01x03 - A Dangerous Path

[bunniefuu]

Putin's a very, very clever

and calculating man.

It was very, very difficult

to find leverage,

and to find ways

of constraining him.

You know, he threatened me

at one point and said, you know,

"Boris, I don't want to hurt you,

but with a m*ssile,"

"it would only take a minute."

Vladimir Putin has rocked the

foundations of European security.

This is the story

of Putin's path to w*r -

how and why he wrong-footed the West

through a decade of clashes

told by the leaders who've

locked horns with him.

I was clear, there could be

no business as usual with Russia.

In this episode,

Putin ramps up his aggression.

From an audacious poisoning

We leave no stone unturned.

We should look at every

opportunity to respond.

To the moment he launched an

invasion that threatened

to engulf Europe.

We worked to the very end

to try to convince them

to change their plans,

until the tanks were rolling,

and the planes were flying.

The issue for Putin was his project

to rebuild the Soviet empire.

I don't know Putin.

He's said nice things about me -

if we got along well,

that would be good.

Frankly, Putin has built up their

military again and again, and again.

Our nuclear's old and tired,

and his nuclear is tippy-top,

from what I hear.

CHEERING Welcome

home, Mr President!

Donald Trump was sworn in

as president amidst

a storm of allegations of Russian

interference in his election.

After the election,

I called the White House

for congratulate Trump.

And definitely, I tried to be

prepared for this, er,

phone conversation,

because I doubt that Ukraine was

among his first priorities.

My message to the Trump was

exactly like this -

from the very first

phone conversation,

"Don't trust Putin."

Since Russia's invasion

of Crimea three years earlier,

Ukraine had been lobbying America to

send its Javelin anti-tank missiles.

President Obama had refused,

wary of escalating tensions

with Russia.

Now, Poroshenko had a chance

to pitch it to Trump.

You could see that Poroshenko

was literally sweating,

and very nervous.

You know, the look on his face -

I won't forget that, as he moved

forward into the office,

full of trepidation, because

so much was riding on this.

At that time, we have

the Russian occupation.

At that time,

the Crimea was occupied.

At that time, Donbas was occupied.

Would you like to say something?

That's a great honour,

and a great pleasure to be together

with you, dear Mr President.

One of the most reliable,

supportive, and, er, partner,

strategic partner for Ukraine.

The President was very

welcoming to Poroshenko.

And Poroshenko, you know, of course,

was a successful businessman.

You know, Trump was

a successful businessman.

I think that they,

kind of, hit it off.

And it's a great honour to have you,

Mr President, thank you.

I said, "Mr President,

lethal weapons."

"We need lethal weapons."

"Javelin is an anti-tank,

very effective weapon."

President Poroshenko was able to

show the effect that Russian

aggression was continuing

to have on the Ukrainian people,

the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

I think President Trump recognised

that Ukraine was under

serious duress, and it would require

some deterrent capabilities.

I'm proud - on my back,

there was wings,

that I go out from the Oval

Cabinet with the direct promises

of President Trump for the Javelin.

That was a great day.

But it wasn't that simple.

Trump still hadn't signed off

on the deal when he flew to

a G20 summit two weeks later.

Here, he would have

his first face-to-face meeting

with Vladimir Putin.

We were getting, you know,

suggestions, erm,

from the Russians and from

President Putin

that they would obviously be pretty

hostile er, if there were

any transfers of weaponry,

particularly the Javelin

anti-tank weapons, to Ukraine.

There was sensitivity on the part

of the president that anything

we'd do to help Ukraine

would anger Russia.

And, of course, he was very

interested in being friends,

for lack of a better term,

with President Putin.

We look forward to a lot of

very positive things

happening for Russia,

for the United States,

and for everybody concerned.

Trump really laboured under

the delusion that a good personal

relationship with Putin would

moderate Putin's behaviour.

Thank you. Here we go.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

Later in a phone call,

President Putin told

President Trump,

"If you supply the Ukrainians with

weapons, they will ask for more".

