we are thrilled to welcome acclaimed senior correspondent for time magazine, simon

schuster. ukraine 17 years his coverage of the war began in 2014 when he was the first foreign journalists to arrive in as russian tro over peninsula in 2019, he met and interviewed volodymyr zelenskyy for profile of his presidential campaign, then continued covering his administration in the years that followed, first traveling to the war zone with the president in april 2021, as the russians gatheredrder when,e full scale invasion began the following year. simon spent months embedded with the president's teamunparalleler compound in kiev, where he wrote the showman. his first book, we're excited to share that. the showman is now on the new york times bestseller list. in conversation with simon schuster is the beloved journalist for the post and hometown hero david von drehle.

please welcome. good evening, everyone. thank you for coming out. the david von drehle now of the washington post. but for ten years of my life, i editor at large at time magazine when privilege to work with an incredible and intrepid young foreign correspondent named simon. we worked together at time for eight years. tonight is the first've ever met five because because while i was sitting in a

comfortable. sipping tea and preparing write up the simon was out on a battlefield in war zones. thechasing down difficult interviews and, risking his life for. our readers he under incredibly difficult circumstances send me notes which that ithe comfort oo through and choose just choices. details that i■ to put into the finished story. i thought it was an excellent partnership. you got i got the glory and simon got the experience. i like to write. so it's a tremendous treat to be here with one of the great

foreign of■■"4> so much admiration for him. think in the introduction you st journalist into crimeaf ten years ago when this horrible conflictf . although i think unpack the fact that it's been hard to beat ukraine a longe. wonder if you't by telling us a little bit about yourself and how you came to this, of greatest journalist in russia in ukraine. oh, stopp. no, it's an enormous treat to meet you finally. and to be here. thank you all for coming out. thank you for that introduction. i'm a little bit dizzy from it. so about myself. yeah, i, i had the gift language

that that is what my,whole career is kind of built on. i was born in the soviet, born in a suburb of moscow, and we immigrated to the united states when i was years old. and i grewp eangco russian. as soon as i finished university, i, i moved back to moscow to work at a little paper called the my, my first job interview was about 10 seconds long. the editor me do you speak russian? i said yes. and he said, okay, move to moscow, teach you the that's bt went. and so i arrived 2006 and have been covering putin's russia a and the former soviet union ever since. before we get to the subject of your book and this fascinating vladimir zelensky, talk to us a little bit about putin and because he seems to be the driving force in this global

catastrophe unfolding in. what do you know about him and how has he changed in the 17 years that you've been covering? yeah, it's been quite, quite a transformation. i said, in 2006 and already then, you know, russia had had taken a turn towardan under his leadership. but i think he was still very much trying to win a seat as an equal at. the table of international decision makers that's kind of be for four throughout his career. maybe that stopped arguably it stopped with the invasion ukraine when he just said, that's it,'f fuy going rogue and beginning this kind of never ending forever war with the west. but when i arrived 26 and for some years after tha h to win te respect of the west and of the

united states in, you know, time, he he felt slighted, felt disrespected. he felt like he wasn't getting the seat at the table, has the t arsenal in the world and so on, and all the oil and all the the gas he and and i think those grievances know slowly piled up and 2008 two years into my stint in moscowe famous munich speech at the munich security conference in 2008 where he essentially declared the start of a new cold war and declared ■,"y goilenge you know what he described as the american hegemony over international affairs the the state of the world that emerged from the us victory essentially in the cold war and the collapse of the soviet union, that he was going to start pushing back on een the evolution of him doing that and more aggressively that year t upcapil tbilisi.d its tanks

so, you know, he he showed clear intentions to use force then and you know i think the evolution has his has shown us that he's just become more and more aggrieved more and more willing to use egregious levels and horrific levels of violence to to as he describes mission to to challenge the west to break the west's domced affairs try that into the then i mean i appreciate you mentioning georgia ukraine. one in a series as is it the last in the series ukraine would he be or do you see this more of a line that if■ it's not successfully enforced he's going to move on to his next targets

because the's of soviet former soviet republics that he doesn't dominate right now. that's right and a of them are members of the nato alliance. so the united states is treaty bound to defend them. i think, you know in questions like this we■l don't to guess vy much i think we should just take take the russians and take putin at his word listen to what he says. you know, i already mentioned the munich the m intentions to fight the americans, you know, in hybrid warfare and actual sick.ver it takes that he's the american dominance he declared that intention many ago yeah more than 15 years ago and u listen to what putin says and what the russian say more generally. i it's horrifying. they very clearly declare their intentions to go after the baltic states to attack poland, to bomb berlin. i mean, if spend an hour or so watching kremlin propaganda

services provide translations into english of those you know i wouldn't recommend for your sake watching toch it's horrifying what they say. they're preparing the russian public for this this, you know, not a cold war, but a hot basicy of europe. and they declare their stated intentions very■ attack further once. once ukraine is is taken, they say we'll we'll continue on. you know, one of the people who who says this witth■ extreme force and real, you know, venom is putin's protege, dmitry evo for a time was sort of seen as the hope for democratic awakening in russia. if you remember those few years when he was kind of pretending to be psident, now become just this absolute warm anger and the things he says, you know, like it's a to use nuclear

joke. i mean, it's really startling and, horrifying. but i think we do have to listen the russians and pay attention at word.they say and take them so against you, enormous threat, terrifyieat]■e stands. this former television comedian. nskyf remind us how came to power remind us who he was before. he was president of ukraine in the middle of a of a substantial war. and and talk about paint the picture for this individual who maybe wasn't planning be global figure in the mi o a war wasn't planning on being churchillian figure when he decided to for es no not at all.

that was not his stated intention. i guess the best way i can i can paint that picture is to just dt met him. it was backstage of his comedy show in and in march of 2019, he was was a few months into his presidential campaign. and comedy shows kind of doubled as campaign rallies. he would it was difficult to tell difference his comedy was his campaign. i mean we have someone that here and a little bit yeah yeah and it was know yeah and and donald trump was in the the time so anyway, we can go back to the comparisons between the two men there are some to be made so i went backstage, you know, the way i pitched the story to my editors at the time was, you know, hey, there are these elections coming up in ukraine. they're sort of up in thegaininn the polls, maybe should take a look and. they said, okay, yeah, weird story. let's do a few pages on the comedian running for president

sounds sounds like a fun one so they sent down there at the time it was quite easy to get access to his team. they weren't getting a lot of attention from the international media some, but it was page thrs about kind of quirky, quirky news from on the other side of the pond. so i met him that backstage before the show hung out with his comedy troupe. drinking in there tople. eat, to eat and take out, you know, joking around. one of them was like kind of musing about what job he might get in in the president's office if his friend won the elections and like, i think i'd make a great defense know, i don't know. maybe he was kidding. maybe he wasn't. i wasn't sure. anyway, so after show, i went to talk to zelensky backstage, went back to his dressing room to talk. that was our first interview, and i was him, you know, about his vague his

answer to pretty much everything was more or less. we'll figure it we can't figure, we'll hire some professionals. we'll get some experts to explain to me, how the economy works and all this stuff thought. scott simon don't worry, weigurt was kind of those it i mean, it was a very vague when it came to the very difficult grave ■schallenges and issues that ukraine was facing. it was very optimist kind of happy go lucky and promising that this this group of outsiders would come in and drain the swamp and breathe new life and bring blood into the political elites. and so on though, that was sort of his his approach. there's a wonderful picture in the book he' performing on stage as all the and he's in a pair skintight leather pants and

you have a very droll caption on there that he was frequently seen andather pants at the time and that to me just paints picture is this kid who is the class clown? he had created a show where he wasa person who accidentally became president. right. that was the premise of the sitcom. and then everybody looked at each should become president. what was state of ukrainian at that point where they would. yeah, maybe guy from tv should be president. well there was a very interesting gallup survey came out during the elections that that really answered this question quite well it was an international survey askinin coh

