By the Book: Benjamin Hall on Zelenskyy's Oval Office Meeting, Confronting Challenges, and Staying ‘Resolute'

Yahoo

18-03-2025

By the Book is a feature series where journalists discuss their works of fiction and non-fiction.
It's the kind of full circle moment that another journalist might have approached as their mic drop story. In November 2023, Fox News senior correspondent Benjamin Hall traveled to Ukraine to interview the war-battered nation's president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Nearly two years earlier, Hall had been a casualty of that war, sustaining near-fatal injuries when missiles struck a car carrying himself and two other journalists. The attack claimed his right leg, left foot, and the use of one eye. His colleagues Pierre Zakrzewski and Oleksandra Kuvshynova didn't survive.
Despite the traumatic circumstances surrounding his previous visit to Ukraine, the 42-year-old British-American reporter didn't hesitate in booking a return trip. 'In my mind, it was never a question of if, but when,' Hall writes in his new book, Resolute, which hits shelves on March 18 accompanied by the premiere of a Fox Nation streaming series. 'I had to go back.'
Elaborating on his decision in an interview with TVNewser, Hall says that a desire to 'relive what I had gotten through' was the main motivator behind his journey. 'I don't think you should ever hide from bad things that have happened,' he adds. 'You should look straight at them.'
It helped that Zelenskyy himself had extended the invitation and made himself readily available to Hall. In his book, the journalist describes his admiration for the Ukrainian president and what he had managed to achieve in a war that had pitted him against the seemingly superior resources of Russian president Vladimir Putin.
'He was far more philosopher than I thought he would be,' Hall says of their 2023 conversation. 'I was really interested to see that side of him. He was so open and happy to talk.'
Far from being the interview that capped his broadcasting career, Hall's interview with Zelenskyy reignited his drive to cover consequential stories. 'I immediately started thinking, 'What else can I do?'' he recalls. 'It could have been the last one, but when big stories happen around the world, I still get the feeling that I have to be there.'
Along with the rest of the world, Hall saw a far less happy version of Zelenskyy when the Ukrainian president visited President Donald Trump in the Oval Office last month. That uncomfortable encounter put Zelenskyy on the defensive against Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance's at times caustic questions and comments, and strained relations between the two countries.
'That's how President Trump does diplomacy,' Hall says when asked for his take on that Oval Office meeting, which he didn't witness in person. 'It's certainly not how President Joe Biden would have done it or other former presidents. No we have to see if he's going to be tough on Putin and make Putin take the ceasefire that's on the table. In that case, he's treating both sides the same, and that is his transactional reaction to how gets things done.'
'But President Trump has been very clear and very open about how he feels and that's what we saw on that day,' Hall adds. 'No one saw it coming… but that's how his policy is going to be made.'
For the record, Trump and Vance weren't the only ones in the room who had unexpected questions for Zelenskyy. Brian Glenn, the chief White House correspondent for Real America's Voice, raised eyebrows when he asked the embattled Ukrainian president why he didn't wear a suit to the White House-a query that had the perceptible tone of a schoolyard taunt. (Glenn later posted a statement to social media expressing 'extreme empathy' for Ukraine, but standing by his question.)
'Throughout my career, I've heard journalists asks questions that I would not have asked, and that's one example,' Hall says diplomatically of that controversial exchange. 'For me, I was interested in what security guarantees could be put in place and how they would pressure Putin if he doesn't agree to the ceasefire. I would not have asked why he wasn't wearing a suit, that's for certain.'
In an expansive conversation, Hall discusses the process of writing Resolute and looks ahead to the kinds of questions he wants to ask-and the kinds of stories he hopes to tell-as his journalistic career enters its next act.
(This interview has been edited for length and clarity.)
There's a line towards the end of Resolute that jumped out at me: 'That is where I am today: somewhere between who I was and who I'll eventually be.' I thought that was an interesting admission for you to make-what did it mean for you to write that on the page?
I always thought that the hospital was going to be the hardest part of my recovery. After that, I would go home and life would be fine. And that wasn't true at all! The hardest parts were when I got home and realized that there were going to have be some real changes. Changes in how I interacted with my family, and how I play with my kids. I realized that things don't start and finish-they are forever changing. We are forever changing.