The Russians clearly didn't

understand why it was that

Ukraine might have any importance

to the United States

in a foreign policy and

security sense.

Very dismissive.

"What's Ukraine to you?"

"Why are you so concerned

about Ukraine?"

Two days after Trump's

meeting with Putin,

his new envoy to Ukraine was sent to

assess the situation on the ground.

There had been sporadic fighting

since the Russian invasion

three years earlier.

We flew very low and very fast

across eastern Ukraine.

We went to an apartment building.

Everything had been shot out.

You could look over the line

of contact and see the

Russian forces on the other side.

The Ukrainians showed

where the Russian tanks are,

and said, "We can't have

the tanks this close."

"If they move towards us, we need

to be able to take them out."

They said that, "We need these

lethal defensive arms

"as quickly as possible".

Back in Washington, Volker joined

Trump's National Security

in trying to convince the President.

I said, "Russia is using all

kinds of offensive arms

"inside Ukrainian territory

to k*ll Ukrainians".

"So, from both a moral

and a defensive,"

"and a diplomatic perspective,"

"you need to actually provide

these lethal defensive weapons."

I said, "Not a Russian tank would

be hurt by a Javelin m*ssile"

"if it didn't attack Ukraine."

"There wasn't a Russian infantryman

that would be injured or k*lled"

"by American-provided ammunition"

"if they didn't attack

the sovereign country of Ukraine."

I tried to make the case

that it's actually weakness

that provokes Russia.

And I believe that Russia invaded

Ukraine in 2014 because Putin said,

"I can get away with it.

The Americans won't do anything."

So, I think the provision of

defensive capabilities to Ukraine

was important to establish or

re-establish deterrence of Russia.

President Trump agreed.

At the end of that year,

Trump finally signed the order

to send lethal weapons to Ukraine.

Our reaction to this decision that

has been taken by President Trump,

that Americans has crossed the line.

He was talked into sending

these Javelins.

HE CLEARS THROA

And, of course, it was only

the beginning of arming Ukraine.

The beginning of

a very dangerous path.

The fact that the US was supplying

the regime with lethal weapons, er,

I think he saw as a threat to him.

Putin believed Ukraine

was illegitimate.

It had ripped out of the

Soviet Union, out of Russia,

and he made it clear that he

considered the break-up of

the Soviet Union the greatest

geopolitical catastrophe

of the 20th century.

Since 1991, 13 former Communist

countries had joined

the defensive alliance of NATO,

and Ukraine was lobbying

to do the same.

After Putin's invasion of Crimea,

NATO had stepped up its presence

along its eastern flank

and deployed a new

m*ssile defence system.

SPEAKING IN RUSSIAN

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.

APPLAUSE

Facing re-election,

Putin seized on the idea of a threat

from the West as a rallying cry.

APPLAUSE

I remember that video,

and I really just thought of it as,

"This is Russian domestic politics."

"He's trying to make people feel"

"that the US and the West is a

threat and that he's tough,"

"and Russia's strong,

and he can make sure that"

"he protects the Russian people."

Is this a sign that this is

definitely something that

would be done, or actually just

trying to sabre-rattle?

Trying to say, you know,

"I'm a strong man here."

"I could do this if I wanted to."

Only a few days later,

the British Prime Minister would be

forced to deal with a threat from

Russia on her own turf.

I remember my private secretary

saying to me that this couple

had been taken ill on

this park bench in Salisbury.

So, when I was first told, it wasn't

absolutely clear what it was.

Of course, quite quickly,

it became quite clear that this was

the use of a chemical weapon.

A nerve agent.

The government has confirmed

that the two people suspected of

being poisoned in Salisbury are a

former Russian spy and his daughter.

Sergei and Yulia Skripal remain

critically ill in hospital.

The Foreign Secretary says the

government will respond robustly

if any Russian state

responsibility is proven.

As soon as we identified

the victims, we knew that it was

likely to have some kind of

Russian angle to it.

