Steven Pifer, American diplomat, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine from 1998 to 2000, is currently an affiliated expert at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University.How has the global security situation changed since the United States used its strategic aviation in the Iran-Israel war? Trump has, for the first time, shown that he possesses such capability and is willing to use it. While this is unlikely to make Russia retreat, the situation remains extremely complex, and the United States is beginning to define its position more clearly.I think President Trump made the decision because he saw that Israel was having some success with its air campaign against Iran.While I believe the B-2 strike caused significant damage to Iran's nuclear program, I'm concerned that, at this point, we still don't know where Iran has stored the 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60%, nor are we certain whether Iran has other centrifuge facilities. So it's unclear how much actual damage has been done to the program.Some say the strike set the program back by years, while others believe it delayed it only by a few months. Once again, the key question is: what will Mr. Trump do next?What will the Trump administration do next regarding Russia and China? The trade war with China has somewhat stabilized. However, a new issue is emerging – the possibility of major sanctions against countries that purchase Russian resources at cut-rate prices, effectively enabling Putin to continue the war and expand military-industrial production.I think we have seen over the past five months a series of ups and downs in the US-China relationship. Officials in the Trump administration have made it clear that they view China as the number one strategic challenge facing the United States. However, on the economic front, we have seen tariffs imposed, then lifted, and then reimposed. So although the relationship in the trade area appears stable at the moment, I am not certain what might happen in a month or two.I think you are correct in saying that China has been providing significant assistance to Russia’s military and defense industries. And unfortunately, we have not yet seen the Trump administration take any meaningful steps to increase economic pressure on Russia. That is one area where I have been fairly critical of the Trump administration. While Mr. Trump has stated that he is unhappy with certain actions taken by President Putin and he is dissatisfied that Russia has not adopted a more accommodating position in negotiations, Mr. Trump has done nothing to apply the considerable leverage that the United States possesses.He could request that Congress allocate additional funding to support Ukraine. He could move to tighten the existing sanctions on Russia. He could work closely with the G7 and the European Union to take steps toward seizing the frozen assets of the Russian Central Bank and placing those assets into a fund designated for Ukraine.Actions such as these would present Vladimir Putin with the reality that if he chooses to continue the war, the military, economic, and political costs for Russia will only increase. However, Mr. Trump has not taken any of these steps. I believe this will mean that his attempt to mediate a resolution to the war between Russia and Ukraine, or more accurately, the war that Russia has inflicted upon Ukraine, will not succeed unless he chooses to make use of the leverage available to him.What do you think about the possible meeting between Xi Jinping and Putin on September 2? We understand that the next two months will be extremely difficult, as the Russians continue bombing our cities. Xi Jinping once called on the international community to respect sovereignty and borders, but this is merely Chinese rhetoric, diplomatic language. Because, on the other hand, if it were not for Beijing, North Korea would not be helping Russia with military forces to attack our positions.What do you think will be on the table during the conversation between Putin and Xi Jinping? Putin will ask for more help, but the Chinese can also formulate their position, responding primarily to the proposals of the U.S. administration.No, I think you are correct. We have seen China provide support to Russia. Although it seems to me that over the past several years, Russia, more specifically President Putin, has placed the country in a position where it has essentially become the junior partner to China.Putin has made Russia extremely dependent on China, and that dependency gives China considerable leverage. I would like to see the West find a way to begin applying pressure on China to encourage it to limit its support for Russia. It does appear that there are already some limits in place. For example, we have not seen China send completed weapons to Russia.However, it is clear that China has helped Russia’s defense industry increase production. There are proposals in the United States Senate, including a bill that would impose sanctions on countries that purchase oil and gas from Russia. That kind of legislation could have a serious impact on China.At the moment, I believe 82 out of 100 senators support the bill, but for reasons likely tied to the White House, the Republican leadership has not brought it to the floor for a vote.So I think one of the key questions the West must consider is whether there are ways to push China to further reduce its support for Russia. This would help increase economic pressure on Russia as a way to either compel it to end the war or to adopt a more reasonable position in negotiating a resolution.The position of the American administration is difficult to grasp. It is too fluid, constantly shifting, changing tone and direction like a chameleon. We had grown accustomed to a consistent American stance: that