Once you embrace that idea, as I have done, it makes the difficult moments so much easier. Once you reach a goal, you have another goal. You keep moving and life keeps changing. So that's what I was thinking about when I wrote that line, which I like a lot, too. The book isn't just about my journey, it's about life's journey. Life does that to you, and that's something you've not only got to realize, but also embrace.
That line also speaks to some of the other situations you describe in the book, including your return to international reporting after your injury and recovery. You do seem to be asking yourself, 'Is this something I still want to do?'
I definitely see my role as a journalist in a different way now. The first time I really noticed it was when I interviewed Maya Regev, an Israeli hostage released by Hamas. Throughout my career, I've tried to get people to open up so I could understand their story and convey it. It was only when I interviewed her and she had similar injuries to mine that I realized that I understood her.
That doesn't mean that every journalist needs to have gone through something difficult to get the story of someone else's difficulties. But as I said to my wife [Alicia Meller], I think that I'm a better journalist because of what I went through. I'm able to get at something that I couldn't quite get at before. I'm able to sit and talk with people about what they're going through and it's given me access to this whole other world.
Based on some of your recent reporting, it seems like you're now particularly drawn to stories about or if that's not reading too much into things.
No, you're spot on. I'm in a position now where I believe my story might help people. I firmly believe in the idea of resilience, and a lot of the work that I want to do is aimed at reminding people how important that is. The town of Hazard, Ky, is a great example. It was a town that had lost everything: the coal mines had shut, the opioid crisis hit it, and a flood knocked it down just a couple of months ago. But what makes that community amazing is that they have the strength to pick themselves up.
To refer back to that line from Resolute, is there a chance that the person you'll eventually decides to pursue that work outside of journalism?
I do speak at schools and with people who are recent amputees, and I would like to be doing more of that. My wife is a real driver of that, too, and also wants me to do more. I never say never. Life is full of wonderful opportunities, and you must try to do as much as you can. But I'm not sure that I'll ever really leave journalism behind. I just can't jump on a plane as quickly as I used to! I also need things like specialized hotel rooms. But I am finding different ways of telling stories, and the Hazard story is an example of that.
In the book, you contrast your willingness to ask for help during your recovery with people from previous generations who felt less inclined to be vulnerable in that way. Is that a positive generational change in your mind?
Absolutely. In my first book, Saved, I wrote about my father, who lived in the Philippines during World War II and was put in a Japanese prison camp at 12 years old. It wasn't until I was in my mid-20s that he really talked about it for the first time. His generation didn't talk about it. You just got on with life, and had some pretty tough times as a result.
So I absolutely think that we need to be talking more, and we're in a world that allows that. I do caveat that, though, by saying that you mustn't go too far and talk about absolutely everything. There are some battles you have to defeat by yourself. There is a line and and people have different ideas about where it is. But when you go through something particularly traumatic, I totally encourage you to talk about it.
When I was in the hospital, I knew that I was going to tell the first person who walked through that door if I was having a bad day and needed help. And just saying things like 'This is really tricky' or ''I'm struggling to figure this out,' helped so much.
Your own story will forever be connected to Ukraine's story. How do you navigate that in your coverage?
I don't think it really changes the way I would report on it. I mean, you could argue that having been in in the middle of it and being injured there I would be saying all we should do right now is give Ukraine absolutely everything it needs to keep the fight going. But I'm also aware that we need to find a way to end this. I like to think I'm pretty good at being able to see what I have to see as a journalist, as opposed to how I see it personally.
In your ideal world, how does this end?
As a pragmatist-or, similarly, a realist-if Ukrainians are not able to push Russian troops back to the original borders and if Russia is not in a position to take all of Ukraine, there have to be concessions somewhere. We can't have a forever war.
What I'd like to see and what I think we will see is a ceasefire. What I'd really hope from a peace deal are security guarantees that ensures that Putin doesn't spend the next three years re-arming. That said, Ukraine would also have three years to re-ram and possibly be more defensive as well.
Ultimately, I want a peace deal and I want it as soon as possible. I don't think we well see new borders to the country. Instead, it'll end up being closer to what you have in Korea where neither side acknowledges that they have technically lost the land. I want what everyone seems to want-I just don't want it in a way that doesn't guarantee the future security of Ukraine.