The chemical weapon

that had been used,

the fact that it was a Novichok -

and Novichoks had been developed

actually in the period

of the Soviet Union.

So, fairly swiftly,

our key prime suspect,

if you like, was the Russian state.

This was a trap, er, a set-up.

Because it has no logical

explanation at all.

First, we do not need

to k*ll these people.

Second, if there is a need,

there is a much

much simple things to do that,

er, and unnoticed, of course,

they will simply get out of

the map and disappear.

The government has

concluded that it is highly likely

that Russia was responsible

for the act against

Sergei and Yulia Skripal.

"Highly likely" is a new invention

of the British diplomacy to

describe why they punish people.

Because these people are

"highly likely" guilty.

Like, you know, in Alice

in Wonderland,

and the King said, er,

"Let's ask the jury,"

and the Queen shouted, "No jury."

"Sentence first,

verdict afterwards."

That's the logic of "highly likely".

Their initial approach

was the classic -

admit nothing, deny everything,

make counter accusations.

And so, we wanted the Russians

to understand we were not prepared

to allow this grotesque attack

to go unpunished.

Theresa May called in

her top advisers.

The Prime Minister's view

on this was,

"We leave no stone unturned."

"We should look at every

opportunity to respond to what was"

"an outrageous provocation."

You have nothing off the table.

You have to be prepared to

look at all options.

We discussed a key cornerstone,

if you like, of the NATO alliance

where if a member of the alliance

is attacked, under Article 5,

they can essentially ask

for response from all NATO allies.

Somebody said "Look,

Theresa, hang on a minute."

"This would be a little

bit disproportionate."

"The only time Article 5 has

actually been used was in response"

"to the 9/11 attacks."

"And that's probably going to feel,

to some of our allies, like a bit"

"of a disproportionate response."

We came to the decision

that we would expel

Russian intelligence officers,

and that was an important signal

to Russia that we know exactly

what you've done, and actually,

we are going to act

against your network.

To show the West meant business,

the Prime Minister wanted her allies

to kick out Russian spies, as well.

Top of the list was

the American President.

I said, we had a very clear

expectation from the United States,

we had our special relationship,

and if the United States wanted to

ensure that Russia got a clear

message about chemical weapons,

they should stand alongside us.

Who are you going to believe?

Are you going to believe

the United Kingdom?

Long-standing allies? Or Russia?

His tone was, "Well, go and

ask the Europeans",

"get them to do something."

"If they do something, which I very

much doubt, maybe I'll do something."

"But I'm certainly not inclined

to go out on a limb,"

"if they're not going to do it."

What I remember is how hard

the UK had to work to build that

international outrage that I

think the crime deserved.

You know, you could see the magnetic

pull of Putin and Russian influence,

even in the EU.

We were negotiating over the weekend

to try and ensure that we had

every country doing something.

I'd be talking to my French

counterpart and he'd say,

"No, we'll call the Italians.

You call the Germans."

My Austrian counterpart

actually said to me,

"Well, you know, this is all very

well, Fiona,

"but, you know,

"the Russians are very nice to us.

"Nothing like that

has happened here."

And I was thinking in my mind,

"My goodness, what happened

during the Cold w*r"?

Vienna and Austria was

the centre of espionage,

and just exactly these

kinds of events.

I mean, films were made about this!

"Wasn't there The Third Man?"

I thought to myself.

We only got 16 EU countries

to do it, right,

and quite a few who didn't.

France and Germany did four each,

I think.

Other countries did,

you know, a few.

Ukraine - 13.

Fantastic.

Interesting, America -

which was then under

Donald Trump's presidency -

did 60.

It's the greatest collective

expulsion of Russian diplomats

and intelligence officials

in history.

So far, more than 130 diplomats

or spies will have

to leave 24 countries.

It's rare that words in diplomacy

are backed up by so much action.

Russia responded immediately,

evicting diplomats from Britain

and every nation that had

backed Theresa May.

The row over Salisbury helped fuel

the nationalist fervour

Putin was stoking.

