Breaking up with Ukraine

Summary

Today, Explained: Breaking Up with Ukraine

Release Date: March 4, 2025
Hosts: Sean Rameswaram and Eric Levitz
Guest: Shashank Joshi, Defense Editor at Leading Magazine, The Economist

---

1. U.S. Suspension of Military Aid to Ukraine

The episode opens with Sean Rameswaram announcing a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy:

"It's official the United States is breaking up with Ukraine. Last night, the president suspended military aid to the country. That's about 1 billion in arms Ukraine isn't getting until it commits to negotiating peace with Russia..." (00:00)

This move marks a pivotal change in U.S. support for Ukraine amidst its ongoing conflict with Russia. The suspension follows a recent Oval Office meeting between former President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, which included unconventional discussions, such as playing cards.

---

2. Political Reactions Within the U.S.

Eric Levitz and Shashank Joshi delve into the diverse reactions from the American political spectrum:

• Left, Moderates, and Globalists: These groups largely viewed the Trump-Zelensky meeting through a critical lens, questioning the sincerity and implications of suspending aid.

• Right-Wing Response:
  Shashank Joshi explains that the American right, particularly the MAGA faction, welcomed the suspension:

  "The American right responded as it responds to most things that Donald Trump does very positively... Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon lauded the administration as giving a masterclass and how to deal with an entitled punk." (02:30)

This reaction stems from a broader skepticism within the MAGA base towards foreign interventions, viewing the suspension as a stance against what they perceive as "warmongering Washington foreign policy."

---

3. The Right's Perception of Zelensky and Geopolitics

The conversation shifts to understanding why certain right-wing factions in the U.S. may distrust or disdain President Zelensky:

• Cultural and Ideological Alignment:
  Shashank Joshi highlights a segment of American social conservatives who admire Vladimir Putin for his stance against Western cultural liberalism:

  "There's a part of the American right that simply likes and supports Vladimir Putin, sees him as kind of representing God's side in this new cultural cold war..." (04:35)

• Marginal Pro-Putin Support:
  Despite these sentiments, Joshi notes that only about 8% of Americans hold a positive view of Putin, indicating that pro-Putin sentiments are relatively marginal but overrepresented among Republican elites:

  "He's a very marginal force on the level of the American population as a whole... but overrepresented among Republican elites." (06:13)

• Conservative Narratives Against Zelensky:
  Influential figures like Joe Rogan have propagated negative narratives about Zelensky, including unfounded claims about personal misconduct and accusations of instigating broader conflicts:

  "Zelensky is basically trying to orchestrate World War Three." (07:19)

---

4. American Public Opinion and Support for Ukraine

Levitz addresses the broader American perspective:

• Declining Support: There is a noticeable decline in American support for involvement in the Ukraine war, influenced by the shifting stances within the Republican Party.
• Comparison with Previous Administrations: Despite this shift, current support metrics show President Trump handling the situation "considerably better" than President Biden did (08:31).

---

5. Implications of the U.S. Withdrawal from Aid

The discussion explores the potential consequences of the U.S. halting its military aid:

• Short-Term Effects:
  Joshi posits that while Ukraine has sufficient resources to sustain operations through spring or summer, the withdrawal of critical support like air defense systems and intelligence would jeopardize Ukraine’s ability to continue its defense effectively:

  "Ukraine's in trouble... Russia would be able to go over Ukraine more easily... Ukraine would have to stay on the defensive..." (16:08)

• Long-Term Consequences:
  Without U.S. support, Ukraine might face severe military setbacks, potentially leading to a capitulation under resource constraints within a year:

  "Ukraine would be in a very, very difficult place at that point." (16:20)
  However, Levitz cautions against definitive predictions due to the unpredictable nature of warfare.

