Philip Breedlove
Well, I think Mr. Putin has flirted with disaster because he, he has risen the ire of the president. I Think that in, in our country, in our policy circles, we have to remember that Putin is the aggressor. This war was contrived to meet his goals for Russia.
- [16:02]
Venetia Rainey
Do you worry that Trump doesn't always have that in mind or Trump's administration, the circle of people around him?
- [16:07]
Philip Breedlove
I'm going to avoid politics here. I think that what is happening here is very clear to people of serious intent. And at some point, we're going to have to deal with, with KGB agent who is running an illegal, immoral and inhumane war. At some point, we're going to have to settle down and deal with that.
- [16:32]
Venetia Rainey
We had Ben Hodges on this podcast a couple of weeks ago, former commanding general of the United States army in Europe.
- [16:39]
Philip Breedlove
He and I are very close friends. He worked for me in his last job.
- [16:42]
Venetia Rainey
He told us that if he was given the order by Trump to take Greenland militarily, he would say no. What would you say?
- [16:49]
Philip Breedlove
When I was the NATO secular, if I had been commanded to invade another NATO ally, I would have said no. Remember that a treaty is a legal document. And to our nation, read our Congress changes treaties. We are bound by our treaties. This is one of the problems about the Budapest memorandum of 94. It was never signed as a treaty. It was an agreement. And that's why some in America say we don't have to abide by what we said in those agreements. I think that's really sad that our nation would take attack that tells the world you can't count on the United States when they give their word. We have a treaty. NATO is established. Allies are a legal thing. And I think that. Are you familiar with the My Lai incident during Cambodia and Vietnam? In that incident, soldiers committed an atrocity in an, in a, in a town. It was horrid. And their defense were. We were ordered to do it. And the courts, the military courts and the civilian courts found that obeying an illegal or immoral order is no defense. And we established the, we established the line of thinking at that point that a soldier, sailor, airman, Marine, now guardian, is not bound to execute illegal and immoral orders. And I'm not encouraging anybody to do anything, but I think that we need to learn from our history. And there you have it.
- [18:47]
Venetia Rainey
I know you don't want to speak politics, so this isn't a political question, but more a question of how the military is able to, to what extent it's able to insulate itself from the politics, which have become very extreme. I mean, I'm speaking to you this weekend. Trump has slapped 10% tariffs on Europe unless they give him. Green knows what it will be tomorrow. But how is the U.S. military, U.S. armed forces, the Pentagon, are they able to insulate themselves from these sorts of waves of constant politics and aggressive tactics?
- [19:16]
Philip Breedlove
So we swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. We don't swear to any politician. Now, our laws lay out that our chain of command is the Secretary of Defense and the president. So we answer those laws. And we absolutely, in America have fought long and hard to steer as clear of politics as we can. And so what we try to do and the way that we remain clear of all this is that we remain true to our oath. And, and then if there is, if there is inch instances where our, our oath to the Constitution tells us that we can't do something, then we don't do it.
- [20:06]
Venetia Rainey
What do you make of Trump's first year in his second term? And are there any highlights that you'd like to pick out?
- [20:12]
Philip Breedlove
Manisha? I don't do politics, so I'm going to speak purely from a military sense. The President is focused on the military's capabilities, and as you have seen across his first year, he has used them quite often, and so he sees them as a viable tool. The President has said more than once that he has fixed our military. I would argue a little differently. I think that he has invested in the military and he's begun to do some good things for the military, but he is far from fixing the military. I can speak authoritatively to the Air Force, but I believe it's the same for the Navy and the Army. I'm not so sure about the Marines, but this is the fact. The United States Air Force is now the smallest and the oldest it has ever been. It is smaller than the day it was born from the army, and our equipment is the oldest it's ever been. Let's just take the B52, for example. First started flying in 1952. Easy to remember. And it will be nearly 100 years old before it's phased out of our inventory. At the current plan and rate, eight generations of pilots will fly that aircraft. And so this is a problem across our fleet. We, our fighter force is smaller and on average, older than ever before. And we need to recapitalize. So I understand the President feels he's fixed it, but there's a long way to go before we're truly healthy.
- [22:07]
Venetia Rainey
So an aging Air Force, do you see signs of investment in the US's military? They had the national Security strategy come out towards the end of last year where encouraging signs in that for you.