trust they have in their government. ukraine was dead last of all the countrie 9 trust their government. there was so much frustration over corruption mismanagement that disappointed of two revolutions that had taken place in■1 previous 15 years in ukraine. to that point, each revolution promising a total renewal of power and ending up with the same oligarchi clans, basically trading places for control of the country. so people were extremely with this. and that zelensky's came up with to to, uh, to environment, to, to campaign in environment was just don't take positions, just, just don't get into the political arena campaigning comedy campaign through entertainment but don't get into debates about these really divisive issues. you know his campaign strategist

told me if you take a if you start taking position on the issues at least in ukraine i think also in the united states, you alienate side or the other't even going to leave him a blank slate, sort of as. they write in the book a canvas onto which voters could prtheir. that was his that was the idea and also this tv that you mentioned invited viewers in ukraine confer use the real zelensky with the president that he played on television which was you kn imaginary world in which this high history teacher stumbles into the presidency by accident and hey, turns out to be much more effective and good heard "]annon political elites. so as one diplomat told me, a gehat campaign, who kind of based in kiev at the time he said people clearly want to vote for. the president from the tv show, but we don't know if zelensky

can't write the script of reality. right. like he could for the show. right now. one of those deeply divisive, as i understand it, that they tried to avoid because p=■vwas question of to what extt to what extent are we ukrainian? right. that is a regional, as i understa of of the area in the east there's a would you say a mor strong plurality, a vocal minority of people who identify with moscow than what would add somewhat differently in in the previous, you know, two or three presidential elections before, the ones$hat t e ns electorate y well divided.

yeah. between east and west, where as a rule know the election, the electoral map that you saw on election night was kind of split '0down middle along the dnipro river that from north to south, across the country, the to the to the eastern south of that river were generally russian speaking as opposed to ukrainian speakers. more to the west, you according to polling the western regions of the country w more passionate about plan to join the ambition join nato and the european union whe rns that were closer to russia i think largely well for reasons but also economic reasons. there their economies in those cities, factories that sustain maf were very deeply intertwined with. the russian economy, they did trade across border all the time. they relied on good relations wilivelihoods. so there was that divide. zelensky grew up on on eastern side of that divide. heeaking family, his his all of his tv

shows, his entertainment, his comedy was always in the russian language. indeed, he only really learned to speak ukraine, ukrainian fluently when he ran for president in 2019. yeah, but before that, his ukrainian was rusty and he made afunny gaffes and mistakes in trying to speak ukrainian. so he i think his his popularity was even in those eastern regions because, you know, he he kind of portrayed himself in many ways as someone has a cultural historical linguistic connection more to the eastern in that national divide. but by the time heputin startedr he'd annexed crimea and then the green men were a you so well early on. and one of the great files that i got to read, russian soldiers

with no insignia, were all over eastern ukraine. and there they were fighting. they were81g each other all all this was going on. what? why then why did take the offensive in 2014 and 2015? well he saw that, you know ukraine by that point. it was it was clear was was moving very swiftly toward western integration 2014. there was a revolution that brought to power a strongly pro-western set of leaderswas fg to bribe, cajole or blackmail ukraine into staying in russia's sphere of influence. and he decided to use force. so he he snatched crimea and then began trying to chop off cn the east.

you know what? the hero of the book, zelensky that was kind ofbreaking. so if before he was either a kind of neutral on the question of east versus west russia versus europe after the of crimea, you really began to take a very strong political stand and to speak out against, you ruia aggression influence. he began cutting off his business ties with. russia, which were substantial, they made up television and movie production company, the russian market. so he began to cut off those relationships. sedsia. you know, he experienced the annexation of crimea the way that so many millions ukrainians did as a stab in the back as your brothers coming to your you a piece of your land. you know, it was deeply insulting. it was it was horrifying. you know, he his life in crimea. family had a summer home there

where they would holiday to him. it felt like as much a part of ukraine as kiev, the capital. so he was deeply wounded by that. that changed forever. his his, you know, maybe his his belief in idea, indeed, russia and ukraine on, some level are brotherly nations. i think he gave up on that after the invasion with crimea and he, as you say, such a such an embodiment of that idea of of a shared culture, of and for him go to the strong ukrainian nationalist, cultural putin. he didn't see in other words he didn't see zelinsky necessarily as a negotiating partner or someone who was going to he'd

arrive at a an understanding with or what do you think he made of that 2019 election. yeah i putin was willing to see how how he could go in manipulating this young inexperienced guy. he didn't zelensky seriously but he's he out some, some concessions from him and really know, get the upper hand in any negotiations in relation to, you know, various issues that were underputin more autonomy for the eastern regions he wanted them to be free to have their own police forces to develop their own economic policy, to be able to make their own decisions in terms of building stronger and stronger ties with russia and brea the the capital kiev, so that, you know, over time, those regions

would kind of drift closer to russia. that was pu'in' he could muscle out this inexperienced young comedian into zelensky for his part, had a very high confidence in his to break the ice and get through to masm humanity him thatme he could he could turn in his favor in ukraine's favor, you know, up to that point in his li limits of his skills as a communicator. he's extremely charming. he's extremely good at winning people over, you know, this this back to his history as an entertainer. you know, he could make you laugh. he could make you smile. and inhose putin, he tried to dt and he he failed. giving a out of putin. there's an idea

idea. i want to get to and i promise we're going to get to the events of two years ago but one more in our sort history lesson that you're giving 2014 2015, 2016, 2019. was there any time there that the west could have proved the catastrophe that's unfolded if we had russia in 2014? and if had i'm just throwing ideas out there or does this feel more like a historical inevitable to you. yeah, i mean, thank you for the questions. it's certainly something i think t, history, those forks in the road as, i like to think of them. the book lays out a number of points that i think, you know, a and say hey you know biden or trump zelensky or or some

european leaders could have taken a different approach to that particular at that turning point in this story and maybe something else would happen. i generally t a my opinion on te things. so i write about the reality we have not alternative realities that may have happened. but i think, you know, the books already stirred some debate in ukraine and among people who kind of studied this conflict about the possibility of those kind of forks in the road. you know, there was certainly steps that zelensky tin tyear, e invasion started that really angered putin. onthreally putin was he closed e three television channels that were pumping russian propaganda into. and for putin, that was

critical. that was his leverage. that was his way of trying to win the ukrainians over through through politics, essentially to maintain a strong voting bloc of pro-russian people inside ukrainechannels, you know, putin reached for other means of maintaining influen who whose party controlled those told me, he said, you know, simon, putin either gets the influence he wants over ukraine, through politics or he gets it through force. there. no third option. he said. so your book begins with an absolutely extraordinary description of the opening hours of the offensive in february. 2020 to we are there with zelensky as he learns of the

fact the country is being invaded. russian paratroopers coming to kidnap him or kill him. right. you've gotten showering and getting ready to? go to work. talk a little bit about access y early on and you kind of take us inside how close you've been to him and does that continue to continue you get back and spend with■n him any of that backstage stuff you can give us of great reporter at work.i would say tho did six interviews with president zelensky. you know, starting from the beginning of his political and his his memory works

strange ways he's very much he focuses on the present d he's he's not he doesn't have a good recall of details so trying to squeeze out descriptions of like okay take me back to describe morning a pointless exercise his memory doesn't work that way so what i had to do was talk to ed him. and for that particular morning, the most useful source was wife the first lady with whom i with whom i spent a lot of times was very some ways correct her husband's memory of events and to to point out that's not how it happened. this is the real story. so and and her memory is very sharp and very good. and she she was able to that day like so it's we see it in the very earliest moments her eyes where sheays you know what's going on and think what that really one thing that tells you that's just