the United States was our friend, our partner, and perhaps even our ally. But more than a hundred days ago, Trump repositioned America from being a driving force to something else entirely, not an initiator but a mediator, a participant in peace talks rather than a direct supporter or provider of strength, power, and means of defense against our enemy’s aggression.We are deeply grateful to the Biden administration for all the support they have extended to us. But now we are in a moment of profound uncertainty. Pete Hagesse has already said that Ukraine will receive less support, and the U.S. budget, including the allocation for Ukraine, remains unapproved. At the same time, we are witnessing a dangerous narrative in which Ukraine and Russia are placed on the same level, as if they were simply two children fighting in the street. This, despite the reality of a brutal war that has already claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and caused millions of losses, including the wounded. How, then, does the current American administration truly see us now?First, I very much disagree with how the Trump administration, how Mr. Trump, has discussed the Russia-Ukraine war. This is not a fight between two kids. This is a neo-imperialist war of aggression that Russia launched against Ukraine. That is clear.What I worry about is that the Trump administration seems to believe this war has no bearing on American interests. Even if one sets aside the relationship with Ukraine, if Russia prevails, if Russia wins the war in Ukraine, it becomes a much greater threat to both Europe and the United States. I am concerned that Mr. Trump does not recognize this.It is in the interest of the United States and in the interest of American security to help Ukraine stop Putin in Ukraine. But again, I am concerned that Mr. Trump does not understand that. I am very worried that American support for Ukraine may be significantly reduced or perhaps even eliminated. When I look at the last five months and consider how Mr. Trump has spoken about the war, I see that he has refused to use the leverage he could have applied to push Russia toward a more accommodating negotiating position.Instead, he has made a series of concessions to Russia. For example, he agreed in principle to meet with Putin even though for the past three years Western leaders have boycotted such meetings. He is working to normalize relations with Russia.For the past four months at the United Nations General Assembly, the United States has voted with Russia against resolutions on the Russia-Ukraine war simply because those resolutions identify Russia as the aggressor.Despite all of these gestures and other concessions made to Russia, the United States has received nothing meaningful in return. We have seen no shift in Russia’s negotiating position, which remains essentially a list of demands that amount to Ukraine’s capitulation. That does not serve American interests, and I am concerned that Mr. Trump does not fully grasp how this war affects both American interests and American security.I hope that he will change his view because I believe the kind of support the United States provided during the Biden administration, even though I wish it had been more, is very much in the interest of the United States as well as in the interest of Ukraine.It is extremely difficult to negotiate with Putin, as Donald Trump is beginning to realize. He has likely never encountered people with historiosophical thinking in such critical circumstances and does not understand that this is similar to Churchill or Chamberlain trying to negotiate with Hitler – it is impossible, because Hitler had entirely different goals. When Trump makes an offer to Putin, what can he offer in return, when Putin is driven by his warped historiosophical vision of destroying Ukraine?Trump, acting in the interests of the United States, will eventually have to raise the level of deterrence and potential escalation. That means providing Ukraine with additional weapons and aircraft to protect civilians who are being killed in our cities.Where does Donald Trump’s patience end? Will it stretch indefinitely? Or will there come a moment when he says: this is not working, so we are giving Ukraine Tomahawks?I very much hope that there will be a change in Mr. Trump's position so that he will continue the kind of support that the United States has provided over the past three years. Here is what I think about Mr. Trump: he does not like to be seen as weak. I believe that, in the context of the Russia-Ukraine war over the past five months, President Putin has made Mr. Trump appear extremely weak.I believe that Putin is manipulating Mr. Trump. He strings him along, speaks to him, and says that Russia seeks peace. But we have seen no real movement from Russia to end the war, to begin serious negotiations, or even to accept a ceasefire.Remember, almost four months ago, the Trump administration proposed a ceasefire. Ukraine quickly accepted it, but Russia rejected it, and there was no consequence for that rejection. It seems to me that Putin has been quite successful in manipulating Mr. Trump and leading him on without delivering anything in return.Now I do wonder whether at some point Mr. Trump will wake up and realize that he has been played, that Putin is not going to change his approach to the war, that he will continue to pursue his military campaign. And I wonder whether Mr. Trump will come to understand that he is being seen in capitals around the world as weak, and whether that realization might cause a shift in his position.But this situation has been ongoing for four months, and so far, unfortunately, Mr. Trump has not yet come to that recognition. I hope that he will, but I am not sure that it will happen.Recently, I spoke with General Wesley Clark, the former commander