---

6. Europe’s Response to the U.S. Policy Shift

Rameswaram inquires about Europe's stance following the U.S. decision:

• Increased European Support:
  Europe is stepping up its aid and defense commitments, recognizing the void left by the U.S. This includes substantial financial instruments like a "150 billion euro loan facility for European defence programs" and potential involvement from the EU’s budget and investment banks:

  "I'm seeing all these new solutions... radical new ways to consider that I haven't seen in the past." (19:39)

• Strategic Reassessment:
  European leaders, including Justin Trudeau, are re-evaluating their defense strategies to compensate for decreased U.S. involvement, seeking to bolster both military and technological collaborations within Europe.

---

7. Broader Implications for Global Alliances

The discussion broadens to the impact of U.S. foreign policy changes on global alliances:

• Reliability of the U.S. as an Ally:
  Joshi expresses concerns that a shift towards an "America First" mindset compromises the U.S.'s reliability, potentially undermining decades-long alliances:

  "They're saying, what would this administration do if my country came under attack and would they do anything, or would they turn on me and demand I hand over my resources in kind of protection racket." (20:40)

• Strategic Consequences:
  The weakening of alliances could leave the U.S. isolated in its strategic endeavors, diminishing its influence against adversaries like China and Russia:

  "Allies just show up in Iraq and Afghanistan to fight alongside you... that world is gonna crumble and America will be on its own." (24:17)

---

8. Reflections on U.S. Foreign Policy Under the Current Administration

Towards the end, Levitz reflects on the internal dynamics of the current administration:

• Lack of Coherent Strategy:
  The administration's approach is described as impulsive and lacking strategic coherence, reminiscent of governance by presidential whims rather than calculated policy:

  "Governance by presidential impulse. And there, I think, I'm afraid I can't offer a coherent view of strategy other than a raw assertion of American power, regardless of the costs or consequences or benefits." (24:05)

• Potential Long-Term Effects:
  This unpredictability may lead to diminishing trust among international allies and erode the foundational alliances that have underpinned U.S. global strategy for decades.

---

Conclusion

The episode "Breaking Up with Ukraine" provides a comprehensive analysis of the U.S. decision to suspend military aid to Ukraine, exploring the political dynamics within the U.S., the reactions from European allies, and the broader implications for global alliances and U.S. foreign policy. Through insightful discussions with Shashank Joshi, the hosts illuminate the complexities and potential repercussions of this pivotal policy shift.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Sean Rameswaram on U.S.-Ukraine Aid Suspension:
  "It's official the United States is breaking up with Ukraine..." (00:00)

• Shashank Joshi on MAGA Right's View of Putin:
  "There's a part of the American right that simply likes and supports Vladimir Putin..." (04:35)

• Eric Levitz on Potential U.S. Withdrawal Consequences:
  "Ukraine would be in a very, very difficult place at that point." (16:20)

• Shashank Joshi on U.S. Alliance Reliability:
  "What would this administration do if my country came under attack..." (20:40)

---

This summary captures the essence of the "Breaking Up with Ukraine" episode, providing listeners and readers with a detailed overview of the discussions, insights, and conclusions presented by the hosts and their guest.

Transcript

[Sean Ramasuram]

It's official the United States is breaking up with Ukraine. Last night, the president suspended military aid to the country. That's about 1 billion in arms Ukraine isn't getting until it commits to negotiating peace with Russia. That move, of course, comes after a perfect meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the Oval Office on Friday. They talked about playing cards. You don't have the cards right now with us.

[Eric Levitz]

You start having cards right now. You don't wear your playing cards.

[Sean Ramasuram]

I'm wearing Cedars.

[Eric Levitz]

Gambling with the lives of millions of people. You're gambling with World War Three.

[Sean Ramasuram]

They talked about being thankful.

[Eric Levitz]

Have you said thank you?

[Sean Ramasuram]

Once they took questions from the crowd.

[Eric Levitz]

What are you saying?

[Sean Ramasuram]

She's asking.