- [22:18]
Philip Breedlove
There are signs of investment in the, all the services. In fact, the president has put forward a defense budget this year that's the biggest ever. So the president is trying, but we have gone through a long, long period of what some call acquisition vacation. We're not buying anything, ships, airplanes, tanks, we're not buying any of them at the rate that would recapitalize our, our fleets or our forces. And so we are aging in average age and it will take some turnaround. The whole issue of how we meet our new national security strategy, which births then the national defense strategy, that's a whole other conversation. There are people that call this a, you know, we are becoming isolationist and we are drawing back from the responsibilities we've held around the world to try to keep things peaceful, etc. Others are saying, and these are rather, how to say it, rather tough views. Others are saying that, that the White House team has adopted Mr. Putin's idea of spheres of influence. The people that hold that view are, are basically reading the, that from what our national security strategy says, which is we are now, number one in our mind is the Western Hemisphere. Number two in our mind is China, and then comes Europe and the others. And so this would, would fit the people that hold that view. And as you said earlier, as we're talking about our president's actions and how he's used and done with the military in his first part of this first year of his second term, he's very much taken that position. We have participated, of course, in Midnight Hammer, which was tied to Operation Rising lion by the Israelis in Iran. We've done several strikes of note since the President has come aboard. But probably the biggest military muscle movement is the one you see right now. For the first time ever, we are deploying a carrier battle group in the Western Hemisphere and striking Western hemisphere targets.
- [25:00]
Venetia Rainey
You're referring to Venezuela there. What did you make of that operation to capture Maduro?
- [25:06]
Philip Breedlove
Well, as a military man, I think it was masterful. I won't pass judgment on whether it should have been done or not. But what we do know is that our military forces executed a nearly perfect attack and rendition and have extricated a really bad guy, an illegitimate leader. And, and so from a purely military stance, it was extremely well done.
- [25:36]
Venetia Rainey
Is there anything else you want to say on one year into Trump's second term?
- [25:39]
Philip Breedlove
Yeah, I think I'll skip it. There is something I want to say, but it would be on the front page of every paper in America tomorrow. So I'm going to leave it at that.
- [25:50]
Venetia Rainey
That was Philip Breedlove, former Supreme Allied Commander Europe and a retired four star U.S. air Force Force General. We're going to take a short pause now. Coming up, we take a look back at some of the highlights and lowlights of the first year of Trump's new administration.
- [26:09]
Grainger Advertiser
You know what's wild? Most people are still overpaying for car insurance just because it's a pain to switch. That's why there's Jerry. Jerry's the only app that compares rates from over 50 insurance in minutes and helps you switch fast with no spam calls or hidden fees. Drivers who save with Jerry could save over 1,300 doll a year. Before you renew your car insurance policy, do yourself a favor, download the Jerry app or head to Jerry AI Acast.
- [26:36]
Podcast Advertiser
Flowers die in three days. Matching underwear from Meundies. That's a gift that lasts. Meundies creates matching prints for couples and friends. Same adorable designs and different cuts for each of you. All made from their signature ultramodal fabric that feels impossibly soft. With 30 million pairs sold and 90,000 five star reviews, MeUndies matching prints are the perfect gift. Valentine's Day is February 14th, so don't wait. Get exclusive deals up to 50% off at Meundies.com acast code acast that's Meundies.com acast Code acast hi, this is Matt from P1 with Matt and Tommy and this episode is sponsored by ebay. The cars you'll find on ebay are just different. They come with a story that you can't wait to share. Like this 1973 Dodge Charger on ebay that has been tucked away in an Arizona Barn for over 40 years. Only 55,000 miles and somehow in great running order, even has a rare sunroof. Suddenly, a car that was hidden for decades is being delivered in just a few clicks with ebay's secure purchase. All the paperwork handled. There are thousands of cars on ebay, from unique finds like the Pontiac Grand Prix SJ to daily drivers. And now with a new way to buy them. Ebay, things people love.
- [28:01]
Venetia Rainey
Welcome back. Before we continue with the episode, I want to ask you to leave a review. It really helps us to figure out what you like and what you don't like. If you're listening on Spotify or YouTube, you can just scroll to the bottom of this episode and leave your thoughts there. Or if you're listening on Apple, go to our main podcast podcast feed and scroll all the way to the bottom we recently had a review accusing us of being pro Hamas, anti Israel, anti American, and massively biased against the West. Do you disagree? Share a review and leave us your thoughts. We'd love to hear from you now. If you think this last year of news has been a wild ride, spare a thought for journalists in Washington who've had to report on this madness every day. From trade wars to bombing Iran. Our U.S. correspondent Connor Stringer has seen the whole Trump carnival up close. I started by asking him what it's been like reporting on this administration's first year.