of U.S. forces in NATO's European Command. The legendary military officer said that the Russians have strategic plans to capture Odesa and advance further in the south. Our soldiers are ready.But war is not only about the front line. It is also about resources and money. How long can Putin sustain an intense war against Ukraine, and how much strength does he still have to do it?Well, I look at the war now and I think that the first Russian objectives for this year are likely to be the full occupation of Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson.We recall that Vladimir Putin said back in September 2022 that he had annexed those provinces, those oblasts, even though Russia does not fully occupy them. So I believe that is probably Putin’s top priority at the moment. When I consider the broader course of the war, it seems to me that the main difficulty facing Ukraine is that Russia is a larger country with a bigger military.However, Ukraine has something else, and that is motivation. Over the past three years, we have seen a Russian army whose soldiers often lack motivation. In fact, they sometimes have to be motivated through fear imposed by their own commanders. In contrast, Ukrainian soldiers are deeply motivated.Ukrainians are fighting for their right to protect their country and to decide for themselves both their domestic policies and their foreign policy direction. That to me has been the most important factor in this war over the past three years.Remember that back in February 2022, virtually everyone in the West, in Washington and in every European NATO capital, expected that the Russian military would achieve victory in a matter of months. But Ukraine surprised the world, and I believe that was because of their motivation.The question now, however, comes down to resources.I think Vladimir Putin continues this war because he believes he has more resources and can outlast Ukraine. This is where I believe Mr. Trump's failure to use American leverage has essentially allowed Putin to continue believing that he can win. What if, for example, Mr. Trump went to the G7 and the European Union and said, let us seize the 300 billion dollars in frozen Russian Central Bank assets and turn that into a fund for Ukraine?With that money, combined with continued Western assistance, Putin would suddenly have to ask himself whether he wants to continue this war if it begins to look like Ukraine will have the resources to fight for two, three, four, or even five more years. And if continuing the war means Russia will suffer three or four hundred thousand casualties every year, that might be the kind of scenario that could shift thinking within the Kremlin.That is why I am very frustrated that Mr. Trump has used none of that leverage. He has done nothing to change Mr. Putin’s calculations or to convince him that American and Western support will continue, that Ukraine will have the resources it needs to defend itself and to continue inflicting military and economic pain on Russia.That is why I am frustrated with my country’s current policy. I believe there are steps we could take that would fundamentally change Mr. Putin’s expectations. But Mr. Trump has failed to take those steps.Several meetings have already taken place within the framework of negotiations with Russia, which resulted in the release of prisoners – in other words, lives were saved. At the same time, there are secret consultations between the U.S. administration and Putin. Advisors meet and communicate behind closed doors. When do you think a true negotiating moment might arise, and in what format could it happen?And what might the framework be, given that Putin's attack on Ukraine began with an ultimatum to the Euro-Atlantic community? He demanded that NATO return to the borders of 1997–2005. Now, through his Foreign Ministry, Putin is demanding the demilitarization of the Baltic states, which clearly indicates that he is not ready for a genuine peace process.Well, I think the real negotiation has to take place between Moscow and Kyiv.This is not something the United States can negotiate on Ukraine's behalf. It seems fairly clear that Vladimir Putin would like to bypass the Ukrainians and negotiate directly with Donald Trump. That kind of negotiation would fail because I believe it would produce an outcome that would be unacceptable to Ukrainians, and understandably so.Putin sometimes speaks about addressing the root causes of the war. When he says "root causes," I believe he has two things in mind. The first is that he does not accept that Ukraine wants to be an independent country, to make its own domestic policy choices and to pursue its own foreign policy course. In his mind, that is a root cause of the conflict.The second so-called root cause is the transformation of the broader European security architecture over the past thirty years. For him to think that he could now reverse NATO's evolution and return to the situation of 1997 is, in my view, a fantasy.What the world and what Europe in particular has witnessed over the past fifteen years, even before Russia’s illegal seizure of Crimea, is an increasingly hostile Russian foreign policy accompanied by significant military buildup. Since 2014, we have seen that Russia is willing to use military force to achieve political objectives, including in situations where there has been no attack on Russia and no legitimate provocation.NATO countries in the Baltic region and in the Nordic area are now, I believe, very concerned about a potential Russian military threat.You also see other NATO countries such as Britain, Germany, and France that have begun to take serious steps to build up their military capabilities because they are concerned that Russia may go further, that Vladimir Putin's ambitions may not stop with Ukraine.When I think about