Donald Trump says US will send Patriot missiles to Ukraine
Steve Holland
and
Trevor Hunnicutt
, Reuters
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) and US President Donald Trump meeting on 27 September, 2024 in New York.
Photo:
AFP - Ukrainian Presidential Press Service
US President Donald Trump said he will send Patriot air defense missiles to Ukraine, saying they are necessary to defend the country because Russian President Vladimir Putin "talks nice but then he bombs everybody in the evening".
Trump did not give a number of Patriots he plans to send to Ukraine, but he said the United States would be reimbursed for their cost by the European Union.
The US president has grown increasingly disenchanted with Putin because the Russian leader has resisted Trump's attempts to negotiate a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has asked for more defensive capabilities to fend off a daily barrage of missile and drone attacks from Russia.
"We will send them Patriots, which they desperately need, because Putin really surprised a lot of people. He talks nice and then bombs everybody in the evening. But there's a little bit of a problem there. I don't like it," Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews outside of Washington.
"We basically are going to send them various pieces of very sophisticated military equipment. They are going to pay us 100% for that, and that's the way we want it," Trump said.
He plans to meet NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte to discuss Ukraine and other issues this week.
- Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
USPS apologises for mail routing errors causing delays to the CNMI
Photo: AFP The United States Postal Service (USPS) has acknowledged routing errors that caused chronic delays in mail delivery to the Northern Mariana Islands, and says it has begun corrective action. In a 5 June letter to acting postmaster-general Doug Tulino, CNMI delegate Kimberlyn King-Hinds cited repeated complaints from residents and businesses about waiting up to two months for packages and letters from the mainland. The delays, she said, were linked to mail being sent by sea instead of air - contrary to USPS policy - after processing at the San Francisco distribution centre. An internal review confirmed that priority mail and lightweight ground advantage parcels under 16 ounces had been wrongly placed in sea transport containers, compounding delivery delays. USPS said it has now instructed facilities to validate routing procedures so that these categories are sent by air to offshore destinations, including the CNMI, from 1 July. "We've been hearing from residents and businesses across the CNMI about unacceptable delays in receiving essential goods and communications," King-Hinds said. "I'm glad to report that USPS has not only acknowledged the problem but is taking corrective action." In a written apology, USPS said: "We understand the extent to which our customers, especially those in CNMI and other territories, rely on us for efficient and effective service. It is always our goal to meet their expectations, and it is disappointing to us when we fail to do so." About 60 percent of CNMI-bound mail is transported by air, while the rest - previously affected by the misrouting - will now receive additional oversight. King-Hinds said she will monitor USPS follow-through to ensure CNMI residents "are treated equitably and reliably". Tax lawyer Tina Avarzand said the delays raise broader legal concerns . She said most Internal Revenue Service notices arrive by first-class or certified mail with a 30-day response period from the date printed - not the date received. With Rota receiving mail only three days a week and Tinian twice a week, she said that the window becomes "impossible" to meet. "Either mail delivery must be expedited, or IRS response deadlines must be extended," Avarzand said, adding that the problem would not exist if the taxpayer lived in Hawaii, Alaska, or on the mainland.
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Donald Trump signs order to extend China tariff truce by 90 days: US media
US President Donald Trump has signed an order delaying higher tariffs on Chinese goods for 90 days. Photo / Jim Watson, AFP Listening to articles is free for open-access content—explore other articles or learn more about text-to-speech. US President Donald Trump has signed an order delaying higher tariffs on Chinese goods for 90 days. Photo / Jim Watson, AFP US President Donald Trump reportedly signed an order delaying the reimposition of higher tariffs on Chinese goods on Monday, hours before a trade truce between Washington and Beijing was due to expire. The halt on steeper tariffs will be in place for another 90 days, the Wall Street Journal and CNBC reported, citing Trump administration officials. The White House did not respond to queries on the matter. While the United States and China slapped escalating tariffs on each other's products this year, reaching prohibitive triple-digit levels and snarling trade, both countries in May agreed to temporarily lower them. But their 90-day halt of steeper levies was due to expire on Tuesday. Asked about the deadline earlier on Monday, Trump said: 'We'll see what happens. They've been dealing quite nicely. The relationship is very good with President Xi [Jinping] and myself.'
