Former Trump national security advisor John Bolton expressed some optimism about the chances of a Putin-Zelensky deal to end the war, “in a trilateral meeting with Trump there,” during an appearance Tuesday morning on CNN:

WOLF BLITZER: Do you see any realistic chance that Zelensky or Putin would want bilateral talks on ending this war? And could anything productive come from that? JOHN BOLTON: I’ve heard actually that it wasn’t just Trump who suggested the bilateral, but that Putin had as well. I’m not sure that’s accurate, but I think if they did have a meeting with just the two sides-the Ukrainian and Russian sides-Putin would be fully capable of delivering an hours-long lecture on his view of the last 1,000 years of Russian–Ukrainian relations. And I’m sure Zelensky would be fully up to refuting that for about the same length of time. I don’t think there’s any chance whatever that, in a strictly bilateral meeting at this point, either side will concede anything. I think there’s more likelihood in a trilateral with Trump there that things might be different. But it certainly would be turning the traditional way of getting things on its head. And Trump has tried that before, for example, with his direct negotiations with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. That didn’t work out to anything, and I’m not sure it would work out here as well. WOLF BLITZER: As you know, Russia unleashed its largest aerial assault on Ukraine in several weeks. That was just hours after President Zelensky met with Trump and several European leaders at the White House to discuss the possibility of peace. So what does that tell you about Putin’s desire to end this war? JOHN BOLTON: Well, I don’t think there’s been any evidence that Putin desires to end it until he’s accomplished the objectives he set out 20 years ago, which is to recreate the Russian empire with Ukraine as a part of it. And I would note that last night, French President Macron sent out a tweet where he said basically that he didn’t think Putin was serious about seeking peace. Now, he did it in kind of a talking selfie, and it was in French, so my poor French may not be entirely up to it. But he sounded pretty pessimistic, I must say, about the Russian perspective. WOLF BLITZER: I want to play what’s called a hot mic moment, Ambassador. When President Trump said he believes Putin is, in fact, willing to strike a deal because of their relationship. Listen to this: TRUMP: “I think he wants to make a deal for me. Do you understand that? As crazy as it sounds.” WOLF BLITZER: You were in the room, I remember, with Trump and Putin during this previous summit. What do you make of this latest comment, this hot mic comment, as we call it? JOHN BOLTON: Yeah, I think what Trump actually said is “make a deal for me” or “with me.” Meaning, it’s Putin saying-as he possibly did in Alaska-“Look, I can help you out here, Donald. You deserve the Nobel Peace Prize if you can bring peace here. And I want to help you. You know, this war never would have begun if you had been president.” And that’s the way to Trump’s heart. It’s evidence of how Putin negotiated him. And Trump is so proud of it, he tells Macron. WOLF BLITZER: Yeah, you’re right. The exact quote he said: “I think he wants to make a deal for me. You understand? As crazy as it sounds.” That’s what he specifically said. This morning, President Trump also ruled out putting U.S. troops in Ukraine as part of a peacekeeping mission. Can Putin be trusted to uphold any peace deal without a robust presence from Ukraine’s allies, including potentially U.S. ground troops? JOHN BOLTON: No, I don’t think so. I think, again, Putin’s mission here is not to gain part of Donetsk province. He didn’t launch the war to get this last 30 percent that he’s reportedly demanding. He launched it to reincorporate Ukraine into the Russian Empire. And our recent history has told us-and indeed Finnish and Swedish accession to the North Atlantic alliance in 2023 and 2024 proves-the only safety in Europe from Russia is behind a NATO border. Trump has ruled that out already. Now, I think he’s making sure the MAGA base doesn’t get unhappy. He’s ruling out boots on the ground. Let’s see what he rules out next. For example, in the British–French proposal, and there have been a lot, they change around, but one of their proposals was there would be British and French troops in Ukraine. But if things got really bad, the backup was the U.S. would come to their aid. Now, is that kind of thing ruled out as well? Let’s see how the U.S. presence in this security guarantee gets sliced away inch by inch so that Trump doesn’t upset his own political base. That’s really what I think people should be concerned about.

RealClearPolitics Videos