incredible is just how unprepared zelensky was that they didn't have a suitcase, they didn't have their documents together. they found out tth invasion that the russians were attacking kiev. the bombs were already exploding. you know, even with all his access to the intelligence that he has, the american intelligence, he did not believe the russians would go for kiev in the opening hours, the baselines was some k east. there had already been this war for about five years. at that point, they expecting kiev to be the main target from morning, this is a state of, you know, shock. but quickly, he you know, he starts thinkinon hfiguring out e leader. that incredible line that americans fell in love with. i don't want to ride. i want ammunition edition.

that's right. i need ammunition of pride that was not going to run for his life life. so not rehearsed, not prepared in advance. great adlib. what's your what's your sense of that? if he wasn't ready, he wasn't ready. the moment that i'm going to stay here and i'm going to try rally this little country against as you nuclear power in the world, which back then, we thought had a really strong, you know, mechanized cavalry force. we learned otherwise, but take us through that that first day, those first couple of days when he just seemed to inve this character, this new character. yeah. i mean, one thing that comes to mind in answer to that question

is he described a kind of pep talk that he gave himself that i describe in the book that first morning as he was trying to come to grips with with thecafacing r superpower coming to kill him, kill his family, take over his entire country. and what he wh hsaying himself'e meaning all of ukraine, the entire world,ryone ■■x■. us. you are a symbol, he said. you need to act the way a head of state must act. so i think that's very telling. r one thing, you know, no one's really for that situation. give me one person who that who who has the the resume of to be to be like okay yeah we're attack from a nuclear superpower. i know what to do now you know there's just doesn't exist the everybody would to improvise you id and i think his as i argue in the book and so far as there is kind of an

argument his skills as an entertainer, his experience, his adaptability, his ability to take on new personas in his life not only as an actor, but also as someone who had transitioned from one career comedy into politics taking on a completely new role. he had shown a kind of mental flexibility in an ability too imagine himself in new roles and to then embody those roles. i think that came came in handy. he didn't any kind of dead air on kind of stepped into what he thought was the role of head of state and know situation totally unfamiliar. you look back to maybe movies, you've seen books you've read similar situations. i mean, his of staff said this toy ever seen such things in the movies, read about them in books. so you look for those kinds of precedent thatbeee similar and you try act like what you read. churchill acted in world war two or, you know, maybe you're favorite action hero.

what else can you do right■ú right. the ukrainian people were g, i think, to. those of us in the west, the grandma was filling up molotov cocktails the, you know, townspeople confronting tanks, just, you know, not going any f. and it seemed to me, surely some of that coz3 from the the tragic history of ukraine that not to be a smart alec but this is not their first rodeo that country has been fighting and caught up in for centuries. a beautiful place, but a little bit unlucky in terms66 estate ao

you feel like when you go there, do you feel like you're in a nation ofid you before invasion? do you now? yeah, i certainly do now. t you that these historical world war two, you know these ten years of war now it's, you know, other other tragedies that they have lived through, had kind of developed this this strength and inner sgt they coun they invasion started. i shared that that perspective with you i asked zelensky about that nasty from him he was like no what do you mean it made us tougher that each those historical blows has left scars that we are still healing from.

so his the historical tragedies had made ukrainians stronger was no, we need to break the cycle of oppression from russians that his generation after generation forced us to take these blows to the head from different lears, r hitler. we need to stop this, we need we need to defend ourselves and end the cycle of these attacks and tragedies coming generation after generation, because it's it's costing us so much in terms of our abity to develop. that was his response. i his point as you have unfold'e seen zelensky change i would think grow change mature talk to a little bit about how he's different now from the.

