This interview was recorded on July 26, 2024. Due to an unstable internet connection during the partial blackout in Ukraine, we present you with a video transcript.
Stanislav Kinka
I appreciate talking with you one more time. We had a conversation at the end of 2023, and now we have a lot of events to come. My first question to you, Mr. Ambassador John Bolton: what is the result for Ukraine after the summit in Washington?
John Bolton
I think that the outcome of the NATO summit was about as encouraging as might have been expected. I think that the continued display of NATO unity against Russia’s unprovoked aggression is important to tell the rest of the world that the alliance remains united.
The difficulty at the summit was the U.S. presidential election in November [2024]. And since the summit, President [Joe] Biden has withdrawn, Kamala Harris is about to become the Democratic nominee. Everything has been thrown up into the air. We have about 100 days to go until the election as we speak. And I think, at this point, the outcome is undecided. But [Donald] Trump and his running mate, J.D. Vance, have made it clear that they would seek a very different policy. We don’t know exactly what that will be because of Trump. You never know exactly what will be out of his mouth in the U.S. Congress and even within the Republican Party in the Senate and, to a lesser extent, in the House is strong. If Trump is elected, it will take a lot of work and a lot of famous phone conversations between Trump and Zelenskyy, and certainly, Trump hasn’t forgotten it. So, it is particularly important to see if Trump wins what he might be persuaded to do after the election is over.
Stanislav Kinka
Is it true that Trump could withdraw the United States of America from NATO? Will Trump’s election lead to a more isolationist policy in the USA? And do they not abolish all their duties before the European allies in the face of the threat from the Russian Federation?
John Bolton
And I think it’s important to face this head-on. A lot of people are saying he wouldn’t do it. It’s not that bad. He’s going to strengthen NATO. I tell you; I was in the room with him in Brussels at the 2018 NATO summit. I wrote about it at length in my book. He was very close to withdrawing from NATO then. And that was before the Russian invasion. He doesn’t understand collective defence alliances. He thinks basically that the United States is defending Europe, and they won’t pay for it. He doesn’t appreciate that in a strong functioning alliance like NATO, the United States benefits from our security being enhanced. Certainly, the security of European members is enhanced, but so is ours. And I think it’ll take a lot of work to try to convince him to stay in NATO and to stay the course in supporting Ukraine. His supporters are constantly offering ideas about what a Trump policy would look like. I don’t think you can take any of them seriously because I’m not sure Trump even reads them or cares what they say. This isolation is not part of a coherent approach. He does not policy in the same sense we understand that word to be in the press.
Stanislav Kinka
What is your forecast regarding the United States’ assistance to Ukraine after the election, whether it’s Trump or Democrats? Will they increase the number of weapons they send to Ukraine because now there are only a limited number of weapons, and Ukraine suffers on the front lines? If you want to be in a better position before any kind of negotiation, you must show your enemy that you are strong enough. What is your forecast for maybe six months or eight months?
John Bolton
America started sending more weapons to Ukraine because it had not developed a plan of assistance that was based on a strategy first. You debate whether we send this weapon system, and we debate it for three months, and then we say: “Yes”; then you debate do we send the next Western weapon system, and that takes three months, and then the answer is “Yes”. This has gone on for over two years, and it has also hurt the entire Alliance effort to assist Ukraine all even though we didn’t deter them from invading Ukraine in 2022, we’re the ones who are the liability of waging. So, by saying that the Biden administration policy will continue, I don’t think that’s totally good news for Ukraine. I think it means the same non-strategic policy that Biden has been pursuing. Under Trump, he said publicly he would get Zelenskyy and Putin in a room together, and they’d solve the problem in 24 hours. Now, of course, that’s ridiculous, and Trump probably knows that. But if he did get Zelenskyy and Putin in a room and couldn’t reach a deal, that would not be Donald Trump’s fault because it’s never Donald Trump’s fault. So, it would have been the fault of somebody else in the room. And I worry that Trump’s relationship with Putin would make it more likely than not that Trump would conclude it was Zelenskyy’s fault. And the result would be a deal favourable to the Russians.
Stanislav Kinka
What about JD Vance and his role in foreign policy? We are concerned because his statement on Ukraine was so weird. He said that Ukraine must stop thinking about returning all the lands, and so on.
John Bolton
His role in foreign policy or is just his meaning about Ukraine it’s only direction. But where Trump has impulses that make up his decisions, because Vance is much brighter, he can put an isolationist policy in a coherent context, which in my view, makes him more dangerous than Trump. I think it’s important to try and find ways to explain to Vance that the foundation of his view that Ukraine is not important is wrong. His argument is the US has limited capabilities. We can’t bother with Europe anymore. We can’t bother with the Middle East anymore. The main threat is China, and that’s where we have to put our resources. I think we’ve got more resources. We need to have the will to put them into play. And I think that the idea that China is a threat only in Asia is incorrect. The China-Russia axis makes it a threat around the world, especially in Europe, where China has aided Russia in many respects over the past two and a half years now. So, Vance’s theory is wrong, but I think he’s very malleable when it comes to policy. But what the rule that he follows is, I want to think about what Donald Trump might do, and that’s where he wants to be.
Stanislav Kinka
Of course, JD Vance has very limited experience in foreign relations. And maybe the last question: what is your point of view on the current Biden administration? What will he be able to do in the last three months in power as US President? Will he be able to force Putin to negotiate based on Ukraine’s Peace Formula?
John Bolton
Well, he has six months until his term expires on January 20th of next year. And I think there are a lot of things that he could do that do not require any further congressional action, decisions he could make, for example, on targets that are permissible to Ukraine using
American-supplied weapons, the same kind of decision to try and persuade the other NATO allies to loosen some of their restrictions, trying to provide more targeted intelligence and information that can help in targeting, making decisions, for example, that would allow Ukraine to destroy the Kerch Strait Bridge, which would be a terrible blow for the Russians, and other steps like that. Again, these are steps the president could take without congressional approval. And I think Ukraine and its supporters should be thinking of things that Biden could decide between now and January 20th [2025]. That is the most important thing, regardless of whether Harris or Trump wins, Biden should not leave office with things undecided that might help Ukraine make progress against the Russians.
Interviewer – Stanislav Kinka
