U.S. Vice Presidential candidate JD Vance sparked intense debate this week by describing Russian President Vladimir Putin as an “adversary” but refusing to label him an “enemy” in a recent NBC News interview. “Just because we don’t like somebody doesn’t mean we can’t occasionally engage in conversations with him,” Vance stated, underscoring his belief in diplomatic engagement to bring about peace in Ukraine. Vance added that ending the Ukraine war will require negotiations involving Kyiv, Moscow, and NATO allies.
Pressed on why he hesitated to classify Putin as an “enemy,” Vance argued, “We’re not in a war with him, and I don’t want to be in a war with Vladimir Putin’s Russia.” The stance has fueled concerns among critics who believe that softening language on Putin sends a concerning message about U.S. foreign policy under a potential Trump administration.
While Vance’s comments are consistent with his broader stance on diplomacy, opponents argue that his refusal to adopt a harder line against Putin undermines bipartisan support for Ukraine and signals a less confrontational approach to Russia’s actions. Democratic leaders criticized the statement as out of touch, warning that downplaying the Kremlin’s threats could alienate NATO allies and weaken the U.S.’s stance on Russian aggression.
The response to Vance’s comments highlights deep divisions in the U.S. on how to address the Russia-Ukraine conflict, with Vance and Trump favoring a focus on “America First” diplomacy over direct confrontation. As the election race heats up, Vance’s statements are set to remain a contentious talking point, leaving voters to consider what kind of stance America should adopt in the face of Russian hostility.