first day of the invasion, both in positive ways and perhaps in ne ways as well. yeah i think, you know, over the course of the invas were a couple of moments that really that really changed him. one was the discovery of atrocities that russian forces had committed in butcher and other occupation. and when the russians withdrew from areas, you know, there were you mass graves uncovered torture chambers really horrible and very evidence of large scale war crimes you know zelensky in confronting was deeply, deeply hurt and changed i think carries almost his physical featurest. changing kind of wrinkles appearing in his face that hadn't been there before he you know saw the paine

milies and saw the victims and what the russians had done that that really. sapped a lot of the the old comedian out of he he did not make nearly as many jokes after that experience and still he's become a much stern r that. also i'd say the victory isthe d forces have achieved on the battlefield also changed him as one of his aides described it. you know, after one of those suddenly were pushing the russians back and the russians were fleeing the advance of this this country that had been written off, you know just, just weeks before zelensky started acting as his advisor put it, like napoleon, before aat you know, this he was enormous inner strength. again emerged in him he described it w as

he compared it to an arm wrestling match where, you know, wrist is just about to hit the table. and then he said and then you hear meaning he hears the the morale of his people rising up, you know, them them beginni tvictory is possib. and he said, you hear the and then you begin to push back. right. that's how that's how he kind of described those m■en be we can actually win this thing on the battlefield. we don't need to grant give away our■hhc land exchange for peace. maybe we don't need to accept accept peace on russia's terms that that changed him into a kind of wartime leader which is a very different zelensky. you know, he's he's he's he became much more involved in strategic military decisions of when to attack how to attac in't even he had no about those things. so he left it to the generals. but over time he became much more involved in those kinds of

th. kind of mentality. it's an ability to, you use military power use use force, send men to kill and die and that that changes you you touched on this idea of which you really well in the book that those. 23456 weeks every the window is the idea of a negotiated settlement was uppermost!hi mind. yeah and then he did make this pivot to. of including crimea. and nwo in was he right to make that turn. i's ■mot■'÷ an

alternate reality. i, i do try to leave that to the analysts and historians and military strategists to imagine. okay, e you i'll say this. there was certainly a point after ukraine had achieved a series victories on the battlefield. you know, ending with the liberation of the city of carson, which was the only regional capital, only really big city that russia had managed to seize in the beginning of the ine took it back in november 2022. and at that point, there was there was an interesting statement from general mark milley that the american head of head of the joint chiefs of staff the head of the american military, who'd been an enormous and very st ser ozelensky, one n individuals pushing president biden to give them more weapons. he gave a speech the day from h. his on, and he basically publicly said to the ukrainians negotiate. now negotiate from a position of

when you have the opportunity, seize it, seize the moment. and the response he got from the ukrainians, both zelensky and the top military commander in ukraine, general vali resolution. so general miller's counterpart was very forceful saying no, no going to push, we have the momentum. what are you talking about? negotiate. we're winning. you know, nowoo the then has been, you know, much, much. there have been much fewer victories. it's been quite a slog■ so looking looking back, i think that was that was that was a something that general milley certainly pointed to as a potentialá turning point where there was this moment where the ukrainians maybe could have or should have taken a different course. sot' you can tell, i'm trying not to give my opinion here. i'm telling you what the experts say. the people thathpe

involved, they're the ones who have, you know, relevant opinions here, not not me, you know, it's it's it's my prerogative to push. but do you think do you think zelensky what i might call the russian way of war? i mean, this is country that has eivably high for losses and. they said, by some estimates, over 300,000 casualties. this into a stalemate. and you think about whath throur a stalemate. vietnam of 55,000 troops across a dozen years or something like. this this is 300,000 troops in two hard time

picturing, even after watching chechnya, even after watching after watching syria, i still really couldn't conceive that send 300,000 russians to die or that the russian people would would sign up for that as well. hmm. ye i think the beginning of the invasion when the ukrainians and their western allies overestimated the power of the russianhat these elite commandos, a, in the russian paratroopers, special special ops, would be able to come in and seize the capital a few days. that was sort of the baseline scenario that the west was envisioning and those troops were killed by the many hundreds. they were decimated. those formations basal■p don't exist anymore.

