Former CIA Director William Burns is one of the most decorated diplomats of his generation. During his 33 years in the US Foreign Service, he served as US ambassador to Jordan and Russia. Under President Barack Obama, he served as deputy secretary of state and led top-secret negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program.
After retiring from the State Department in 2014, he took over the leadership of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace before being tapped by Joe Biden to head the Central Intelligence Agency. Burns told the British newspaper Financial Times that the call was “unexpected.”
When asked what it was like to transition to the CIA after decades at the State Department, Burns recalled: "A friend of mine, a former senior CIA official, once described the mood within the agency as it awaited a new director as something like the Scottish tribes awaiting the arrival of the English king."
Burns was the first career diplomat to head the CIA. Biden wanted to use his experience, so he sent him to deal with some of the most complex challenges of his presidency. By his own estimate, he traveled more than a million miles during his service with the agency. He sat with some of the most infamous figures of the 20th and 21st centuries. When asked who he remembers most, he replied without hesitation:
“Gaddafi was by far the strangest.” He recalled the late Libyan dictator’s habit of pausing in the middle of a conversation and staring at the ceiling for several minutes, collecting his thoughts. “He was a really strange guy.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin was his most difficult interlocutor. "He's incredibly stubborn," Berns said.
In the fall of 2021, as US intelligence agencies gathered information about the Kremlin's plans for a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, it was Burns who was sent to Moscow to deliver a direct message to the Russian leader that the US knew what he was up to.
Putin had retreated to his residence in Sochi, on the Black Sea coast, amid the COVID-19 pandemic. They spoke on the phone for about an hour.
“He didn’t apologize at all,” Burns says. “He didn’t even try to deny it.”
The CIA director returned to Washington convinced that Putin would indeed go to war.
That winter, American officials initiated an extremely rare and extensive process of declassifying intelligence on Russian intentions, in an attempt to warn the world but also to prevent Putin from subsequently constructing a false narrative to justify the war.
Not everyone was convinced, though. Until the very beginning of the invasion, some of the US's European allies remained skeptical that Putin was really preparing for an all-out attack. Even Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky needed convincing.
The FT writes that the CIA was the only US government agency to remain on the ground throughout the Russian invasion, playing a quiet but crucial role in helping Ukraine. During the war, Burns traveled to Ukraine 14 times, taking the long train journey from the Polish border to Kiev. Over time, he says, he came to appreciate and admire Zelensky.
American warnings about Putin's plans turned out to be strikingly accurate. However, their expectations that Russian forces would quickly overrun Ukraine were wrong. Why were Washington so wrong in its assessment of how the war would unfold?
“We expected it to be much more effective,” Burns says of Putin’s army.
“Any Western army would immediately go and destroy the enemy's air defenses and command structures. The Russians didn't do that. Partly because they were so arrogant, they didn't think it was necessary.” When talking about the Russian president, Burns often returns to that very word: arrogance.
On the eve of the war, only a very narrow circle of Putin's advisers had access to the invasion plans. American assessments of how the war might unfold did not sufficiently acknowledge how the secrecy of these plans could distort their execution.
“We underestimated what happens when the circle is so narrow that the usual review of the war plan or the operations plan is no longer carried out,” says Burns.
Dissatisfaction with the war, which has cost Russia an estimated 1,1 million lives and inflicted serious economic damage, has also created an opportunity for the CIA. “We were very lucky in recruiting a large number of Russians who had become disillusioned with the war after it began,” said a former agency chief.
The phrase "interesting times" was often heard in Washington during 2025, and Burns was a direct witness to numerous key moments in modern history.
"This is an era where we are no longer the only major player on the geopolitical scene. I would argue that we still hold the best cards in our hands compared to any of our rivals. The question is how we play them," Burns said.
One of the most important “cards” in that hand, Burns says, is America’s network of allies and partners around the world — something Trump has repeatedly shown he doesn’t particularly value. “It’s that network that sets us apart from relatively more isolated powers like China and Russia, even as their partnerships become increasingly serious,” he added.
The CIA had great luck recruiting a large number of Russians who had become disillusioned with the war after it began.
Russian revanchism and the rise of China have marked the end of thirty years of American dominance as the unquestioned global power, while at the same time a race is underway for supremacy in new technologies that are shaping the future, the FT points out.