[Eric Levitz]

What if Russia breaks the ceasefire? What if anything, what if a bomb.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Drops on your head right now? Today explains looking into why humiliating Zelenskyy appeals to the MAGA base and what Europe plans to do about it. Support for this show comes from Smartsheet. Imagine this. You sit down at your desk to start work. You open your computer and instead of scrolling through all your screens, clicking on all your applications and getting lost in the mess of your emails, messages and meetings, you simply open one single window. And that window is smartsheet. Smartsheet is the place where distractions are minimized, friction is calmed, and work flows. See how Smartsheet can transform the way your team [e-mail] Vox.

[Shashank Joshi]

Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile with a message for everyone Paying big wireless way too much. Please, for the love of everything good in this world, stop with Mint. You can get premium wireless for just $15 a month. Of course, if you enjoy overpaying, no judgments. But that's weird. Okay, one judgment anyway. Give it a [e-mail] Switch upfront payment.

[Eric Levitz]

Of $45 for three month plan equivalent to $15 per rate. First three months only, then full price plan options available, taxes and fees extra. See full [e-mail] Ukraine Ukraine explained.

[Sean Ramasuram]

It's Ukraine explained today, explained Sean Ramasuram here with Eric Levitz, a senior correspondent at Vox. Eric, I think people are pretty sure how the left and moderates and globalists responded to that Oval Office meeting between Trump and JD And Eric and Zelensky. But how did the right in the United States respond?

[Shashank Joshi]

Yeah, well, the American right responded as it responds to most things that Donald Trump does very positively. In fact, I think it wasn't just the fact that Trump personally did this, but that substantively on the MAGA right, on the nationalist American right There's a real appetite to see the United States stand up to Ukraine and Zelensky and project the kind of line that Trump did. So you saw. The American Conservative magazine hailed Trump's performance as a great clarifying moment in which a US President finally stood up to the warmongering Washington foreign policy blob. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon lauded the administration as giving a masterclass and how to deal with an entitled punk. And you sort of saw similar sentiments from other conservative influencers and social media users and Republican politicians.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Now, you know, with the Bannon comment, it sounds like he has some disdain for Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian president. There was a sense from what was going on in the room and from, you know, what's his name? Brian Marjorie Taylor Greene bullying Zelenskyy over not wearing a suit. Do you own a suit that people on the right maybe just don't like this president? Is that the case?

[Shashank Joshi]

So I think they don't or a significant segment doesn't. And I think that there's really two really distinct reasons for that, depending on what part of the right you sit on. Among hardline American social conservatives, there is just outright fondness for Putin's Russia that's been this presence within the movement since about 2013. When Putin enacted what he called an anti propaganda law, Russia's Duma gave near unanimous approval to a vaguely worded bill.

[Sean Ramasuram]

That would ban homosexual propaganda accessible to minors.

[Eric Levitz]

Hundreds of people took to the streets of the capital on Saturday to demonstrate for and against the measure, which effectively bans gay rights rallies and could be used to prosecute anyone voicing support for homosexuals. Critics say this is just one more step in what the Russian government sees as a fight against Western values.

[Shashank Joshi]

It was also simultaneous with a broader crackdown on LGBT rights within Russia. American social conservatives, who at the time were dealing with an Obama era advance in gay rights and social liberalism, really took inspiration from this. And Putin in the years after, really started casting himself as a defender of traditional Christian morality against an increasingly decadent West. And so there's a part of the American right that simply likes and supports Vladimir Putin, sees him as kind of representing God's side in this new cultural cold war in which Ukraine is kind of the front for this decadent European pro gay cultural movement. And that Putin is essentially pushing back against this. And so that informs their views of the Ukraine, Russia conflict and thus their views of Zelenskyy.

[Sean Ramasuram]

How big is this faction in the United States of pro Putin Americans? Because, you know, historically Speaking, Eric. Russia, Putin bad.