they were wiped out. the most elite troops in the russian military. so we overestimated their capacity to to seize a city like kiev who whose people have such a strong will resist. but think, yes, we underestimate the russian tolerance for for losses putin's tolerance for losses generals, illusions the commander, the military. ■ç i him at length for the book too and and he said you know this was this was in june of 2022 so there was sort of planning they beginning to push back, beginning this kind of series victories. and he said you know we have to basically bleed them white. we have to kill so many of their men that they they just give up. they can't take it anymore. and a bit more a little over a ye■= later when he announced that it appears there's a stalemate on the front lines, we've sort of exhausted our ability to push forward. he admitted that he did not expect russia to be able to

withstand such losses. you know, his troops were inflicting horrify and losses on the russians and more ofgthem cs that they would empty out russian prisons and rapists and killers just to go after wave of as the russians cynically moonsu know to into line of ukrainian artillerynd ter generals listeng was was shocked by this when when i talked to zelensky about this the way he thinks about it is he's horrified by the power ofsi propaganda, because he's amazed that russian propaganda has such a hold over the consciousness people that they don't pipe up. there is no antiwar movement, there is no committee of soldiers, mothers demanding bring our boys home. it just doesn't exist there are seople are afraid of repressions. but during the wars in chechnya in the 1990s there w antiwar mo.

there were soldiers, mothers, committees that would rally and put a lot pressure on the kremlin. now, zelensky looks looks at ■- that's horrifying. the power of persuasion, the power of the propaganda that putin has at di as many ways. the scariest weapon putin has is that a function of the new communications technology charges? i mean, or how is it getting at even as he' dragged country into an by any measure, a catastrophe, it's economic catastrophe, what is it done? russian natural gas exports or that has tremendously damaging. how can it be getting better? yeah i mean, it is a mystery to me. i think zelenskoperthink this ia

dimension of the conflict where he feels particularly knowledgeable and skillfu propaa information persuasion so you know he marvels with horror, but he marvels at the way russian propaganda, too, has, you know, created this narrative of a fight to the end withhu the empe of lies. that is the united and its allies. and, you know that russia is standing up to the arrogant west and all these things, you list of grievances that are fed constantly through television. i wouldn't say that there's any kind of breakt technology in the information war that putin is using. that's the usual stuff. tv, tv, control over the airwaves broadcast and all media media in russia. it's just, you, the airwaves, you control the sources of information. you can control the minds of your people. so you brought up this question of the united states and its

allies how can that is alinsky in the at this point. well he doesn't have lot of options you know he needs the st he's reliant on the west. i think in many ways. you know, one of my most telling interviews with him was actually earlier in his administration when he d hi trump, then president donald trump in the scandal that led to donald trump's first impeachment. some of you pr that trump tried to extort political from zelensky by using american military aid for ukraine as leveragehe was impeae end 2019. you know, i talked to zelensky at the time as theeant=■ unfolding and in washington i met with in kiev and he he said know this this taught me a lesson can't trust any anyone.

everybody just has their interests, have their political interests. they have their personal interests. and values and doesn't seem to count for much. so he was already quite, i don't know, cynical or into that was a painful lesson. but he took with him into the into the invasion and know didn't have enormous faith the western allies abilities to to help him or their willingness to help him. but he found ways to to pressure them to convince them to shame them into it in many ways. and also, i think what was quite clever and innovative is he didn't speak only to his counterparts in foreign countries but he spoke to us he spoke to the voters. he spoke at the grammylarge jumt were that were shown a large demonstrations in european. he would speak directly to the people to encourage all of us to

to pressure governments and our leaders to help. this was. i think, very effective politics for democratic politicians not to stand for what ukraine was fighting for, cause. so i think he pushed the west to help him. he didn't he didn't justthem to. you know, now i think he's he's as he said in our last conversation and, you know, io or with the war is rolling along like a wave over europe and the united states he sees that he's always for for ways ttonterfind message that we attention back bring back the support. but it's getting harder and as the war drags it? i do, yeah, i do. you know, he's he's he's changed a lot, but he's he's he's still a very still, very human.