- [28:47]
Connor Stringer
I think one word, vanishi, that sums up very best is relentless, non stop. Perhaps if I was allowed to. This whole administration and their whole kind of approach to politics is all about just flooding the grid, hitting things at 100 miles per hour. And unfortunately, we spend our time chasing after them at all hours of the day. You must remember that Trump and his kind of loyal team have had about five years to prepare, to kind of get together a merry brand of his most loyalist kind of friends and confidants and come up with a quick fire way, the best way they can blitz through all their policy should he and should he return to power in 2025? So they've gone straight out the gates immediately, as quick as what they would have anticipated, quicker than what we could have ever imagined. And crucially, they thought ahead. They've realized and thought about some of the hurdles they may have faced and how they can creatively avoid them. And that has just ended up meaning that we are essentially working all hours of the day, often very late. This is a president who, you know, tweets on true social, you know, more, you know, than anybody in history, I think. And that's like how he likes to break policy news and how he likes to communicate with them, with the American people. And he's doing so all hours of the day. You know, he's up hurry. If you walk by the White House sometimes in the evening, or if for some ungodly reason you're up at 4am and walking by the sofa and you'll see the light on in the Oval Office, he is up at 4 or 5 in the morning and he's working and he's doing this stuff and you know, unfortunately or fortunately, depending on what way you look at it, it's our job to, to be there when he does do that. So it's been absolutely relentless.
- [30:21]
Venetia Rainey
Give us a sense of some of the stuff that you've done over the past year. Give us some of your reporting highlights and lowlights, if you will.
- [30:28]
Connor Stringer
Some of my highlights. Well, it must be my time in the Winnebago with Dom Nichols in Anchorage, Alaska. The three days cozied up with my esteemed colleague as we kind of campervanned around Anchorage. What trip that was being able to see Vladimir Putin in the flesh, witnessing history as Donald Trump welcomed him to America for the first time in a long time. And all the anticipation building up to, would there be a deal? Would this be the end of the Ukraine war? Was America now favoring Russia for the first time and turning their backs on Europe in a kind of historic first? It was unprecedented. The atmosphere there was something I've never experienced before. You had the traveling Russian kind of press pack, which were everything you could imagine. So everything from chain smoking to kind of moaning about American hospitality, which is obviously hilarious, and what they've been, you know, for what they're used to, to, you know, the American side to remoaning it by the Russians. And it was basically a cold war on oppressed fronts as well as, you know, as well as being there for quite the occasion. So that was really fantastic and quite surreal to see actually in the flesh, the low lights. To be honest, it hasn't been that many. It's been an absolute whirlwind. It's been a fantastic year for me. I mean, it's quite privileged to be able to report this and spend my time in the White House and be able to come and go be up close and, and, you know, get to see the President asking questions, go into the Oval Office, go into the East Room, you know, be there to bear witness to some of the most historical meetings, meetings that I'm sure we will look back at with either raised eyes, brows or quite disbelief, depending on what comes next.
- [32:01]
Venetia Rainey
So you've met Trump multiple times in person. You've been in the room when he's sort of taking questions. What's he actually like in the flesh? Is it in any way different from what we might imagine from reading news reports about him?
- [32:11]
Connor Stringer
Much taller. I can tell you that, you know, he might come across on TV as being quite short, and the stereotype is short and overweight, but he's not. He's tall man, six foot two, six foot three. For reference. I'm six foot six, so I can appreciate a tall. A fellow. A Fellow Tall being YT1. And he's got a. He's got an aura about him. When he walks into the room, there's. He draws attention immediately. He's extremely charismatic, very Charming. You know, his whole life he's been used to being in front of the cameras, you know, through his reality TV stars or for his various businesses. He knows how to use them and knows how to play television very well. And you get a sense of that, not so much that it's an act, but he's like any kind of good presenter or anyone who's kind of been used to being on the tv. They know exactly when to turn it on. And what you see with Trump is very much what you get. You know, with many politicians, there's the political speak, the very formal manner in which they conduct their business, then behind the scenes, they're much looser, more themselves. Trump is himself 247 and you see that often he'll joke with his favorite reporters before the cameras were turned on. Peter Doocy is one of his favourites, who he'll always kind of crack a joke with or ask him about football or something. You know, he's very relaxed in those environments and most comfortable in those environments, but he is, he has an aura about him which is quite hard to capture on television and one that I think warrants attention.
