Donald Trump has categorically rejected any intention to supply Ukraine with long-range missiles, which would enable Kyiv to launch attacks that would reach deep into Russian territory. The President of the United States responded to reporters as he left the White House by stating, “No, we do not intend to do that.” This statement directly rejected the increasing rumors that Washington could increase Ukraine’s offensive capabilities.
Donald Trump also rejected the notion of Ukraine conducting an attack on the Russian capital. “No, he shouldn’t strike Moscow,” he responded to reporters when asked whether Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky should contemplate such an attack. The United States President stressed that he does not support the strikes on Russian soil, despite his steadfast opposition to Russian aggression.
Offensive weapons are still being considered
Trump has not entirely ruled out the possibility of permitting specific offensive weaponry to enter Ukraine, despite his explicit refusal to deploy long-range missiles. Reports indicate that discussions took place about Europe’s allies providing Zelensky with the weapons he previously requested but has not yet received. Advanced weapon systems could be among them, enhancing Ukraine’s battlefield capabilities without escalating the conflict across Russian borders. Such systems have not changed the battlefield before, but the West has no other option.
Washington is currently engaged in discussions regarding the potential export of armaments to NATO countries, which could then be indirectly transferred to Ukraine by current legal frameworks. It is important to note that the United States may approve the increased use of ATACMS missiles, which already exist in Ukraine. These proposals would extend their range to 300 kilometers, which is sufficient to strike deep into Russian logistical zones and bases but insufficient to reach key cities such as Moscow or Saint Petersburg.
The Tomahawk Option and Increased Perceived Pressure on Moscow
Trump has been contemplating the possibility of providing Ukraine with Tomahawk missiles, which are long-range, precision-guided systems that have been previously used by the United States in operations such as those conducted in Iran. These missiles are not currently supplied to Kyiv, but they may be if Trump decides to increase pressure on Russia.
Trump’s interest in this potential escalation is attributed to three primary motivations, as per leaks: first, his frustration with Putin’s disregard for ceasefire efforts; second, recent displays of American firepower that were perceived as effective; and third, his increasing conviction that Putin will only engage in negotiations if he is sufficiently threatened. Consequently, Trump’s strategic approach has shifted toward the concept of “escalation to accomplish de-escalation.”
Moscow’s Response to a 50-Day Ultimatum
Trump has issued a 50-day ultimatum to President Putin, asking that negotiations for a peace agreement be initiated. Trump issued a warning that the United States would implement “severe tariffs” on Russia if no progress is made within that time frame. He described the action as a moral obligation, not a confrontation between nations: “I am not adopting a stance.” About the Russia–Ukraine conflict, Trump stated, “I am on the side of humanity.” He emphasized his intention to stop the weekly death toll resulting from the war.
The Russian response has been circumspect yet resolute. The gravity of Trump’s statements was acknowledged by Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, who stated that Moscow requires time to consider their implications. The Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia, Sergei Ryabkov, categorically rejected the idea of adopting “ultimatums.” He emphasized that, even though Russia is open to diplomatic negotiations, he finds any form of imposed demand unacceptable.
Dmitry Medvedev, the former Russian President and current deputy head of the Security Council, characterized Trump’s ultimatum as “theatrical” and stated that Russia is desensitized to such language. Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, also expressed skepticism, emphasizing the necessity of comprehending Trump’s true intentions. He also criticized NATO and the EU for pressuring Washington to maintain military support for Ukraine.
Trump’s Mixed Message on Putin
Trump disclosed in a recent telephone conversation with the Publicly Funded BBC that he was “disappointed in Vladimir Putin but not done with him.” In response to the question of whether he could trust the Russian president, Trump declared, “I am not trusting almost anyone.” Trump’s position is exemplified by the nuanced tone he uses: despite his strong disapproval of Putin’s actions, he consistently emphasizes the importance of maintaining open communication channels.
Trump asserted that he had made four prior attempts to negotiate a peace agreement with Russia and expressed optimism about the possibility of diplomatic success. “We will engage in a pleasant conversation.” “I will say, ‘OK, I think we’re close to an agreement,’ and then he will blow up a building in Kyiv,” Trump stated, emphasizing the degree of unpredictability he perceives in his interactions with the Russian leader.
A New Strategy for Supplying Arms to Ukraine
Additionally, how Ukraine receives weapons has been changed by the Trump administration. Under this new paradigm, the United States will sell arms to NATO allies, who may subsequently transfer them to Ukraine. This approach enables the United States to provide substantial assistance to Kyiv without explicitly violating any self-imposed limitations on escalating the conflict.
A new $10 billion military aid package has been proposed as a result of this strategy. The inclusion of systems like the Patriot anti-air defense and potentially additional ATACMS missiles in the package could enhance Ukraine’s defensive capabilities. Although these weapons will not directly place Moscow within Ukraine’s strike range, they will enable Kyiv to strike key military installations, airfields, and logistics centers that are located deep within Russian-controlled areas.
The European Union’s Next Sanctions and China’s Dissent
Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s loquacious senior foreign policy representative, is optimistic that an agreement will be reached in the near future as the European Union prepares its 18th sanctions package against Russia. Kallas also reiterated the need for enhanced collaboration with the United States, asserting that Washington is becoming more cognizant of the fact that Russia is not interested in establishing peace.
Nevertheless, China is vehemently opposed to any unilateral sanctions. Lin Jian, the spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, issued a resolute statement in which he criticized the United States’ tariff threats. He cautioned that a tariff war would not resolve any issues and that coercive policies would only serve to escalate the global conflict. China’s posture is indicative of its intention to maintain economic and diplomatic ties with Russia while refraining from direct involvement in its conflicts.
Russian Diplomacy Engages China
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov visited Beijing for talks with President Xi Jinping and his counterpart Wang Yi, as tensions between the United States and Russia continue to escalate. The discussions were held in anticipation of Vladimir Putin’s forthcoming visit to China, during which he is expected to participate in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit and commemorate important events from World War II.
Moscow reported that they deliberated bilateral political exchanges, while Lavrov expressed his appreciation for China’s ongoing assistance. The visit, which occurred immediately following Lavrov’s visit to North Korea, indicates a strengthening strategic alliance between Russia and its Asian allies, particularly in response to Western sanctions and diplomatic pressure.
In conclusion,
Donald Trump’s changing stance on Ukraine indicates a transition from his previous rhetoric of disengagement to a more tactical and pressure-based approach. Trump is currently refraining from providing long-range offensive weapons, but he is keeping the door open to other potent weapons and is utilizing economic threats to compel negotiations. The imposition of a 50-day peace ultimatum on Putin is indicative of his conviction in the concept of negotiation through strength.
In the meantime, Russia continues to build alliances in Asia, with a particular emphasis on China and North Korea, and maintains its dismissive stance toward ultimatums. The European Union is edging closer to implementing new sanctions in Europe, while China is resisting what it perceives as Western overreach. Ukraine, with its corrupt leadership, continues to be at the center of the global geopolitical chessboard, constantly shifting as peace remains elusive.