Russia, I ask the question: would Vladimir Putin really attack a NATO member state?If you were to ask most Russia experts in the West today, they would probably say that Putin would never attack a country like Estonia. That would be irrational, they would say. And they are probably right – but I would add an important qualifier.If you had asked those same experts in 2018 or 2019 whether Vladimir Putin would launch the kind of full-scale invasion of Ukraine that he did in 2022, they would have said no, he would not do that, that it would be unthinkable.There is a real risk for NATO. There is a risk for the United States. There is a risk for the broader West in underestimating Vladimir Putin's ambitions.That is why I believe it is critical for the West to take meaningful steps to ensure its security. And I would argue that this includes helping Ukraine defend itself, because Ukraine’s defense of its own territory is also, in my view, a defense of the West.What could President Trump and President Zelenskyy have discussed in The Hague? A 50-minute conversation between presidents in the current context is extremely serious. After the meeting in the Vatican, Trump’s position began to improve. Still, there is no clear understanding of what exactly was said between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy.What issues might irritate the current American administration? It is not just about Trump personally – there are likely things that Washington would want to hear and steps they would want to see from Ukraine. These may include clear anti-corruption measures, stronger transparency in military aid usage, a well-defined reform agenda, or efforts to build broader international coalitions. At the same time, symbolic gestures and strategic communication from Kyiv can also play a major role in aligning with American expectations. I do believe that the conversations between the two presidents, Zelenskyy and Trump, both at the Vatican and then in The Hague, appear to have gone fairly well.They seem to have done a fair amount of work to recover from the disaster in the Oval Office at the end of February, when I believe Vice President Vence ambushed President Zelenskyy and attempted to disrupt and derail that meeting. I think that incident has been smoothed over to some extent, but it is still not clear to me what Mr. Trump is actually looking for from Ukraine. I also do not understand what further steps Ukraine could take that might lead to a change in Mr. Trump’s approach to the Russia-Ukraine war – steps that Ukraine has not already taken.It seems to me that President Zelenskyy and other senior Ukrainian officials have repeatedly expressed their gratitude to the United States and to the West for the support that has been provided. Ukraine agreed to an arrangement involving the development of rare earth minerals in Ukraine, which could potentially benefit American investors.So I do not see what more Ukraine could realistically do. It seems that the real question is whether Mr. Trump comes to realize that he is being manipulated by Putin. That recognition may be what leads to a change in his position.My concern is that he has been played by Putin for more than four months now, and he either does not realize that he is being manipulated and that he appears weak in Moscow, or he is willing to accept it. That is what troubles me. I do not think Ukraine can fix this on its own.The task now lies with people in the United States – trying to find a way to persuade Mr. Trump that the path he is on is not only bad for Ukraine, but also ultimately bad for American interests, and bad for him personally. If he continues on this course, other world leaders will begin to view him as weak, and that perception could follow him into the future.A few days ago, we recorded an interview with David Ignatius, a legendary American journalist, and he advised us to seriously consider bad scenarios in case the optimistic and favorable ones do not materialize. How high is the probability of these negative scenarios for us? And if possible, what might they be?In the best case, I very much hope there will be a major change in Mr. Trump's approach and that the United States will continue to provide the kind of support to Ukraine that we saw from 2022 through 2024. I think that would be important for Ukraine, and I also believe it could influence the Kremlin's calculations about whether to continue this devastating war.There is also, in my view, very strong support in Europe. Quite frankly, three years ago, I might not have predicted that level of commitment. It seems to me that the Europeans are prepared to continue supporting Ukraine even if the United States ends its support. I think that is a very positive development.However, the one problem at this point in time is that Europe alone may not have the defense industrial capacity to supply everything Ukraine needs. So the bad scenario I foresee is that American support ends. I sincerely hope I am wrong about this because I believe continued US support for Ukraine is in America's security interest. It is not only in Ukraine's interest.But I fear that we may see the Trump administration choose not to request new funding for Ukraine. That would shift the burden almost entirely onto the Europeans. Perhaps the Trump administration would still be willing to sell certain types of weapons to Ukraine. I did notice that after the meeting in The Hague, Mr. Trump said he would consider providing more Patriot air defense missiles.Even though I would like to see continued American support, I think Ukraine needs to have a Plan B. Ukraine needs to prepare for how it will continue the fight if US support under Mr. Trump comes to an end.Let me say once again, I hope I am wrong in that prediction, but I fear that is the direction American policy is currently heading.