In the middle of the crisis,

he cruised to victory

in the Presidential elections,

confirming his status as

the longest-serving

Russian leader since Stalin.

HE CHUCKLES

Discussing priorities

for his new term,

Putin pointed to an issue

that had been simmering for years.

The two leaders agreed that

their respective national

security councils would have

more direct contact,

and so, I thought this was a good

way to talk about arms control,

including the INF Treaty.

President Ronald Reagan and

General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev

signed themselves and their

countries into the history books

today and set their seal on a

treaty that would eliminate

the world's stockpile of land-based

medium-range nuclear weapons.

The INF Treaty, which controlled

Intermediate Nuclear Forces,

marked the end of years of Cold w*r

tensions over the stationing

of missiles in Europe and the USSR.

But evidence was mounting

that Russia had been developing

new missiles and deploying them

close to the border with Europe.

We considered the Russians to have

been in very serious violation

of it for well over a decade,

and it didn't make any sense at all

to have the US bound by a treaty

that the Russians were not bound by.

That's obviously unacceptable.

The Russians refused

to admit any violation.

Trump's team flew to Moscow to

take it up with Putin.

Here we were on the plane,

and President Trump,

what does he do?

He immediately tells the press,

"Oh, we're going to pull out

of the INF Treaty".

Russia has not adhered to

the agreement, so we are going to

terminate the agreement, and we are

going to develop the weapons.

We're not going to be

the only one to adhere to it.

I think you understand that.

OK? Thank you, thank you, everybody.

It was unexpected, to say the least,

but it was very much

in the Trump mode.

Mr President.

This treaty is dated of '87.

Er, I was much younger

at that time,

but I was part of our team

in negotiating this treaty

in Geneva, with the Americans.

And I think it is one of the best

treaties that we have achieved,

because it is very simple.

Simple in terms of verification,

and of trust to each other.

Putin said, "I thought on

the great seal of the United States",

"the eagle had olive branches

in one of its claws."

Well, thank you Mr President,

it's a pleasure to see you again.

But I didn't bring any more olives.

That's what I thought.

THEY LAUGH

It was clear that the Russians

wanted to keep us in the INF Treaty

while they were basically

developing weapons,

erm, because of their

own broader security concerns.

President Putin said

to Ambassador Bolton, "OK."

"Right, so we won't have

the INF Treaty."

"What's going to happen post-INF?"

"How are we going to manage

the intermediate nuclear forces?"

These missiles, they will reach

St Petersburg in 3-4 minutes,

and Moscow, in 7-8 minutes,

or something more, perhaps,

I'm not sure about

the details of it.

So, the risk of danger, of w*r

will be much, much higher

than without these missiles.

What Putin was mostly concerned

about was what the United States

would do in Europe,

once we had the capability.

As he might have been, except he

was the one who had posed a threat

to begin with by already stationing

noncompliant missiles.

Most of the countries at greatest

risk of Putin's missiles

were members of NATO.

Everyone's attention was riveted.

The Germans, the Dutch,

the Norwegians,

they stepped forward and said,

"Well, hey, is this really

the moment?"

"Isn't there more work that

we can do at the diplomatic table?"

The Russians were invited

to a special meeting.

The atmosphere in

the room was very tense.

The INF Treaty was considered to be

a cornerstone of European security.

We explained our concerns,

and that we expected from Russia

to destroy all these systems which

violated the INF Treaty.

Russia was represented by Deputy

Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov.

He was very clear and said,

"The problem is NATO,"

"the problem is the US,

but the problem is not Russia."

I said, "Our efforts are sincere

to try to save the INF Treaty",

"and we would very much like

to look for ways to work with you"

"in order to resolve this issue."

And he just shook his head

and he said,

"The relationship is going

in the wrong direction,"

"and there's no way we can do

problem-solving with NATO."

Strict instructions, I'm sure,

to punch NATO in the nose.

The Americans confirmed

their withdrawal from the Treaty,

undeterred by Putin's threats

of a new Cold w*r.