- [33:29]
Venetia Rainey
So you're a British correspondent working for a British newspaper in Washington. That gives you a slightly different perspective, I would expect, from other US based correspondents. How has it been watching this whole Trump first year in terms of its impact on Britain and Europe? And how has your, I guess, reporting, do you think, been different from the way American correspondents might report on it to make it translate for a British audience?
- [33:53]
Connor Stringer
That's quite extraordinary, isn't it? The special relationship, as we say, I think has been tested, arguably frayed, but at least pooled in ways in which it has never been before. It has been tested and pushed to its limits, I think for the first time possibly in its history. What we've seen is over this year is Trump coming in from the get go and kind of ripping up the norms of which we would have been used to as Brits, of how we kind of work with America. You know, the trade deal, for example, coming out of the gates early, slapping his most favored nation, a special relationship with tariffs. Thankfully, we were first out the gates to get ourselves a deal, but it's not been smooth sailing. Everything from nitter to the fence to the BBC. Of course, the Telegraph story that we broke regarding the doctoring of his speech hasn't played very well, but what has gone very well and what the Brits and the government has used to their advantage, and many tell me in the background that they haven't been afraid to lean on the royals, something Trump absolutely loves and it cannot be overstated enough how infatuated he is with King Charles and the monarchs as a whole. We invited him over a lovely state visit went terribly well after that. You know, it kind of put us back into his good graces. But Trump swings day to day and we're seeing the impact that's having in Britain, particularly on our trade, particularly on our tariffs. We've been, we've negotiated a trade deal which has thankfully so far held its, held together. But the tech deal brokered by then ambassador Peter Manderson, who of course has been sacked over the course of the last year and that raised many eyebrows in the White House. I can tell you about his relationships with Epstein and his links to China. The tech deal that he brokered has fallen apart. Americans are being very tough in negotiating. I'm still trying to get concessions that they didn't get during the regional trade deal on May 8th. I'm actually doing a whole big piece in this, so. So hopefully listeners will, will spend the time to read it to mark Trump's One Year next week. But it will focus on exactly that. The twists and turns, how the special relationship has been tested in a way that it never has been before, from everything from foreign policy to the royals to the BBC and of course the big one in the news at the moment, free speech.
- [36:01]
Venetia Rainey
How do you think Starmer's handled it all? As you said, this is an unprecedented challenge to the way we normally do business. Do you think he's handled it well?
- [36:09]
Connor Stringer
Starmers have been in a very difficult position and I can tell you, speaking to people behind the scenes in the White House, in fact, yesterday had a conversation with somebody who said that Trump, regardless of what you may read and perhaps what their perception may be on the world stage, really likes Starmer. And they get on very, very well privately when they come to visit. Apparently they have quite a lot of private time together. They enjoy a little chim wagon and a catch up. And the reasons being, I'm told, and this is typical Trump, is because he thinks Starmer looks the part. He thinks he looks like a bit of a chiseled pm, which is the most Trump thing ever. You know, he's basically, he thinks he's good looking and handsome, so he likes him. Which is extraordinary, isn't it? The same person was telling me actually that when Boris, in his interactions with Boris, you actually find him didn't like him as much because of his intellectual language and the way he would Communicate just doesn't play well with Donald. He's a very simple man. He's not of that ilk. He very much prefers the strip talking manner of business. So Starmer gets on at least with Trump extremely well in that regard. Stormy's face a difficult position. He's obviously got domestic issues that he's been trying to tie at the same time tied a toe line without irking the president on issues that he obviously wants European and British support on Venezuela, Greenland, NATO, Ukraine. Starmer's positioned himself as a bit of a, almost a wartime peace leader, but a bit of a, at least someone kind of a peacekeeper with leaving the coalition, the willing with Ukraine and now positioning himself in Greenland to try and calm tensions. He's doing so using his relationship with Trump towing and walking a very tight tightrope, trying not to kind of veer on the wrong side. The president oak his wrath while also using his relationship to obviously pursue British interests and British values in trying to stop kind of American advances over recent months.
- [38:00]
Venetia Rainey
I'm aware this is a tough question, but we're going to ask it anyway. If you had to pick the most significant thing, one thing that Trump has done in his first year of his second term, what would you go for?
