Podcast Summary:
Russian Roulette – "Adam Entous on U.S.-Ukraine Relations in 2025"
Date: January 8, 2026
Host(s): Max Bergmann, Maria Snegovaya (CSIS)
Guest: Adam Entous (The New York Times)

Episode Overview

This episode delves deep into the evolving dynamics of U.S.–Ukraine relations during Donald Trump’s second administration, as reported by Adam Entous in his acclaimed New York Times piece, "Separation: Inside the Unraveling US–Ukraine Partnership." The discussion explores the Trump team's policy shifts, internal administration factions, the suspension and resumption of military aid to Ukraine, the back-channel dealings with Russia, impacts on Ukrainian strategy, covert intelligence cooperation, and the prospects for peace as of early 2026.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Genesis of the NYT Piece and Research Background

• Adam Entous describes how his reporting evolved from chronicling CIA–Ukrainian intelligence ties to a broader "real-time" chronicle of the U.S.–Ukraine partnership’s fate post-Biden administration, especially during the Trump transition (02:32–06:12).
  • Notable Detail: Over 300 interviews informed his reporting.
  • Biden's last acts provided Ukraine with new authorities, such as allowing long-range missile (ATACMS) and drone strikes inside Russia.

The Trump Transition and Early Posture Toward Ukraine

• Trump’s incoming administration, wary of repeating the "Russia hoax" narrative of 2016, sought official permission to negotiate with Moscow during the transition (06:54–13:49).
  • The Biden team refused official written approval but pledged not to prosecute for private diplomacy.
  • Backchannel: Steve Witkoff (a Trump confidant) is linked via Saudis and Russian financier Kirill Dmitriev, echoing earlier post-2016 Kremlin overtures.

"Frankly, I give respect to them for going through the front, you know, seeking like an official blessing, if you will, for doing this."
— Adam Entous (13:25)

Trump’s Lack of Strategy and Mineral Fixation

• Trump repeatedly claimed he would end the war "on day one" but lacked a substantive plan; instead, his focus became Ukraine’s mineral wealth, encouraged by Lindsey Graham and others (15:15–22:06).
  • Key anecdote: Trump’s response on seeing a map of minerals—“I want half.”
  • Zelensky was pressured to sign a vague minerals deal as a supposed show of respect.

"Trump blurts out, I want half...this became his number one fixation."
— Adam Entous (15:26)

The Oval Office Showdown with Zelensky

• The build-up culminated in a tense February White House meeting:
  • Trump felt insulted by Zelensky’s lack of deference.
  • U.S. side canceled a working lunch with Ukrainians, left them "in tears," then ate the meal themselves (22:06–27:54).
  • Within days, Trump froze military aid to Ukraine—initially intended as symbolic, but then left indefinite—to pressure Kyiv to adjust its war aims downward.

“Then all the aides go and eat the lunch [after canceling on the Ukrainians]...They are just ridiculing Zelensky, making fun of how he dresses. They're giddy, almost excited, as if this was a great thing that just happened.”
— Adam Entous (21:15)

Intra-Administration Factions: Kellogg vs. Vance Camp

• Kellogg: Deeply anti-Kremlin, pro-Ukraine, influential but increasingly sidelined
• Vance, Hegseth, Colby (DoD): Prioritize munitions shortage for Taiwan/China, view Ukraine as "sinking ship," advocate sharp aid reduction (22:38–27:54).

"They do believe Ukraine is a lost cause...We need these munitions...to counter China against Taiwan."
— Adam Entous (24:12)

The Aid “Whiplash”: Suspension, Storage, and Messaging

• Trump’s team started stockpiling U.S.-produced 155mm shells for theoretical needs in Asia, withholding from Ukraine even as Russia intensified shelling (30:09–38:12).
  • Withheld aid seen as a signal to Europe/Ukraine to step up—or accept less support.
  • Behind the scenes, the Pentagon’s career officers and the CIA continued support, but overt DoD and political voices were sidelined.

"The message was to the Europeans...Ukraine is kind of like the dog...Either you put up or shut up. Right. Because we are walking."
— Adam Entous (31:10)

• Ukrainian officials repeatedly asked for “honesty” about future U.S. support, but got only evasions.

"'All I need from you is honesty...If those munitions don't arrive today, they're going to die tomorrow. So just be honest with me.' And Hegseth...just nods and it's again, kind of callous, showing a lack of empathy."
— Adam Entous (34:10)

Unorthodox Influencers and Continuity below the Surface

• Fox News host Brian Kilmeade and retired General Jack Keane became mediators, phoning Trump to urge support restoration (38:12–39:14).
• The CIA’s cooperation with Ukrainian intelligence and support for drone strikes inside Russia quietly intensified, beyond the munitions drama.
  • The CIA enabled targeted Ukrainian attacks on critical Russian oil infrastructure, costing Russia "as much as $75 million a day" (39:14–55:18).