Putin already had

the largest stockpile of

nuclear warheads in the world.

And his forces were now deployed

from the Arctic Circle

to the Middle East.

But it was the threat to his

immediate neighbours

that was causing the most concern.

Tri, dva, Odin!

That year, a former comedy actor

was elected in Ukraine.

Volodymyr Zelensky had to decide how

to deal with the ongoing conflict

in the east of his country.

To end the fighting in Donbas,

Zelensky wanted to renegotiate

a deal his predecessor had agreed

with Putin four years earlier.

The Minsk Agreement had been signed

as Russian-backed forces threatened

to overwhelm Ukraine's army.

But the ceasefire it promised

had never held.

Six months after taking office,

Zelensky got his chance to

confront Putin at a summit hosted

by the French President.

It was a very tense meeting.

It was the first meeting

of the presidents.

President Macron,

he was trying to, sort of,

make acquaintance for everybody.

Erm, he promised that it will be

a good dinner, French-style,

with a good wine afterwards,

probably been pushing us not

to have a very long conversation.

Minsk Agreements, they are

absolutely clear that Donbas

will remain part of Ukraine,

but with special status

and possibilities.

Having its own militia, having

special relationship with Russia,

er, speaking Russian language

without any interference.

Under the Minsk deal, elections

were due to be held in Donbas -

despite the Russian-backed

separatists remaining in control.

We were trying to get the Russian

tanks out of our territory,

which Putin himself

personally said, "No".

He slammed the table,

and he used a couple of words

which I markedly remembered.

And he was quite upset with,

you know,

the way the discussion was going.

The problem is, he was promised

by his own people that

President Zelensky would be

eager to accommodate.

And it was not happening.

I was thinking,

"Jesus, I've seen it before."

"It's going to nowhere."

I remember I was telling

President Zelensky,

"You can't bargain with him."

"Putin does not need

anything from us."

"There is no river,

no building or city, or -"

"he wants us not to exist."

CHEERING

For all Zelensky's efforts,

there were no further meetings

between the two presidents in

the year that followed.

Instead, Putin celebrated

the seventh anniversary of

his capture of Crimea.

CHEERING

CHEERING CONTINUES

That spring, after NATO had

conducted its largest military drill

in Europe for decades,

Putin announced a huge training

exercise on Ukraine's border.

For years, Ukraine had been

trying to join NATO.

But progress had been stymied by

countries including France

and Germany, who were worried

the move could antagonise Russia.

Zelensky stepped up his efforts to

win over NATO'S Secretary General,

Jens Stoltenberg.

I had to tell him the reality,

and that is that to make

decisions on membership,

to invite a country

to become a member of NATO,

we need consensus, we need

all allies to agree.

And there was no consensus in NATO.

I suggested that we should focus

providing political

and practical support.

The best way to increase the

security of Ukraine was to actually

support them and enable them

to defend themselves.

Putin soon announced the official

end to the military exercise.

But tens of thousands

of troops and heavy armaments

remained on the border.

For me, it was the beginning of

something that was very worrying.

I felt very strongly -

we need to help Ukraine,

we need to help them

defend themselves,

we need to give them hope.

So, I wrote to the Prime Minister

at a very high classification.

Ben Wallace came to me and -

with a letter, secret letter.

And it was basically making

the case for us stepping up

our military support for Ukraine.

And what I said to Ben was,

"Look, let's do this."

"Let's keep in step with

the Americans as far as we can."

Now, the Americans were already,

I think, providing Javelins

and other kit, so we went

for the NLAWs, the famous

Belfast-made anti-tank weapon.

In America, a new President

had taken office.

Joe Biden had spent years dealing

with Putin as Vice President,

and there were high hopes

for their first summit.

There had been this sense of

build-up in the media here

in the United States, in Europe,

that it was, sort of, a return

to the Cold w*r days, in terms of

the superpower showdown.

They talked very forthrightly about

areas where we disagreed.