- [38:09]
Connor Stringer
I think one of the big, the big kind of takeaways from the year is kind of America's position on Ukraine and how it's kind of, we've seen him really side with Putin and at least, you know, the critics will say Putin has played him. I think the damage that is absolutely true and particularly how the U.S. or how Europe has had to ban together in a way I think that has never happened before, at least since the Second World War and use an ESO alliance and use our closeness and partnership in order to kind of steer the president into backing Volodymyr Zelenskyy and coming up with a favorable peace agreement. And that of course, still hangs in the air. Donald Trump pledged to finish that war in the space of a day of coming in office. We are literally a year into, into his, his time here and we seem no closer to a deal. So I think for me, the big takeaway, the big shock will be kind of how he's handled the, his position on the, on the, on the Ukraine war. Of course, we cannot Forget Honorable mention, second and third, the 12 Day War, obviously, with Israel and Iran, US bombing the nuclear facilities there. That kind of whole period was absolutely extraordinary as you imagine. The raid of Maduro, I think will go down as one of the best, well executed military operations in US history, perhaps ever extraordinary. And of course, the threats to Greenland, which haven't stopped and began as early as January last year, just literally days after he got into the Oval Office. They are ramping up now a year later. So honourable mentions, but I think Ukraine still is a standout.
- [39:38]
Venetia Rainey
Big moment, I think, particularly from a European perspective, that feels right. The Ukraine issue has still not been resolved and festers, I think, at the heart of America's relationship with Europe more broadly. Finally, let's just do a quick look ahead to his second year in his second term. What are you going to be watching for, particularly as the midterms come up in November?
- [39:57]
Connor Stringer
You said the key word. It's exactly that. It's midterms. And with midterms come affordability. It's the big issue that Americans are facing now, and the one that's always been a big voter issue. Historically, the midterms, usually voters will vote with their feet against the party in power. That's just statistically, historically how the mood normally goes. But there's a real sense in the Republican Party that there needs to be some damage control. Trump just last week rallied his GOP members at the Kennedy center or the newly named Trump Kennedy center, to convince them, or kind of give a bit of a rallying call, a bit of a pep talk, to fight for these midterms, which seem to be, which will be a difficult time for them, and all expectations that it's not going to be very well. That's also why we're seeing the person trying to ram through as much policy as he can before them. The expectation is, of course, he will lose the House and the Senate, and that will hamstring him in being able to get through any other policy that he has on his agenda. The big issue, though, and is seemingly his obsession with the foreign policy at the moment, which isn't playing very well with his base. This kind of interventionless mindset the US has been long considered to have is what Donald Trump campaigned against. You know, no more foreign wars, no more foreign investment, focusing on things at home and in our backyard. Yet we see the prospect of another bombing campaign in Iran, the potential conflicts, obviously, in Venezuela, the follow from that. Running a Venezuelan government from the United States seems extraordinary, but it all will come down to the economy. And that's the voter issue at the kitchen table. Gas prices, food prices. And if Donald Trump, between them and then, cannot get a grip on that, I think it's going to be quite a slot right there from Republicans.
- [41:41]
Venetia Rainey
That was Connor Stringer, the Telegraph's US Correspondent. That's all for today's episode of Battle Lines. We'll be back again on Wednesday. Until then, goodbye. Battle Lines is an original podcast from the Telegraph created by David Knowles and hosted by me, Venetia Rainey and Roland Oliphant. If you appreciated this podcast, please consider following Battle Lines on your preferred podcast app and if you have a moment, leave a review you as it really helps others find the show. To stay on top of all of our news, subscribe to the Telegraph, sign up to our Dispatchers newsletter or listen to our sister podcast Ukraine the latest. You can get in touch directly by emailing battle linestelegraph.co.uk or contact us on X. You can find our handles in the show. Notes the producer is Peter Shevlin. The Executive Producer is Louisa Wells.
- [42:35]
Podcast Advertiser
Guys, it's no use putting it off. The best time for an underwear refresh is now Tommy John Underwear is designed for a perfect fit that stays put all day. There's zero chafe, thanks to four times more stretch than competing brands and their innovative horizontal Quick Draw Fly is a game changer. With over 30 million pairs sold, there are thousands of men out there more comfortable than you. Don't settle for less. Go to tommyjohn.com today for 25% off your first order with code comfort. That's tommyjohn.comfort tommyjohn comfort perfected.
- [43:08]
Grainger Advertiser
If you're an H Vac technician and a call comes in, Grainger knows that you need a partner that helps you find the right product fast and hassle free. And you know that when the first problem of the day is a clanking blower motor, there's no need to break a sweat. With Granger Granger's easy to use website and product details, you're confident you'll soon have everything humming right along. Call 1-800-GRAINGER click granger.com or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done.