[Shashank Joshi]

Yeah, so I think that this is a very marginal force on the level of the American population as a whole. I think about 8% of Americans have expressed a positive view of how Vladimir Putin handles world affairs. I think that it's overrepresented, though, an oversubscribed view among Republican elites and, you know, particularly I think, those in the general orbit of J.D. vance. And so to this, you know, segment, Zelenskyy is a sinister figure who maybe some of them will allow that he's doing the right thing for Ukraine because Ukraine needs America to intervene. Although not all of them would say that, but they pretty much uniformly see him as fundamentally irresponsible and potentially inviting a nuclear war.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Okay, so Putin, not necessarily maga's best friend, Zelensky, maybe not so much maga's arch nemesis, but this way of thinking that the United States needs to have Europe's back all the time, not exactly the MAGA platform.

[Shashank Joshi]

Yeah, like I said, I think it's a little bit that. And then there are, you know, for the purposes of telling a compelling narrative, I think, but also maybe it's felt, you know, figures like Joe Rogan have actually really had a strong emotional and negative reaction to Zelensky. So Rogan has implied that he's addicted to cocaine and said that, you know, Zelensky is basically trying to orchestrate World War Three.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Zelensky, can I get a drug test? This is like cocaine.

[Eric Levitz]

Like, baby.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Putin's fucking scared, man. Yeah, Putin's terrified. We got him, man. We got him. Like, what are you talking about? He has nuclear missiles, you fucking monkeys. Jesus Christ.

[Shashank Joshi]

I think that there's a broader group of conservatives who don't have any particular ill will to Zelensky, but just fundamentally oppose the goal of fighting for Ukrainian democracy. And then there are others who actually specifically have animus towards him. Notably, the Russian government has also at times implied that Zelensky is addicted to cocaine. So I think that there's some specific narrative here that I'm not fully versed in. But, yeah, this seems to be a meme.

[Sean Ramasuram]

How do most Americans feel about all this, Eric? It sounds like Trump's base, Joe Rogan, not into supporting Zelensky and Ukraine, but most Americans. I mean, we've been at this for years now. You would hope most Americans are on board.

[Shashank Joshi]

Yeah, I think that there is definitely mixed feelings. And there is declining American support for involvement in the Ukraine war, particularly as Republicans move more against it. There's also, as CNN's Harry Entin pointed.

[Eric Levitz]

Out he's doing considerably better than Joe Biden was doing on the handling of the Russia, Ukraine conflict.

[Unknown Speaker]

And so on this simple question, I.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Think Americans are saying, okay, Donald Trump's doing all right on this. Well, Donald Trump at this point says he wants nothing more than peace between Russia and Ukraine, perhaps with a little bit of Ukraine resources on the side. Does this US Break with Zelensky that we're seeing now get us any closer to peace?

[Shashank Joshi]

I don't think it does. I think that there is a reasonable argument that as part of a comprehensive strategy for forcing an end to the conflict, the United States should encourage Ukraine to prepare itself for making some territorial concessions in the interests of peace, because Russia has some advantages in a long term war of attrition. It has a lot more people, it has a lot more resources. And so there's an argument that, you know, Ukraine should be interested in the kind of deal that Trump sometimes expresses fondness for.

[Sean Ramasuram]

We want, like you, a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine. But we must start by recognizing that returning to Ukraine's pre2014 borders is an unrealistic objective.

[Shashank Joshi]