And Putin made very clear

his belief that Ukraine should be

subjugated under Russia,

and that's something we

fundamentally disagreed with.

But there's a sense that

we needed to put guard rails around

our relationship with Russia,

so we did not end up into

an unintended conflict.

I think that the last thing

he wants now is a Cold w*r.

As I said to him,

"This is not a 'Kumbaya' moment,"

"as you used to say back

in the '60s, in the United States,"

"like, 'Let's hug and

love each other.'"

"But it's clearly not in

anybody's interest -"

"your country's or mine -"

"for us to be in a situation where

we're in a new Cold w*r."

And I truly believe he thinks that.

Biden's hopes were short-lived.

Within months, as the West

was reeling from America's chaotic

withdrawal from Afghanistan,

Putin's generals put on a display

of Russia's military might.

US intelligence was also picking up

even more worrying reports.

I had watched Putin increasingly

stewing in a combustible combination

of grievance and ambition.

We had begun to put together

a pretty clear and pretty

troubling picture

of Russian military planning.

I had come to believe that

President Putin was quite serious

about launching a major new

invasion of Ukraine.

Biden dispatched Burns to Moscow

to confront Putin directly.

The Covid pandemic

was sweeping through Russia.

Moscow, in particular, was in the

midst of one of the worst waves of

Covid that Russia had experienced.

President Putin had isolated

himself in Sochi.

And so, my conversation with him

was actually over a secure phone

from an office in the Kremlin.

I was very direct in laying out

the message that President Biden

had asked me to convey -

that we know what he's up to,

and to tell him that he's going

to pay a heavy price if

he launches such an invasion.

Erm, President Putin listened

to all this with no effort to deny

that this planning was under way.

He had a list of grievances

about Ukraine and about the West,

and the ways in which he felt

the Western leaders,

including the United States,

hadn't paid attention to

Russia's concerns over the years.

I was troubled before

I arrived in Moscow.

And I was even more

troubled after I left.

NATO ministers gathered

to decide what to do about

the new intelligence.

Zelensky sent

his new Foreign Minister.

The stronger we are,

the less tempting it will be

for Russia to move forward.

We'd been informed that the

worst-case scenario

is very likely to happen.

That Russia has an intention

to attack Ukraine, and will use

everything in its power

to occupy the whole country.

And I can probably say that many

people were truly shocked.

All allies agree that it was

a significant military build-up,

but there were differences on how

to interpret those facts.

And to what extent was this just

a demonstration of power,

an attempt to coerce Ukraine?

There were a number of

colleagues who were not convinced.

And they would ask, you know,

myself and other Baltic colleagues,

like, you know, "Do you really

believe that this is possible?"

That a full-scale invasion

of a country of 40 million people,

it's truly incomprehensible.

I said to the Allies, that,

"OK, maybe you have a bit different"

"assessments of the likelihood

of a full-scale invasion."

"But in one way, it doesn't matter,

because regardless of whether"

"the likelihood is 80% or 20%,"

"we need to be prepared

for the worst."

As the summit wrapped up,

Putin addressed a new intake

of ambassadors to Moscow.

His words were aimed firmly at NATO.

I talked to him after his

big pronouncement.

And so, you know, I begin with

a long preamble about how

our two countries have fought

together against fascism,

how they were integral to

the defeat of Nazism.

And, you know, he liked all that,

he bought all that.

But then, he kept saying,

"You must rule out any

NATO membership for Ukraine".

I said "Well, we can't rule out

NATO membership."

"It's a free country."

It was pretty alarming, you know,

he wasn't moving at all.

And during 20 years since

the first enlargement of NATO,

we have heard that there will be

no further enlargements.

And we have got seven waves

of enlargement.

And it was on the verge of

Ukraine applying to NATO.

CHANTING IN RUSSIAN

For Putin, if Ukraine strengthened

its ties with the West,

an ancient bond would be destroyed.

He'd recently used a 5,000-word

polemic to glorify the historic ties

between the two countries -

from the Orthodox Church

to the ancient Russian language.