“The CIA has officers running around Ukraine, you know, meeting with commanders, in some cases not too far from the front lines, both gathering intelligence and also giving them advice...”
— Adam Entous (41:32)
“The strikes on these oil refineries was costing the Russian economy $75 million a day.”
— Adam Entous (54:26)

Peace Negotiations and the “War within the War”

• The Trump administration’s peace push forced Ukraine to abandon its “retake all territory” ideal, but Russia (Lavrov/Ushakov) refused to budge from maximalist 2024 war aims (Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, Zaporizhia, Crimea).
• Trump’s faith in his personal “magic” with Putin was repeatedly rebuffed; both Ukraine and Russia carried out campaigns to influence Trump (56:07–69:23).

“...Trump sees Russia from a 1980s lens, kind of like ‘Red Dawn’...giant country...cannot be defeated.”
— Adam Entous (58:37)

• After months, Russia offered a nominal “concession”—stop fighting if given all Donetsk—but this was militarily unrealistic and emotionally devastating for Ukraine, echoing Obama-era wounds over Crimea.

“It’s just such a monumental request...and now here was Trump telling them, give it up. Not only give up territory that Russia had conquered, but give up territory that they haven't conquered. And that would probably take them between 20 and 30 months to conquer after having lost hundreds of thousands of people...”
— Adam Entous (64:03)

Looking Ahead: 2026 and Beyond

• With negotiations likely stalled, the future is a “race to the bottom” between Russia’s economic staying power and Ukraine’s manpower and resources (70:47–78:54).
  • U.S. production lines for munitions (and Europe’s) may begin to catch up, possibly stabilizing Ukrainian resistance.
  • CIA and U.S. military likely to continue intelligence assistance.
  • No prediction on a sudden Trump pivot to major support; all sides may default to "status quo" amid profound uncertainty.

“Never doubt the resourcefulness of the Ukrainians...and the incompetence of the Russians.”
— Adam Entous (75:10)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the parade in Red Square:
  “When Trump sees the Victory Day parade in May in Moscow, he turns to his aides and says, ‘They look invincible.’ ...the military people...were like, not impressed.” (58:37)
• On internal chaos:
  “People were afraid to say Ukraine in meetings because they thought they’d be fired...One official compared it to, like, Pol Pot.” (41:10)
• On negotiations and optics:
  “It almost feels deliberate—to have the Ukrainians say no and then be able to blame the Ukrainians for walking away.” — Max Bergmann (69:23)
• On the challenge of prediction:
  “I struggle enough trying to piece together what happened in the past to try to figure out what’s going to happen in the future. Mostly try to leave [that] to others. But, you know, honestly, I don’t know...” — Adam Entous (70:47)

Timestamps for Major Segments

• 00:34–02:32 — Welcome & Overview of Adam Entous’ NYT reporting
• 02:32–06:12 — How the piece was conceived, focus on post-Biden transition
• 06:12–15:03 — Trump team’s approach to Ukraine, avoiding “Russia hoax,” early backchannels
• 15:15–22:06 — Trump’s minerals fixation, mounting Oval Office tensions
• 22:06–30:09 — Admin factions; the White House–Zelensky confrontation & aftermath, initial aid freeze
• 30:09–38:12 — How/why munitions and aid were withheld, communication breakdowns
• 38:12–41:32 — Alternative pro-Ukraine advocacy via Fox News, covert continuity via CIA
• 41:32–55:18 — CIA support, drone campaign, and intra-agency tensions on Ukraine
• 55:18–69:23 — Peace process efforts, Putin's demands, both sides’ psychological offensives, and political context
• 69:23–78:54 — Prospects for 2026: competing exhaustion, munitions, manpower, and possible stabilization

Tone & Style

The conversation is substantive, candid, laced with moments of dark humor and weary geopolitical realism. Entous is meticulously detailed, mixing storytelling, quote snippets, and strategic analysis, often balancing empathy for Ukrainian suffering with recognition of the policy dilemmas facing U.S. officials on all sides.

Conclusion

This episode offers a granular, inside-baseball account of a tumultuous year for U.S.–Ukraine relations, with high-stakes diplomacy, factional Washington battles, and profound on-the-ground consequences in Ukraine. For listeners looking to understand the interplay of personalities, strategy, and unintended effects in modern international crises, this conversation is invaluable—layering official policies, backroom deals, and raw human emotion in the crucible of war.

Further Reading:
Adam Entous’s "Separation: Inside the Unraveling US–Ukraine Partnership" (link in episode notes) provides expanded context and original reporting beyond the podcast discussion.