In one of the scariest moments in modern history, we're doing our best at ScheerPost to pierce the fog of lies that conceal it but we need some help to pay our writers and staff. Please consider a tax-deductible donation.
On today’s episode of Scheer Intelligence, Robert Scheer sits down once again with former CIA analyst Ray McGovern for a rare, unvarnished look at the war in Ukraine, the collapse of nuclear arms control, and the dangerous return of great‑power spheres of influence. McGovern, who spent 27 years briefing presidents from Nixon to Reagan, argues that the conflict was provoked, that Russia believes it has already won, and that the real negotiations now bypass Europe entirely. Scheer pushes back, insisting on the human cost and the moral urgency of ending the war now — not after another round of geopolitical maneuvering. Together, they cut through media narratives and political posturing to expose what’s really at stake: the future of global security, the erosion of diplomacy, and the lives caught in the crossfire.
Click to subscribe on: Apple / Spotify / Amazon
Q&A Transcript Rushed and Edited for Clarity
Robert Scheer:
Ray, you’re the person I turn to when the foreign‑policy narrative feels upside‑down. You spent 27 years inside the CIA, you briefed presidents, you know the internal logic of U.S.–Russia relations. We’re now four years into Russia’s attack on Ukraine. Trump says he can end the war. Negotiations seem to be happening. What’s actually going on?
Ray McGovern:
I’d start with Trump’s unpredictability. He has the nuclear codes, and Putin’s first priority is not to provoke him into something catastrophic. The second priority — and this surprises people — is that Russia wants the U.S. engaged in Europe. NATO, as originally conceived, is essentially gone. Russia needs someone capable of negotiating a security arrangement that respects its core interests, including keeping Ukraine out of NATO.
Scheer:
You’re saying Putin has gone out of his way not to alienate Trump?
McGovern:
Yes. And he takes heat for it domestically. But look at the recent example: Trump says he asked Putin to stop shelling Ukraine’s energy infrastructure for a week — and Putin agreed immediately. That tells you Putin is his own man. Trump, on the other hand, seems unable to make decisions even on something as straightforward as extending the New START Treaty for one year. Putin offered it. Trump hasn’t responded. That signals to Moscow that Trump isn’t fully in control.
Scheer:
But people are freezing in Ukraine. The suffering is enormous. Trump claims progress. Putin paused the bombing. Isn’t there a real chance this ends soon?
McGovern:
Not soon. Russia doesn’t want to conquer all of Ukraine. They want a negotiated settlement that acknowledges their security concerns. But they’re in no hurry — they believe they’ve already won militarily. They’re slowly taking more of Donetsk. They want the U.S. involved because Europe is, frankly, irrelevant here. Zelensky has been sidelined. The negotiations are essentially trilateral: U.S., Russia, and Ukraine only insofar as it doesn’t obstruct.
Scheer:
But Ray, this is where I have to stop you. We’re talking like foreign‑policy technicians while people are dying. You and I have seen war up close. You know the moral cost. Russia loses moral authority the longer this drags on. And Trump — for all his faults — seems to recognize the folly of pushing NATO expansion to Russia’s doorstep. Isn’t time working against everyone? Isn’t the moral imperative to stop the killing now?
McGovern:
I hear you. And this is where Martin Luther King Jr.’s words matter. He said injustice must be exposed “to the light of human conscience.” That’s what we’re trying to do. But I also have to analyze the situation realistically. The war was provoked — Mearsheimer predicted this 11 years ago. After the Minsk agreements failed and the Istanbul talks were sabotaged, Putin saw no alternative. That doesn’t justify it morally, but it explains it.
Scheer:
I’m not convinced the American people need to be “educated” into supporting peace. There’s no mass movement demanding the war continue. The real issue is whether peace can happen now — not months or years from now.
McGovern:
The Russians think time is on their side. They’re puzzled by the U.S. rush — late‑night meetings, frantic diplomacy. They assume Trump knows his leverage weakens as Russia takes more territory. But Russia’s long‑term goal is a new European security architecture that prevents this from happening again. That’s not a quick process.
Scheer:
But we’re slipping into the same logic that justified Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan — endless war because “conditions aren’t right.” Meanwhile, people suffer. And beyond Ukraine, we’re seeing U.S. pressure on Venezuela, Cuba, Mexico, the Middle East — a return to spheres of influence. Isn’t that the real story?
McGovern:
Yes, the world is reorganizing into spheres again. The U.S. wants dominance in the Western Hemisphere and the Middle East. China wants its regional sphere. Russia wants a buffer. It’s a return to great‑power politics — and a dangerous one.
Ray McGovern:
The American public has been conditioned to see Russia as irredeemably evil — Russiagate played a huge role in that. Even though the narrative collapsed, the perception stuck. So when you try to explain that the war was provoked, or that Russia had legitimate security concerns, people react emotionally rather than analytically.
Robert Scheer:
But Ray, I don’t think the American people are clamoring for this war. There’s no mass movement demanding escalation. The real issue is whether peace can happen now. Not in a year, not after more killing, not after more “leverage” is gained. Right now.