This is a president who is now

really evoking an ethnic nationalism

we haven't seen in Europe,

really, since the w*r,

potentially, in the Balkans.

But also, a man who was thinking

like a politician about legacy.

This is not about NATO and

all the red herrings

that he was throwing out.

The issue for Putin was his project

to rebuild the Soviet empire.

His project to reintegrate

what he regarded as the

spiritual heartland

of Mother Russia.

As the West frantically looked

for a diplomatic way out,

NATO'S Secretary General

convinced the Russians

to attend a crisis meeting.

It was absolutely clear that

the purpose of the Russian military

build-up was to invade Ukraine.

But of course, plans can be changed,

it's never too late to step back.

There had not been a NATO-Russia

council

since 2019, the main reason

being

Russia's claim that we should

not be discussing Ukraine -

while, of course, Ukraine

was an obvious subject for

any dialogue with Russia.

We met in this room,

Russia was sitting down there.

The Russian delegation shared

with us some maps.

And those maps were not depicting

NATO territory in the correct way.

Turkey, Greece, Denmark, Norway,

and other countries were not part of

NATO, according to the Russian maps.

That prompted comments

by some allies that,

"Hey, part of my territory

is just not on the map."

So, that's the SHE

SPEAKS IN FRENCH

Deputy Foreign Minister

Grushko represented Russia,

he presented a set of proposals.

One was to ensure

no further NATO enlargement.

The other proposal from Russia was

that NATO should accept to remove

all its troops

and infrastructure from

the eastern part of the alliance.

And I said, "We can discuss arms

control, but we cannot discuss"

"a proposal of Russia that will

ban any NATO enlargement."

This is not NATO

aggressively moving east -

this is east and central Europe

wanting, by their own choice,

to be part of NATO.

And it's not an aggressive action,

it's a defensive alliance

defending new members.

I felt the meeting had not gone

as well as we hoped for.

There were no real indications from

the Russian side that they really

wanted to sit down and engage

in a real effort to find

a diplomatic resolution.

With options running out,

Western leaders held a

video conference.

We had one thing that

we could threaten Putin with,

in addition to military

support for Ukraine,

was a package of sanctions.

They had to be absolutely

knockout sanctions.

The problem with that was

hydrocarbons, oil and gas.

And, you know, there was

a difference of opinions

around the table.

An argument that was deployed

particularly by our German friends

was that when it came to sanctions,

you needed creative ambiguity.

I didn't understand that myself,

I've got to be totally honest,

I thought, "Just tell them you'll

cut off Russian oil and gas."

"We're going to sanction every

single one of your oligarchs."

"We're going to impound

your yachts."

And I thought I'd carried

everybody with me,

and Mario Draghi said,

"Look, I'm sorry."

"As Italy, I just have to say

that we cannot do this."

"We cannot dispense with

Russian oil and gas."

In January, Putin attended

the annual memorial

to mark the siege of Leningrad.

Publicly, he continued to maintain

that Russia had no plans

to invade Ukraine.

But a steady stream of Russian

battalions was heading

to the border.

We were seeing increasingly

detailed confirmation about

Russian planning for invasion,

and also about the precision of

their planning for the

political day after, as well.

I arrived in Kyiv and met

with President Zelensky

in his offices, in downtown Kyiv.

President Biden had asked me

to share with him

our most updated intelligence.

Their plan was for

a lightning strike, erm,

from Belarus south into Kyiv itself.

It'd decapitate

the Ukrainian leadership

and install a puppet regime.

I fly into Kyiv, and it's very weird

because the city

is still buzzing.

Volodymyr Zelensky and I had

a long dinner and, you know,

we tried to get to the bottom

of what their strategy was.

And we couldn't get

much out of them.

We should develop our economic

partnership Yeah.

Talking to our ambassador,

she and I both thought that Zelensky

thought that Putin was bluffing.

But I think we misunderstood

what Zelensky was doing.

If he stood up in a press

conference with me and said,

"Russia is about to invade our

country, Boris Johnson said so,"

it's a disaster.

