WASHINGTON (Independence Avenue Media) — Russia continued its campaign of aggression against Ukraine on Wednesday, bombing a kindergarten in a deadly barrage of drone strikes. This attack followed President Donald Trump’s decision to hold off meeting with his Russian counterpart. For former U.S. Ambassador John Herbst, the sequence of events fit a tragically repetitive pattern.
“So far, [Russian President Vladimir] Putin has been able, at critical moments, to persuade Trump not to put pressure on him,” Herbst said. “It happened in May, when Trump and European leaders were about to put sanctions on Russia. It happened again in August.”
“As Zelensky was coming to Washington to try and make a deal on Tomahawks, it happened a third time.”
That insight could not have proven more prescient. Just hours after the following interview concluded, the cycle of pressure and retreat appeared to repeat itself. A prospective summit in Budapest was scrapped. By evening, Trump unveiled significant new sanctions on Russia, targeting its two largest oil companies.
In this exclusive interview, John Herbst, senior director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council, explains why he expects Trump to return to pressuring the Kremlin.
The Strategy: Pressure vs. Retreat
Kartlos Sharashenidze, Independence Avenue Media: Following President Trump’s recent White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin, what are your observations?
Ambassador John Herbst: Well, the thing is, Trump is mercurial. And the stance he’ll take on the war will change over time. But it’s also true that there is a certain framework in which it changes over time.
He thought he could solve this war quickly and obviously he’s been unable to do that. There was a period starting in the middle of February where he thought Ukraine was the problem in achieving a peace. Now, of course, that was wrong.
After he made numerous ceasefire proposals, all of which Zelensky accepted and Putin tried to not reject — Putin ultimately deflected. He refused to agree. Trump began to realize that Putin was the problem.
Why John Herbst Believes Trump Backs Off
We saw a period starting in May where Trump began to try and put some pressure on Putin. But each time he tried to put pressure, Putin would offer a meeting, and Trump would back off on the pressure. And that’s essentially what we’re seeing right now.
I suspect once it becomes clear that Putin is not interested in making peace one more time, Trump will come back to the idea of putting pressure on the Kremlin.
Is a “Durable Peace” Possible?
Sharashenidze: Trump said both sides should “stop where they are,” which sounds like freezing the front lines. Could this lead to a just and lasting peace?
Amb. Herbst: Trump has never talked about a just peace. He’s talked about a durable peace. And he’s been pretty consistent on that.
A durable peace along the current lines of battle; a durable peace involving serious deterrence capability for Ukraine to prevent future Russian aggression — that’s what he’s been pursuing.
“I think he has the ability to achieve this if he’s willing to put major pressure on the Russian economy.”
Sharashenidze: Do you think Zelensky’s position has changed with the latest developments?
Amb. Herbst: My sense is that Zelensky would accept a lasting peace as long as it’s actually lasting. He wouldn’t accept that happily, but, given the circumstances, I think he’s already indicated a willingness to do this.
Ukrainians are not stupid. They understand their circumstances. But again, it has to be a durable peace, and he needs to have serious deterrent capability. Putin doesn’t want this; Putin has rejected this. Zelenskyy has not.
Trump’s “Paper Tiger” Rhetoric
Sharashenidze: A few weeks ago, Trump called Russia a “paper tiger.” Now, he’s calling for both sides “to stop where they are.” How do you interpret this change in tone?
Amb. Herbst: It’s very simple. Trump will entertain very different ideas at different times, and his rhetoric reflects that. But again, Trump is on record as saying he wants a durable peace. So, there will be a political cost for him in not achieving that.
Sharashenidze: Does Putin view President Trump’s willingness to engage as a sign that Washington might back off its support for Ukraine?
Amb. John Herbst: I think Putin hopes that. He may even expect it, but that is not working so far for Putin. He has been able to stop Trump from taking strong steps against the Russian economy, but he’s not been able to persuade Trump to back off of support for Ukraine.
The Path Forward for Ukraine
Sharashenidze: In your view, what would be the best outcome for Ukraine, Europe, and the U.S.?
Amb. John Herbst: The best outcome would be arming Ukraine to the hilt, allowing them to shoot wherever they want as long as they don’t shoot at Russian civilians. If American policy was that strong, that would be the result.
A durable peace based upon persuading Putin to stop shooting is an outcome that can be achieved with American strength. If Trump pursues that energetically, he will achieve his goal.
About John Herbst
John Herbst served as the United States Ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006. Currently, he is the senior director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council. His analysis of the Russo-Ukrainian war is widely cited by international media. John Herbst continues to advocate for strong Western support for Ukraine to ensure regional stability.
Trump’s “Paper Tiger” Rhetoric
Sharashenidze: A few weeks ago, Trump called Russia a “paper tiger.” Now, he’s calling for both sides “to stop where they are.” How do you interpret this change in tone?
Amb. Herbst: It’s very simple. Trump will entertain very different ideas at different times, and his rhetoric reflects that. But again, Trump is on record as saying he wants a durable peace. So, there will be a political cost for him in not achieving that.
Sharashenidze: Does Putin view President Trump’s willingness to engage as a sign that Washington might back off its support for Ukraine?
Amb. John Herbst: I think Putin hopes that. He may even expect it, but that is not working so far for Putin. He has been able to stop Trump from taking strong steps against the Russian economy, but he’s not been able to persuade Trump to back off of support for Ukraine.
The Path Forward for Ukraine
Sharashenidze: In your view, what would be the best outcome for Ukraine, Europe, and the U.S.?
Amb. John Herbst: The best outcome would be arming Ukraine to the hilt, allowing them to shoot wherever they want as long as they don’t shoot at Russian civilians. If American policy was that strong, that would be the result.
A durable peace based upon persuading Putin to stop shooting is an outcome that can be achieved with American strength. If Trump pursues that energetically, he will achieve his goal.
About John Herbst
John Herbst served as the United States Ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006. Currently, he is the senior director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council. His analysis of the Russo-Ukrainian war is widely cited by international media. John Herbst continues to advocate for strong Western support for Ukraine to ensure regional stability.
Trump’s “Paper Tiger” Rhetoric
Sharashenidze: A few weeks ago, Trump called Russia a “paper tiger.” Now, he’s calling for both sides “to stop where they are.” How do you interpret this change in tone?
Amb. Herbst: It’s very simple. Trump will entertain very different ideas at different times, and his rhetoric reflects that. But again, Trump is on record as saying he wants a durable peace. So, there will be a political cost for him in not achieving that.
Sharashenidze: Does Putin view President Trump’s willingness to engage as a sign that Washington might back off its support for Ukraine?
Amb. John Herbst: I think Putin hopes that. He may even expect it, but that is not working so far for Putin. He has been able to stop Trump from taking strong steps against the Russian economy, but he’s not been able to persuade Trump to back off of support for Ukraine.
The Path Forward for Ukraine
Sharashenidze: In your view, what would be the best outcome for Ukraine, Europe, and the U.S.?
Amb. John Herbst: The best outcome would be arming Ukraine to the hilt, allowing them to shoot wherever they want as long as they don’t shoot at Russian civilians. If American policy was that strong, that would be the result.
A durable peace based upon persuading Putin to stop shooting is an outcome that can be achieved with American strength. If Trump pursues that energetically, he will achieve his goal.
About John Herbst
John Herbst served as the United States Ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006. Currently, he is the senior director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council. His analysis of the Russo-Ukrainian war is widely cited by international media. John Herbst continues to advocate for strong Western support for Ukraine to ensure regional stability.
Trump’s “Paper Tiger” Rhetoric
Sharashenidze: A few weeks ago, Trump called Russia a “paper tiger.” Now, he’s calling for both sides “to stop where they are.” How do you interpret this change in tone?
Amb. Herbst: It’s very simple. Trump will entertain very different ideas at different times, and his rhetoric reflects that. But again, Trump is on record as saying he wants a durable peace. So, there will be a political cost for him in not achieving that.
Sharashenidze: Does Putin view President Trump’s willingness to engage as a sign that Washington might back off its support for Ukraine?
Amb. John Herbst: I think Putin hopes that. He may even expect it, but that is not working so far for Putin. He has been able to stop Trump from taking strong steps against the Russian economy, but he’s not been able to persuade Trump to back off of support for Ukraine.
The Path Forward for Ukraine
Sharashenidze: In your view, what would be the best outcome for Ukraine, Europe, and the U.S.?
Amb. John Herbst: The best outcome would be arming Ukraine to the hilt, allowing them to shoot wherever they want as long as they don’t shoot at Russian civilians. If American policy was that strong, that would be the result.
A durable peace based upon persuading Putin to stop shooting is an outcome that can be achieved with American strength. If Trump pursues that energetically, he will achieve his goal.
About John Herbst
John Herbst served as the United States Ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006. Currently, he is the senior director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council. His analysis of the Russo-Ukrainian war is widely cited by international media. John Herbst continues to advocate for strong Western support for Ukraine to ensure regional stability.
Trump’s “Paper Tiger” Rhetoric
Sharashenidze: A few weeks ago, Trump called Russia a “paper tiger.” Now, he’s calling for both sides “to stop where they are.” How do you interpret this change in tone?
Amb. Herbst: It’s very simple. Trump will entertain very different ideas at different times, and his rhetoric reflects that. But again, Trump is on record as saying he wants a durable peace. So, there will be a political cost for him in not achieving that.
Sharashenidze: Does Putin view President Trump’s willingness to engage as a sign that Washington might back off its support for Ukraine?
Amb. John Herbst: I think Putin hopes that. He may even expect it, but that is not working so far for Putin. He has been able to stop Trump from taking strong steps against the Russian economy, but he’s not been able to persuade Trump to back off of support for Ukraine.
The Path Forward for Ukraine
Sharashenidze: In your view, what would be the best outcome for Ukraine, Europe, and the U.S.?