Ray McGovern:
I understand. But from Russia’s perspective, they’re not rushing because they believe they’ve already achieved their strategic goals. They’re securing Donetsk piece by piece. They want a long‑term security arrangement that prevents NATO expansion and future conflict. That takes time.
Robert Scheer:
And while that time passes, people die. That’s the part that gets lost in these strategic discussions. You and I have seen war up close. We know what it does to people. And yet here we are again — talking about “buffer zones,” “security architecture,” “leverage.” It’s the same language that justified Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. Endless war because the conditions for peace are never “right.”
Ray McGovern:
That’s why I brought up Martin Luther King Jr. He said injustice must be exposed to the light of conscience. That’s what we’re trying to do — expose the lies, the provocations, the geopolitical games that led to this. But we also have to understand the structural forces at play. The U.S. wants dominance in its hemisphere. Russia wants a buffer. China wants its sphere. We’re sliding back into a world of great‑power zones — a modern Monroe Doctrine on a global scale.
Robert Scheer:
And that’s the tragedy. Because the world doesn’t need more empires carving up spheres of influence. It needs diplomacy, cooperation, and a recognition of shared humanity. Instead, we get militarization at home, militarization abroad, and a political class that treats war like a business plan.
Ray McGovern:
Which is why conversations like this matter. We have to keep exposing the truth — even when it’s uncomfortable, even when it challenges the dominant narrative. That’s the only way anything changes.
Robert Scheer:
But Ray, I want to push this further. You and I have spent our lives trying to expose the madness of U.S. foreign policy — Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, the coups, the covert operations. And now we’re watching another war grind on, with the same cold strategic language used to justify it. Meanwhile, ordinary people — Ukrainians, Russians — are suffering. Isn’t there a moral obligation to stop this now, not after some perfect geopolitical alignment?
Ray McGovern:
There is. And that’s why I keep returning to King’s idea that injustice must be exposed. But we also have to understand the forces driving this. The U.S. has been pushing NATO expansion for decades. Russia warned repeatedly that Ukraine was a red line. Mearsheimer predicted exactly this outcome. When diplomacy was possible — Minsk, Istanbul — it was sabotaged. So yes, morally, the war should end now. But structurally, the actors who could end it are still maneuvering.
Robert Scheer:
And that’s the tragedy. Because the longer this goes on, the more entrenched the suffering becomes. And beyond Ukraine, we’re seeing the U.S. reassert itself in Latin America — Venezuela, Cuba, Mexico — and in the Middle East. It feels like a return to the Monroe Doctrine, but on a global scale. Big powers carving up influence zones while preaching democracy.
Ray McGovern:
That’s exactly what’s happening. The U.S. wants dominance in its hemisphere and continued influence in the Middle East. China wants its regional sphere. Russia wants a buffer. It’s a re‑emergence of great‑power politics — and it’s dangerous. But it’s also the reality shaping decisions behind closed doors.
Robert Scheer:
And yet, the American people aren’t demanding this. There’s no mass movement saying “keep the war going.” There’s no public enthusiasm for confrontation with Russia or China. The political class is operating on autopilot — military budgets, alliances, posturing — while the public is exhausted.
Ray McGovern:
True. But the public has also been conditioned to see Russia as the villain in every scenario. Russiagate did enormous damage. Even though the narrative collapsed, the emotional residue remains. So when you try to explain the roots of this war, people react as if you’re defending Putin rather than explaining the context.
Robert Scheer:
But that’s the problem — nuance disappears. You can’t say “this was provoked” without being accused of apologizing for aggression. You can’t say “NATO expansion was reckless” without being labeled pro‑Kremlin. And meanwhile, the killing continues. That’s why I keep coming back to the moral dimension. We can’t let strategy overshadow humanity.
Ray McGovern:
And I agree. But I also believe that exposing the truth — the real sequence of events, the provocations, the missed diplomatic opportunities — is part of the moral work. If people understood how we got here, they might demand a different path.
Robert Scheer:
And that’s why we’re having this conversation. Because the mainstream media won’t touch these questions. They won’t talk about the sabotage of peace talks. They won’t talk about NATO’s role. They won’t talk about the human cost. They treat war like a sports match — who’s up, who’s down — instead of a human catastrophe.
Ray McGovern:
Exactly. And until that changes, we have to keep pushing. Keep exposing. Keep challenging the narrative. Because the stakes — nuclear weapons, global instability, human suffering — couldn’t be higher.
Editor’s Note: At a moment when the once vaunted model of responsible journalism is overwhelmingly the play thing of self-serving billionaires and their corporate scribes, alternatives of integrity are desperately needed, and ScheerPost is one of them. Please support our independent journalism by contributing to our online donation platform, Network for Good, or send a check to our new PO Box. We can’t thank you enough, and promise to keep bringing you this kind of vital news.
You can also make a donation to our PayPal or subscribe to our Patreon.