What happens? Economic meltdown.

Plus, everybody who is remotely

vulnerable to a Russian attack

is going to scarper.

I get back from Kyiv,

and the following day

I've got Putin on the blower

again.

And this is a very long call,

and a most extraordinary call.

He was being very, very familiar.

I said to him,

"Look, if you do this,"

"it will be an utter catastrophe."

"It will mean a massive package

of Western sanctions."

"It will mean we continue to

intensify our support for Ukraine."

"And it will mean more NATO,

not less NATO, on your borders."

And he said, "You say"

He said, "Boris, you say that

Ukraine is not going"

"to join NATO any time soon,"

he said in English, "any time soon."

"What is any time soon?"

And I said, "Well,

it's not going to join NATO for"

"the foreseeable future."

"You know that perfectly well."

It fundamentally wasn't about

He, sort of, threatened me

at one point and said, you know,

"Boris, I don't want to hurt you,

but with a m*ssile,

"it would only take a minute,"

or something like that, you know?

You know, jolly.

But I think from the very

relaxed tone that he was taking,

the, sort of, air of detachment

that he seemed to have,

he was just playing along with

my attempts to get him to negotiate.

Three days later, Putin was

guest of honour at the opening

ceremony of the Winter Olympics.

There, the Chinese leader joined

him in opposing NATO expansion,

as the two men said there were

"no limits" to the bond

between their countries.

It sent a very strong message

that China now is actually, er,

an even closer partner,

supporter of Russia,

this statement just underlined

the importance of standing up for

the principle of every nation has

the right to choose its own path.

The following week,

Britain's Defence Minister

set off on a last-ditch

mission to avoid w*r.

We landed at Moscow, we all had

to be tested for Covid.

Remarkably, our interpreter

failed her test,

even though she seemed

to have passed on the plane.

But you know!

We were greeted by Minister Shoigu,

the Minister of Defence,

and the Chief of the General Staff,

Gerazimov, a very powerful figure

in the Russian military,

very close to President Putin.

I took deliberately

my Chief of Defence Staff,

but I also took my commander

of the field army with me.

It was important to signal

to the Russians that, you know,

if you do these things, the people

who will be dealing with that

response are sitting in this room.

Thank you, Minister Shoigu,

and thank you for agreeing

to meet at this time.

A time none of us wish to be in

an atmosphere of insecurity,

anxiousness, and indeed,

instability.

It benefits neither of us.

So, the assumptions that

they had made were -

the Ukrainians won't fight,

the Russian armed forces are

close to invincible,

that the international community

will fracture, and in fact,

that the Ukrainians

will welcome them.

And I remember saying to Minister

Shoigu that they will fight,

and he said, "My mother is

Ukrainian, they won't!"

He also said he had

no intention of invading.

That would be "vranyo" in

the Russian language.

Vranyo, I think, is a, sort of,

demonstration of bullying

or strength, which is,

"I'm going to lie to you.

You know I'm lying."

"I know you know I'm lying,

and I'm still going to lie to you."

He knew.

He knew I knew, and I knew he knew.

But I think it was about

saying, "I'm powerful".

It was the fairly chilling,

but direct lie of what they were

not going to do, er,

that I think to me confirmed

they were going to do it.

I remember as we were walking out,

General Gerasimov said,

"Never again will we be humiliated."

"We used to be the fourth army in

the world, we're now number two."

"It's now America and us."

And there, in that minute,

was that sense of potentially why.

I take the call in

the office in Number Ten.

And Zelensky's very, very calm.

But he tells me, you know,

they're attacking everywhere.

"The tanks are coming in everywhere,

"we're doing our best, but it's,

you know, they're huge numbers" -

and it just sounds appalling.

But I say that, you know

"For God's sake, find a way

of looking after yourself.

"And, you know, if there's anything

we can do to help you find

"somewhere to be safe,

then we want to do it." And

he doesn't take me up

on that offer.

And, you know, he heroically

stayed where he was.