Amb. John Herbst: The best outcome would be arming Ukraine to the hilt, allowing them to shoot wherever they want as long as they don’t shoot at Russian civilians. If American policy was that strong, that would be the result.
A durable peace based upon persuading Putin to stop shooting is an outcome that can be achieved with American strength. If Trump pursues that energetically, he will achieve his goal.
About John Herbst
John Herbst served as the United States Ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006. Currently, he is the senior director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council. His analysis of the Russo-Ukrainian war is widely cited by international media. John Herbst continues to advocate for strong Western support for Ukraine to ensure regional stability.
Trump’s “Paper Tiger” Rhetoric
Sharashenidze: A few weeks ago, Trump called Russia a “paper tiger.” Now, he’s calling for both sides “to stop where they are.” How do you interpret this change in tone?
Amb. Herbst: It’s very simple. Trump will entertain very different ideas at different times, and his rhetoric reflects that. But again, Trump is on record as saying he wants a durable peace. So, there will be a political cost for him in not achieving that.
Sharashenidze: Does Putin view President Trump’s willingness to engage as a sign that Washington might back off its support for Ukraine?
Amb. John Herbst: I think Putin hopes that. He may even expect it, but that is not working so far for Putin. He has been able to stop Trump from taking strong steps against the Russian economy, but he’s not been able to persuade Trump to back off of support for Ukraine.
The Path Forward for Ukraine
Sharashenidze: In your view, what would be the best outcome for Ukraine, Europe, and the U.S.?
Amb. John Herbst: The best outcome would be arming Ukraine to the hilt, allowing them to shoot wherever they want as long as they don’t shoot at Russian civilians. If American policy was that strong, that would be the result.
A durable peace based upon persuading Putin to stop shooting is an outcome that can be achieved with American strength. If Trump pursues that energetically, he will achieve his goal.
About John Herbst
John Herbst served as the United States Ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006. Currently, he is the senior director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council. His analysis of the Russo-Ukrainian war is widely cited by international media. John Herbst continues to advocate for strong Western support for Ukraine to ensure regional stability.
Trump’s “Paper Tiger” Rhetoric
Sharashenidze: A few weeks ago, Trump called Russia a “paper tiger.” Now, he’s calling for both sides “to stop where they are.” How do you interpret this change in tone?
Amb. Herbst: It’s very simple. Trump will entertain very different ideas at different times, and his rhetoric reflects that. But again, Trump is on record as saying he wants a durable peace. So, there will be a political cost for him in not achieving that.
Sharashenidze: Does Putin view President Trump’s willingness to engage as a sign that Washington might back off its support for Ukraine?
Amb. John Herbst: I think Putin hopes that. He may even expect it, but that is not working so far for Putin. He has been able to stop Trump from taking strong steps against the Russian economy, but he’s not been able to persuade Trump to back off of support for Ukraine.
The Path Forward for Ukraine
Sharashenidze: In your view, what would be the best outcome for Ukraine, Europe, and the U.S.?
Amb. John Herbst: The best outcome would be arming Ukraine to the hilt, allowing them to shoot wherever they want as long as they don’t shoot at Russian civilians. If American policy was that strong, that would be the result.
A durable peace based upon persuading Putin to stop shooting is an outcome that can be achieved with American strength. If Trump pursues that energetically, he will achieve his goal.
About John Herbst
John Herbst served as the United States Ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006. Currently, he is the senior director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council. His analysis of the Russo-Ukrainian war is widely cited by international media. John Herbst continues to advocate for strong Western support for Ukraine to ensure regional stability.
Trump’s “Paper Tiger” Rhetoric
Sharashenidze: A few weeks ago, Trump called Russia a “paper tiger.” Now, he’s calling for both sides “to stop where they are.” How do you interpret this change in tone?
Amb. Herbst: It’s very simple. Trump will entertain very different ideas at different times, and his rhetoric reflects that. But again, Trump is on record as saying he wants a durable peace. So, there will be a political cost for him in not achieving that.
Sharashenidze: Does Putin view President Trump’s willingness to engage as a sign that Washington might back off its support for Ukraine?
Amb. John Herbst: I think Putin hopes that. He may even expect it, but that is not working so far for Putin. He has been able to stop Trump from taking strong steps against the Russian economy, but he’s not been able to persuade Trump to back off of support for Ukraine.
The Path Forward for Ukraine
Sharashenidze: In your view, what would be the best outcome for Ukraine, Europe, and the U.S.?
Amb. John Herbst: The best outcome would be arming Ukraine to the hilt, allowing them to shoot wherever they want as long as they don’t shoot at Russian civilians. If American policy was that strong, that would be the result.
A durable peace based upon persuading Putin to stop shooting is an outcome that can be achieved with American strength. If Trump pursues that energetically, he will achieve his goal.
About John Herbst
John Herbst served as the United States Ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006. Currently, he is the senior director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council. His analysis of the Russo-Ukrainian war is widely cited by international media. John Herbst continues to advocate for strong Western support for Ukraine to ensure regional stability.