"The technological revolution is truly something that cannot be compared to anything that human society has experienced so far - since the beginning of the industrial revolution two centuries ago," said Burns.
As head of the CIA, he has been a strong advocate for mastering new technologies. Analysts must learn to use large language models (LLMs) to deal with the vast amounts of data being produced continuously today, he said, while field operatives must know how to navigate so-called “smart cities,” where cameras with facial recognition technology have become commonplace.
Regarding the US attack on Venezuela on January 3rd, which captured its President Nicolas Maduro, Burns says that the citizens of Venezuela would be better off with different leadership, but he warned:
“Our record when it comes to regime change is not exactly spotless.”
He recalled the so-called "Pottery Barn rule", which was mentioned by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell on the eve of the Iraq war: "If you break something, you're responsible."
“Things can easily get out of hand, so you have to constantly question your own assumptions,” Burns adds.
He clearly distinguishes the tactical execution of the operation, which he describes as "extraordinary", from the broader strategic picture, towards which he is considerably more cautious.
“We are now responsible for an outcome that is risky and uncertain, both for Venezuela and for the entire region,” he told the FT.
“This action is fueling a dangerous geopolitical shift, where justice is determined by force, and the world is run by big guys sitting around a small table, making deals and dividing up spheres of influence,” he added. “This, in my view, directly benefits our rivals in Moscow and Beijing, and further undermines the trust of our allies and partners.”
The FT recalls that since returning to the White House, Trump has been aggressively campaigning to shrink the federal administration and bring it under control, convinced that his agenda in his first term was hampered by a "deep state" of career civil servants. By the end of the year, an estimated 300.000 civil servants had left their jobs or were unemployed.
“Serious reform is needed, that’s for sure,” says Burns. “But I don’t think this was real reform. This was, at most, a way to intimidate people and create an atmosphere where everyone is constantly looking over their shoulder.”
"Imitating autocrats, in my opinion, is not a recipe for success," he said.
The final weeks of 2025 brought a flurry of diplomatic activity, as American, Ukrainian, and European officials tried to shape a peace agreement even though Putin appeared not yet ready to budge.
“I don’t think Putin is serious about negotiations today, because he’s too confident that time is working in his favor,” says Berns.
He adds that the way the war ends will likely have consequences that go far beyond the borders of Ukraine, as the world enters a new, still undefined period.
Beijing has been closely watching how Moscow is handling the war, said Burns, who traveled to China during the first year of the invasion.
“The only topic the Chinese weren’t even slightly polemical about was the war in Ukraine. They listened carefully. They knew they had misjudged before the war started. They thought the Russians would just run over the Ukrainians,” he said, adding: “I honestly think that contributed to Xi Jinping’s doubts when it came to issues like Taiwan.”
Trump has pushed the boundaries of what is acceptable in American foreign policy. His approach, which often breaks norms and relies on trade pragmatism, has sometimes shown that there is more room for maneuver in that policy than previously thought, the FT reports.
Burns responded that there is an important lesson in Trump's willingness to talk to his enemies: "You have to talk to even the most obnoxious opponents... so they understand where you're coming from, and vice versa. That doesn't mean you have to trust them or give in to them."
The most difficult chapter at the helm of the CIA
Burns was directly involved in the Biden administration's efforts to broker an end to Israel's war in Gaza and secure the release of hundreds of hostages held by Hamas, which he says was the most challenging chapter of his tenure.
In October, Israel and Hamas reached a US-brokered ceasefire agreement that included the release of the remaining hostages. Burns believes Trump was able to reach the deal because he was willing to be very direct.
He notes that Trump used the failed Israeli attack on Hamas leaders in Qatar to put pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The second key factor, in his view, was timing. Hamas had already been seriously weakened by Israeli military operations, but so had its other main enemies in the region - Iran and Hezbollah.
Burns believes that there were times when he thought Biden should have been tougher on Netanyahu, for example when Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar was assassinated in early October 2024, when, objectively, everything was ripe for a deal.
Although the past year has been tumultuous for both the world and the United States, Burns is moderately optimistic about the country's long-term future. He recalled the thought of 19th-century French historian Alexis de Tocqueville that America's greatness lies not in its enlightenment, but in its ability to correct its mistakes.
"Although our political situation is such that we sometimes doubt this ability, I believe we have not lost it," Berns concluded.
Bonus video:
