John Herbst: Trump has yet to 'bring the hammer down' on the Kremlin

6 July 2025, 10:50 AM

Exclusive

U.S. President Donald Trump continues to publicly shift his stance on Russia’s war against Ukraine.

Following his latest phone call with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, Trump labeled the full-scale invasion “Biden’s war” and said he doesn’t want to get too involved in the conflict. Yet he also admitted to being disappointed by the call, noting that Putin showed no signs of wanting to stop the war.

Trump’s remarks came as Russia launched its largest drone and missile attack on Kyiv since the start of the full-scale invasion.

It’s the second time Trump has publicly expressed frustration with the Kremlin leader, yet he continues to stall new sanctions on Russia and avoids taking strong action to hold Moscow accountable.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has paused deliveries of several types of U.S. weapons to Ukraine, including the crucial missiles used by Patriot air defense systems.

On July 4—while Kyiv was still reeling from fires caused by the massive overnight attack—Trump spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Afterward, Zelenskyy called him “very well informed.” Reuters later reported that the conversation raised hopes the U.S. might resume shipments of Patriot interceptor missiles. Trump himself confirmed shortly after that the U.S. would continue helping Ukraine and acknowledged Kyiv’s need for Patriots. “I don’t want to see people getting killed,” he added.

Still, Trump declined to say whether he would back tougher sanctions on Russia.

What’s really behind Trump’s mixed messaging—genuine confusion, or calculated political strategy? Why is he surrounding himself with advisers who downplay the Russian threat? And could U.S. support for Ukraine shift again?

NV put these questions to John Herbst, a seasoned American diplomat and former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, who spent 31 years in the U.S. Foreign Service.

— US President Donald Trump stated that he doesn't want to be too involved in this war, calling it Biden's war once again. How should such statements be interpreted? 

— I think this reflects a certain instinct on Trump's part that has been, I wouldn't say, helpful towards strong American policy and not helpful to Ukraine's defense against massive Russian aggression. 

— Also, Trump said that he saw that Putin doesn't want to end the war and that he was very disappointed in his conversation with him. Why do you think Trump was so charmed by the Russian president and believes that he actually wanted to end the war? 

— Look, Trump has had a peculiar approach, even affection towards Putin, going back to the time he first became president in January 2017. That has not prevented him at times from taking steps which Putin doesn't like. And last week was a very good example of steps taken that Putin didn't like at the NATO summit in The Hague. But Trump doesn't seem to take those measures easily or quite comfortably. So we have to look at what's happened in that context. 

At the same time Trump has been compelled by circumstance to acknowledge that Putin is the problem, Putin is the reason why this war is going on. And he keeps blaming it on Biden, because that makes it easy for him to try to avoid taking action. But it doesn't mean that ultimately he can avoid taking action.

So that's, I think, the way to look at this. I can't say I'm enthusiastic by what he said, but I was pleased that yesterday he acknowledged that the phone call with Putin got nowhere and Putin remains the problem behind this ongoing war. 

— I was covering this NATO summit in The Hague and I was actually a bit surprised when Donald Trump said that his phrase that he will end the war between Ukraine and Russia in 24 hours was a sarcasm. Was it sarcasm at that time? 

— Trump speaks in hyperbole. But sometimes he means that hyperbole. And when things go his way, he says that he was justified in whatever prediction he was making. He recognized, I forget when it was, March maybe, that his 24 hours was not going to work. So then he said, well, I'll get it done in six months or maybe three months.

Well, three months obviously has not worked and we're approaching six months very soon and that's obviously not working. So Trump has stopped saying he can get this war done, but he's still on record as saying he wants to see a durable peace. And there's still record of him saying he would punish the party that's blocking that peace. But because of his peculiar approach or affection for Putin, he's been unwilling to bring the hammer down on Putin for being an aggressor. But his own words push him in that direction. And I don't rule out that this could happen.

— Back in early April, Senator Lindsey Graham introduced a bill to impose tough sanctions on Russia for refusing to make a long-term peace with Ukraine. And he means this 500 duty for buyers of Russian oils. But the time is passing and Trump is ignoring this bill. What do you think the perspective of the bill is? 

— I think the perspective of the bill is real. And there's no question that Trump has not given an okay to Republicans in the Senate to move the bill forward, which is why it has not moved forward. And this again reflects that reluctance on Trump's part to put pressure on the Kremlin. But at some point he may feel obliged to do it. And of course his administration had been embarrassed by this pause in weapons initiated by the Pentagon. And we obviously have to see how this plays out, the quote-unquote current pause in weapons.

And you know, Trump said yesterday that, you know, there's no such pause. Now he has to make sure that that is true. 

— Politico also has written that Trump's representative Vitkoff proposes to exempt energy resources from Russia from sanctions, but Interior Minister Doug Burgum insists on a different approach — to oust Russia, freeing up space for American exports.

—- Look, we know that there are clear differences in the Trump administration on policy towards an aggressive Kremlin. There are some members of the team who understand precisely, that Putin's policy is a danger to vital American interests, including his war in Ukraine. There are others, and you just mentioned one of them, who seems to be completely clueless about the dangers that Russian policy poses for the United States. And that's where you get fatuous ideas, like lifting sanctions on Russian energy or returning Russian natural gas to the European market, which would hurt American natural gas. So there are people who have access and influence with President Trump who clearly have very little understanding of what Russia's up to and how dangerous Putin's policies are for the United States.

— Then this means that he quite often listens to some garbage?

— Well, there's no question that there have been people with access to Trump who have fed him nonsense. One of them, Trump wound up calling out not over Russia, but over Iran. I'm thinking of Tucker Carlson. And of course, he also kind of called out his director for national intelligence, also over Iran-related issues. And there's a general feeling among people who watch what's going on in the administration that as a result of Trump's decisive action in Iran, which was a success, and the hesitation or even opposition from some members with access to him, those folks have lost some influence with Trump.

And all the people who don't want to help Israel also don't want to help Ukraine.

– So these are the same people?

— Well, there are people who are willing to help Israel and not Ukraine, but those who spoke out in some fashion against the strike on Iran are also strong opponents of American aid to Ukraine because they don't understand that Moscow declares us to be its principal adversary. Again, they're not very well informed about Russian policy. 

— Also, the U.S. recently stopped supplying certain types of weapons to Ukraine. And this happened actually at the time when the situation, the battlefield is actually hard. Who or what do you think influenced this decision by the U.S.? 

— Deborah Kagan and I wrote a post which appears on the Atlantic Council website yesterday afternoon. You can get an answer there. But it's very clear this came from the Department of Defense. And if you've been following the American media closely or this issue closely, you know that Senator Shaheen and Representative McCaul have both said this is Elbridge Colby's initiative, the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, who has long demonstrated he has no idea how dangerous Russia is to the United States. So the Pentagon did that. And again, Trump said yesterday there's no pause in American weapons to Ukraine. So this was clearly done without the approval of the White House. And it was particularly odd that it happened because Trump, again, last week at the NATO summit in The Hague said he would try and find the scarce air defense systems for Ukraine. He also talked about Russia being a problem. He also was behind the 5 percent  new spending limit for NATO, which the Russians didn't like. He agreed to the communique, which said some of that spending can go to Ukraine. All things are very positive, very smart, strong, standing strong for American interests. So then to have this decision suddenly be taken right after Trump was doing all these things looks like the Defense Department was not paying attention to the policy of the president. And as someone who spent 31 years in the State Department, I know that's a very odd situation. 

So in this case, if there was a deep state at work, it was a deep state which was pushing pro-Russian policies and anti-American policies.

— Is there anything Ukraine or EU could do to change this situation for Ukraine with weapons? 

— Oh, you know, the piece that I just mentioned was not praising that decision. And I've been on, I've been doing the BBC, I've been doing News Nation and other media making the same point, that this is bad for American security, and demonstrates that there are some problems at DOD that need to be fixed if President Trump wants to be successful. And, but I don't want to overstate the influence of people like me, but there are many of us who are making these points right now.

And there was an excellent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, which is a conservative newspaper which has often backed Trump, that really calls the administration out for this very bad decision. Again, this Department of Defense decision. 

— There have been numerous reports in the American media about White House Chief of Staff Sergio Gora, who is responsible for recognizing employees in President Trump's administration. There are suspicions that he is concealing his Russian origins. Does anyone in the administration even care about this issue?

—- I think that so far no one in the administration has reacted. For those in the administration who want to see certain policies and sees Sergio Gora as helping them implement those policies by putting people in positions who pursue those policies, they probably don't care. But for others who care about the reputation and the authority of the administration, this could be an issue.

I say could because it is odd that no one's been able to find his birth certificate in Cyprus. Not Cyprus, Malta, where he said he was born. I've seen the stories about him perhaps being a Russian citizen, but at this point, they're not proved stories. I'm not saying they're false, they're just not proved. 

—  Is it true that Trump is really so afraid of China that he's trying to pull Moscow out of their orbit at any cost?

—-  You know, this was a bad idea that was first entertained in the Biden administration. And it's clear that there are people in the Trump administration who also entertain this idea. Such folks are not very familiar with how Russia works or how China works. So if you want to take Russia out of a partnership with China, make sure Russia loses in Ukraine. I suspect that would lead to a new leadership in Moscow that probably has a much better sense of Russia's interests by having at least a decent or a normal relationship with the United States and the West. 

— Is there any chance that Trump will finally make up his mind about war and how this decision might look like?

— I think that Trump is, again, on record of having saying he could end this war and establish a durable peace. And he laid out a way to do it, meaning putting pressure on the side that's blocking a durable peace. And it's embarrassing for him to be in that situation. Again, the naive voices with access to Trump will say, you can just ignore that. But history won't ignore it. And the sound voices in his administration who have access to him also know this. 

So I don't rule out that Trump may wind up bringing a hammer down on the Kremlin. Most of my colleagues disagree with me, and they have ample evidence for their point of view. But there's also evidence from my point of view. 

— Do you think there is something that can trigger Trump to make more pressure on Russia now? 

— It would be very easy for Trump to do so by pointing out the number of times he's given Putin a chance to move in the right direction, by pointing out that Russia and Iran are working extremely closely together. And over the decades, Iran has been responsible for operations which have killed hundreds and hundreds of Americans. And without Russian support, Iran would not have been able to take some of those actions, to run some of those operations.

And again, just pointing out to what Russia says about the United States, that again, we are their principal adversary. Trump could very easily do this. Again, there's something inside of him which gets in the way of him seeing it. But politics of his own standing here could ultimately move him in that direction. And I think that's, if he does go the right way, that's how it will play out. 

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Google News