i mean, one thing that comes through in the conversations withlly listens to whoever he's talking to, he often begins our conversation by interrogating me about you.hinkt what's going on? you know, the news of the day what do you think we should be doing? and he does that with everybody, kind of his way to, make sure that he's getting he has his he has a clear awareness of the will of the people. so he talks to people, soldiers, evneg. he really listens to what they tell. it also allows him to check the information getting from his very narrow him, that he's he tries to check the information he's getting from the top by speaking to everyone at the bottom. i think that shows a level of empathy that that really shines through. and when you meet the guy, he's he's not haughty. he's not he's he's he's not stand offish. he talks to you like an equal.

couple of questions from. the audience on their way in you've the army chief of solution a couple of times been fired right or what's his status now there are contradictory rtsin his post ite was a move to fire him but the off of that. now, that could change. could have changed, actually, as we were sitting here talking, not sure i haven't checked the news, but it's it's he's in a very precarious position. is that a measure of precariousness in zelensky's position as well that he doesn't feel enough to f that? that's that's a very fair point. yeah. i think and he's right to be worried that firing him would be extremely destabilizing. you know, as i very clearly heard from my conversations with military officers and even some

of zelensky's close friends, th see that the general is extremely popular with his forces and removing him from his post could could lead to a major backlash within the something yo weigh quite heavily, you know, in making a decision like that. but the tensions beten really 's one of the relationships i really describe in a lot of detail in the book. that's kind of the way it evolves and the tensions were simmering behind scenes for a long time. now they've really started, you know, boiling over. so i think something has to give i don't know where it's going i know you don't like the predictions. i'm in. we have this■z terrible out of hand. i can predict anything. the future. but when i think fact he

held. you know, held great britain hour and, you know, there's so many parallels. and then the war ended and victory came. they kicked them out immediately. e as a president of or has you think thisxperience has changed him or changed his relation on ship to the country in way that would make that difficult? it will be difficult. so declined from around 90% about a month into thenvasion to roughly 60% now. so still, you know comfortably the most popular in the country. ■abye by some measure. so think he still has a great

deal of respect and admiration among his people, you know, for the way he's he's led them through this war. so, yeah, he definitely has a political future. i mean, i do end the book on a note ofau, about that transition that you're asking about. you know, power is a it's to part with and under martial law, which is enforced now the beginning of the invasion zelensky has extraordinary poweruley decree. he has full control over the broadcast media. he has yhe$1re is no parliament the normal functions of parliament have been suspended. and, you know, generally politics is on■4 so that is an intoxicating level of power. have, you know, when i talked to him about . says, look, it's simple. we the war, we lift martial law, we go back to democracy as

normal. don't about it. but historical you knoweswonder. i think it's something that we have to we have to watch for. i think his heart is in the right■r, you know, with those kinds of issues. but i just think it will be hard to to suddenly, okay, you guys can all go back criticizing me on your television channels and all the other political parties can can go ahead and criticize there are a lot of questions and painful questions that he hasn't fully answered yet about his his failure to adequately prepare for the invasion, you know, certain other■- decisions that i think a lot of ukrainians, you know question why he did that. and those questions are sort of g. muffled at this point because the country and the leadership is so single mindedly focused on the war. but sooner or think it will be g for zelensky use perhaps some of those powers or hang onto them

as a stay in power or, or, you know serious challenges to his aut go on for hours. i'm learning so much. i learned so much from your book. very proud of it. thank you. i want to thank rainy day books and the truman making our meeting possible. after all these years. i cgrati hope you sell a millio. and thank you for taking inside this incredibly important historic story. thank.

ll, good evening and thank you, first of al