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Two reasons Trump calling in troops in DC is so extraordinary
By Aaron Blake , CNN Donald Trump at a press conference at the White House announcing the deployment of the National Guard in Washington DC and the federalization of the Metropolitan Police Department to combat crime in the city. To his left is US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Photo: NurPhoto via AFP Analysis - For years, it has seemed as if President Donald Trump really wanted to deploy the military on US soil and was just looking for the right opportunities to do it. It's escalating - and in a way that reinforces how extraordinary and fraught Trump's gambit is. He announced on Monday (local time) that he is placing the Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police Department under federal control and is deploying the National Guard to deal with crime in the city. The former is unprecedented, while the latter - deploying the guard - has a handful of precedents in DC and other cities. But as with Trump's first mobilization of the troops this year, two months ago amid protests in Los Angeles, he's stretching the bounds of presidential action for a situation that doesn't appear on par with past deployments. And this move is likely to add to fears - including among some former Trump administration officials - that the president is crossing a line on militarizing the homeland and politicizing troop deployments. Trump's stated rationale is that crime in DC is "out of control." He and his allies have seized on a brutal recent assault of a former staffer for the Department of Government Efficiency. As plenty have noted, though, DC violent crime is actually down in recent years. It spiked in 2023, but has been declining since then. The most recent data from the Metropolitan Police Department show violent crime is down 26 percent so far this year from 2024. The data also show violent crime this year has been lower than at any point in at least six years, the Washington Post reported. In other words, it's lower than at the tail end of Trump's first term. None of which means crime isn't a problem in DC or isn't high, relative to lots of other places. (In a Washington Post-Schar School poll this spring, crime, violence and guns were at the top of the list when DC residents were asked to name the biggest problem facing the district, although the share naming crime as a major problem was down significantly since 2022.) But things had already apparently been moving in the right direction without federal intervention, which makes Trump's decision appear more arbitrary. If this move is warranted today, why wasn't it late in his first term? From there, it's a question of whether the problem fits with the extraordinary remedy Trump is putting forward - and whether it represents a troubling precedent. People protest Donald Trump's federalization of DC police and deployment of National Guard troops, in Washington DC on 11 on August, 2025. Photo: NurPhoto via AFP Top officials in Trump's first term worried about his penchant for calling in the troops - something they have said they talked him out of - because of its overtones of getting the military involved in domestic politics and its potential to inflame situations. Some of these same officials have said Trump has fascist tendencies. The situations where Trump has called in the guard are unlikely to tamp down those fears. Presidents have done this before, but almost always to deal with large-scale disturbances like riots. A backgrounder issued by the National Guard in 2020 said state militia and the guard worked to quell race riots and labour strikes in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. But for 90 years between 1867 and 1957, no president federalized them. In the years that followed, a succession of presidents federalized the guard to deal with ugly scenes during the Civil Rights era. Then it was called in to deal with race riots in Detroit (1967) and after the Rev Martin Luther King Jr's assassination (1968). Before Trump called the Guard in to deal with racial justice protests in DC in 2020, the last example had been the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles in 1992. In other words, Trump is calling in the guard for a very different purpose even from the rare instances in which this has been done before. Trump's decision to call in the guard in Los Angeles two months ago would seem more in line with that history, but it too was unusual. The violence amid the president's controversial immigration raids didn't seem to be nearly as serious or widespread as Trump claimed or at all comparable to the Rodney King riots. And it was the first time in 60 years that a president had called in the troops without a request from a governor. (A trial this week is set to determine whether Trump exceeded his authority.) All of which reinforces how Trump is indeed breaking new ground. The second reason this is so fraught is that it doesn't really seem to be something Americans are asking for - and could be something they are quite sceptical of. Trump in June didn't just deploy the guard to deal with the Los Angeles protests; he also sent in Marines. Those Marines were only there to protect federal property, but it raised the prospect of an even more heavy-handed crackdown. Some polls showed a split verdict, but a Washington Post-Schar School poll showed Americans paying close attention to the Los Angeles situation opposed sending the guard and the Marines 54-37 percent. And weeks later, a Quinnipiac University poll showed voters disapproved of sending in the Guard 55-43 percent and disapproved of sending in the Marines 60-37 percent. (Independents disapproved of the latter more than 2-to-1.) Going back to 2020, CNN polling showed Americans said 60-36 percent that it would be inappropriate for a president to "deploy the US military in response to protests in the United States." So, Trump's proposition is a dicey one. And it's not just that the president has taken these extraordinary steps; he's repeatedly suggested they could be a part of a new ratcheted-up role for the military in policing the country. "I can inform the rest of the country that when they do it, if they do it, they're going to be met with equal or greater force than we met right here," he said amid the mobilization in Los Angeles, referring to protesters getting violent. On Monday, he left open the possibility of deploying active-duty troops in DC - ie not just the guard - although he said he didn't think that would be necessary. And he said he could take a similar approach to cities like Chicago and New York. "Then I'm going to look at New York, in a little while. Let's do this. Let's do this together. Let's see. It's going to go pretty quickly," Trump said. "And if we need to, we're going to do the same thing in Chicago, which is a disaster." Trump has threatened these things before. He's now following through in ways that seem designed to test our tolerance for a very different kind of country. - CNN