But an effective version of that strategy, in my view, would require the United States to credibly threaten to fund Ukraine's war effort indefinitely so that Russia actually has an incentive to come to the table. You know, if Ukraine is going to be starting to draw down the military supplies it received from America, then six months from now, Russia might be in a position to conquer a lot more territory than they are today. Giving them that impression is not a recipe for a near term peace. So what is? If I had a really good answer to that, I think that I would be potentially making more money at a different employer. I think it is a very difficult situation. I mean, on the Ukrainian side, in order to get Ukraine comfortable with signing a peace agreement, I think you really need to have some kind of assurance that its security is going to be protected if it does make concessions. I think that Zelensky is in a position where he really does not have a good choice beyond trying to win back the Trump administration's favor. Because the path for Ukraine to really get decent settlement of this conflict is much narrower if the United States is not in its corner.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Eric Levitz, read his [e-mail] ahead on today Explained. You're up to the plate. Support for the program today comes from betterment. You thought I was going to say something else. Betterment asks, do you want your money to be motivated? Do you want your money to rise and grind? Do you think your money should get up and work. Betterment has a lot of questions for you and for your money. Betterment is an automated investing and savings app that they say makes your money hustle. That's a fun visual. Their automated technology is built to help maximize returns, meaning when you invest with Betterment, your money can auto adjust as you get closer to your goal rebalance if your portfolio gets too far out of line and your dividends are automatically reinvested and according to the company, that can increase the potential for compound returns. Visit betterment.com to get started. Investing involves risk. Performance is not guaranteed.

[Unknown Speaker]

Support for this show is brought to you by Noom. Weight loss isn't about getting a quick fix, it's about lasting change. That's where Noom comes in, offering a complete science backed approach to sustainable weight loss by pairing GLP1 medications with their proven behavior change program. Noom has already helped millions achieve their goals and now it's your turn. With Noom GLP1 you can get access to a doctor, a coach and a support supportive community all from within the Noom app on your phone. You can ask your care team anything regarding your plan and get support with medication and side effect management. Plus, NoomGLP1 comes with companion, your guide to better and more sustainable GLP weight loss. Companion even comes with Muscle Defense, a program to help you keep the muscle and lose the fat. Noom GLP1 starts at $149 and is delivered to your door in seven days. Start your GLP1 journey today at Noom.com that's N-O-O-M.com Noom the Smart Way to Lose weight not all customers will medically qualify for prescription medications. Compounded medications are not reviewed by the FDA for safety, efficacy or quality.

[Shashank Joshi]

I'm ready for my life to change.

[Eric Levitz]

ABC Sunday American Idol returns. Give it your all. Good luck coming out the golden ticket. Let's hear it.

[Shashank Joshi]

This is a man's world.

[Sean Ramasuram]

I've never seen anything like it.

[Eric Levitz]

And a new chapter begins.

[Sean Ramasuram]

We're going to Hollywood.

[Eric Levitz]

Carrie Underwood joins Lionel Richie, Luke Bryant and Ryan Seacrest on American idol. Season premieres Sunday 8, 7 Central on ABC and stream on Hulu.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Today Explained is back with Shashank Joshi, defense editor at Leading magazine the Economist in London, England. Shashank the United States doesn't seem to want to help anymore with this war, at least for the moment. Who's going to help? Ukraine?

[Eric Levitz]

Well, the good news is that there's already a lot of aid flowing to Ukraine from non American sources. And then you can add into that Canada, Australia, and indeed even some other Asian countries, Japan and others. The bad news is that that 40% of American aid includes some stuff that is pretty significant. So that's things like air defense systems that can take out big Russian ballistic missiles. It includes intelligence support to help Ukraine understand what's going on, where the Russians are, how to target their missiles. And it includes some commercial services provided by American companies, the most famous one, of course, being Starlink. The communication systems provided by Elon Musk, SpaceX. There's no indication that has stopped right now, those things, intelligence for Starlink. But there is a concern obviously, that that could be severed at some stage.

[Sean Ramasuram]

So what does that mean for Ukraine? Does that mean they can't win this war with the US Pulling out in its intelligence air support capacity?

[Eric Levitz]

It means Ukraine's in trouble. It doesn't mean it's in immediate trouble. There's enough stuff in the pipeline, enough stuff in their stockpiles in order keep going certainly through spring, probably through the summer. There's a lot. You know, the Biden administration gave them a ton of stuff just before they finished their time in office. And if you look at what Ukraine's defense industry is making, we must remember here, Ukraine had this huge defense industry in Soviet times, right? It was like the specialist maker of, I think, guidance systems for Soviet ballistic missiles in the Soviet Union. So it has this incredible engineering skill. It's building out huge numbers of strike drones that are now providing the lion's share of casualties in the war. The Ukrainian government says they can make about 40% of their battlefield needs. But anyway, all in all, that's great. But if the Americans cut everything and run, then we would be in a battlefield crisis probably by the end of this year, maybe early next year, where ammunition would be running dry. The Russian air force would be able to go over Ukraine more easily. And to answer your question directly, no, Ukraine would not be able to win. It would have to stay on the defensive. It would be eking out its position, prob falling back. And I think it would be in a very, very difficult place at that point.

[Sean Ramasuram]

I mean, if we game that out, does that mean that ultimately in about a year, once their resources run dry and they're forced to capitulate, potentially, that they may end up in the same place they're in right now with President Trump trying to force them to come to a negotiating table and to settle this thing?

[Eric Levitz]

Well, at that stage, I suspect President Trump would have less interest in the war. He would have had to wash his hands of it at that point. But I also caution you, war is unpredictable. In early 2022, I was among the many people who thought that Ukraine was bound for defeat against these overwhelming odds. And I completely hold my hands up and acknowledge I was wrong, because wars are unpredictable. Things happen. We saw a rebellion in Moscow with one of Vladimir Putin's most important mercenaries, Evgeny Prigozhin, rising up and marching on the capital. So who knows what happens in a year? The Russian economy could blow up. We could see other developments inside Russia. You know, in some ways, the strategy on the Ukrainian side has been, look, keep it going, keep the Russians engaged, keep killing or wounding 1200, 1300 Russians a day and something will turn up. At some point, they will just run out, they'll get exhausted. And so I'm always wary of saying Ukraine will lose because we don't know all the other things that can happen in a conflict like this. And technologies change as well. You know, the drone revolution that Ukraine is exploiting right now to inflict these massive casualty rates, those ton of drones, they did not exist, exist as usable battlefield weapons. Back in February 2022.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Europe seems to be, you know, making noise about stepping up in this moment. There was this huge assembly of European leaders and Justin Trudeau this past weekend.

[Eric Levitz]

The UK is prepared to back this with boots on the ground and planes in the air. Together with others, Europe must do the heavy listings.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Is there going to be a difference between the European support of, say, four or six months ago and what we see in the coming months?

[Eric Levitz]

I think there is, yes. I think we realize we're in a crisis here, and I know we've said that before. You may have heard that before in Trump 1, you may have heard it before at other times, but this feels to me the most febrile, fluid moment in European security in my lifetime. And possibly since, since, you know, I think certainly since the end of the Cold War, possibly the most dramatic rupture in transatlantic relations, maybe since the 1950s. And I can see people finding new ways to spend more on defence. You can have a big 150 billion euro loan facility for European defence programs. You could allow the EU's own budget to go on defence, get a European investment bank to put money into it. So I'm seeing all these new solutions to say at the end of the day, whether it's for Ukraine, whether it's for us. If America walks away from NATO, we need more money. And I am seeing radical new ways to consider that that I haven't seen in the past.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Why was it that the US Was so invested in Ukraine up until, say, I don't know, last Friday?

[Eric Levitz]

I think fundamentally the same reason it's been invested in Europe since 1945. It realized that a continent in which this authoritarian power is able to steamroller over a smaller power, change borders by force, that this begin to threaten NATO. And if you threaten NATO, you begin to threaten the basis of European security, the cohesion and peace and economic prosperity of Europe that America has benefited from by trading with Europe for so many years. But I think the larger picture is also that if you're in a world where a dictator can basically rewrite the borders by force and say, actually, this country doesn't exist, I'm going to take it that this doesn't bode well for everyone else. This doesn't bode well for Taiwan. It doesn't bode well if you're kind of Japan or South Korea. It doesn't bode well if you're any American ally. And in turning that upside down, I'm seeing concern, profound concern, not just among Europeans. You can accuse us of being whiny Europeans, and sometimes we are. But actually, I'm seeing a lot of concern among Taiwanese, among Japanese, among Australians, who are looking at this and thinking, hey, this administration that is saying, I will no longer defend you, and in fact, I want you to give me $500 billion worth of minerals to pay me back. They're saying, what would this administration do if my country came under attack and would they do anything, or would they turn on me and demand I hand over my resources in a kind of protection racket? I think that's provoking some serious questions about the reliability and integrity and the good faith of the United States government as we have known it for 80 years.

[Sean Ramasuram]

But hearing you say that, Shashank, it occurs to me that, you know, we're talking about our own president who, you know, isn't quite at that dictator status, but is making threats, you know, north of the border in Canada, over there in Greenland, south of the border in Panama. I mean, this is a guy who's. Who's into territorial conquest. What. What do you think the US Might lose in a moment like this, where it seems to be transitioning to this sort of more America first mindset?

[Eric Levitz]

I think that's a brilliant question. And my goodness, where do we begin? Right. Look at Germany. The US Has a lot of troops in Germany. Do we think they're all there just to sit there defending Germany against Putin? No. Germany is this huge hub for American military power projection. It has this huge military hospital. It's an air bridge to get your forces to the Middle East. And then what about this coalition to compete with China in technology? Do you think you're going to do this whilst the Europeans are hoovering up China, Chinese electric vehicles and building Huawei into their telephone systems? It's an alliance, a tech alliance, in which alliances are critical. You need to work with partners. That's been the assumption of this last administration, the Biden administration, But even Trump won to some degree. If that's going away and allies are just viewed as these inferior powers who have to come to the Oval Office in a suit and pay tribute and grovel, then I think America's going to find itself in a world where stuff it has taken for granted, that allies just show up in Iraq and Afghanistan to fight alongside you, for instance, that that world is gonna crumble and America will be on its own. And one of the big strengths it has that China doesn't and that Russia doesn't, which is real allies, that will ebb away.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Mm. So America first saves us some money. Maybe. You know, I don't even. I can't even think. I'm trying to play the devil's advocate. All I can think is that it saves us some money.

[Eric Levitz]

No, look, I mean, let me have a go, right? Because I think it is important to understand where an administration like this is coming from. I think there is this faction in the administration that says Europe is a side story. We're going to get out of Europe and send stuff to Asia. Husband, our resources. We're not going to spend 50 billion a year on Ukraine, we're going to spend it on Asia. Confront China, put more stuff into Japan, put more stuff into South Korea. I think that that kind of makes sense. I may not agree with that, but I see the internal logic of that. However. However, it is a big. But this assumes this is a normal administration that does strategy, where people, you and I, sit in a room and discuss strategy and produce documents. What happens when the president puts out a video saying, you know that strategy you said about pivoting to Asia? I just want to put this AI video out showing you a giant golden statue of myself in Gaza because I want to own Gaza. And then at that point, there is no sense of strategy. It's a sense of whimsy. It's a kind of, you know, the Emperor Caligula making his horse, the consul. It's a sense of governance by presidential impulse. And there, I think, I'm afraid I can't offer a coherent view of strategy other than a raw assertion of American power, regardless of the costs or consequences or benefits.

[Sean Ramasuram]

Shashank Joshi, economist.com, avishai Artsy produced. That's a hat trick. Devin Schwartz was producing, too. Patrick Boyd and Andrea Christensdotter mixed. Jolie Myers edited, and Laura Bullard and Kim Eggleston, fact checked. Thank you, Kim. I'm Sean Ramaswoorom. I'm gonna be at south by Southwest in Austin, Texas, this Saturday. Come say hi if you're there, too. I know I told you I'd be talking to Rami Youssef, but Tim Walls said he wanted a chat, so we're doing that instead. Swing by the Vox Media podcast stage, presented by Smartsheet and Intuit if you're into it. Learn [e-mail] SXSW voxmedia.com South by Southwest all right, all right, all right.