Kyiv, Moscow residents baffled by Trump's wavers on Ukraine aid
In Kyiv, the move to freeze shipments prompted fears for US-made air-defence systems, crucial for shielding Ukraine's cities from Russian daily drone and missile attacks.
On Tuesday, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky's senior advisor Mykhailo Podolyak said Trump's latest move "was expected, as it aligns with the core strategic interests of the United States".
But for Kyiv resident Valentyna Minakova, the US president's sudden change of mind was not a reason to rejoice.
"He says one thing today and another tomorrow," the 58-year-old told AFP, adding: "We can't count on him at all, absolutely not."
"But let's hope that he will give us something. At least what we need for air defence, to protect our civilian population," Minakova, unemployed, said.
The sentiment was shared by Vira Tykhonenko, a 50-year-old retail worker.
"I'll tell you one thing: I don't trust him. I didn't trust him during his first term, and now even less so," she said.
"Because everything he says doesn't match his actions," Tyhonenko told AFP.
Similar as for student Egor Kyryukhin, Trump's reversal on weapons shipments to Ukraine was too early to celebrate.
"I'd wait until he actually delivers them," the 20-year-old told AFP.
"Trump makes a lot of statements, different ones," Kyryukhin said.
'He's crazy'
In Moscow, many residents AFP spoke to also shrugged away Trump's latest statements on Ukraine.
"This person is mentally unstable, in my opinion," said Ekaterina, a 56-year-old Russian teacher who declined to give her full name.
Trump "makes impulsive decisions, and this harms the whole world and prolongs the situation, leads it to a dead end," she added, echoing earlier statements from the Kremlin.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, quoted by Russian state media, said it was "obvious of course that these actions probably do not align with attempts to promote a peaceful resolution."
For 23-year-old Mikhail, who works in marketing, Trump's decisions "delay the end" of the over three-year conflict.
"I think nothing will change. In general, he's crazy... That's why it neither disappointed me nor surprised me," he told AFP.
"I don't know at all when it will all end," Mikhail added.
© 2025 AFP
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
27 minutes ago
- France 24
‘Today it's paper, tomorrow it's nothing': the perils of security guarantees for Ukraine
Ukraine and its Western allies have said the specifics of a post-war security agreement are expected to be finalised in the next few days. Such security guarantees have long been considered key to maintaining a post-war peace in Ukraine. The UK and France gathered a mostly European 'coalition of the willing' in March as a potential peacekeeping force, but many worried it would lack effectiveness without robust US support. In an apparent breakthrough following Monday's gathering of European and NATO leaders at the White House, US President Donald Trump suggested potential security guarantees for Ukraine as part of a future peace deal with Russia. 'When it comes to security, there's going to be a lot of help,' he said alongside Zelensky in the Oval Office, while noting that European countries would take the lead. 'They are a first line of defence because they're there. But we'll help them out.' In a subsequent interview with Fox News, Trump said US help would probably take the form of air support. Following a much-anticipated meeting between Trump and US President Vladimir Putin last Friday in Alaska, Trump's Russia envoy Steve Witkoff said the US might consider offering Ukraine ' Article-5-like protection ', a reference to NATO's principle of collective defence, in which an attack on one is considered an attack on all. Witkoff added that Russia had agreed to the proposal, calling it 'game-changing'. Zelensky said on Tuesday that 'we are already working on the concrete content of the security guarantees', a process he said will continue at full speed in the upcoming weeks. Mykhailo Samus, a defence and politics analyst from Kyiv, spoke to FRANCE 24 about the security guarantees Ukraine might receive following a peace agreement ending the war with Russia. But with the failure of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum still vivid in the minds of many Ukrainians, he also advocates building a strong Ukrainian army that is fully integrated in the European defence system. FRANCE 24: What will 'security guarantees' for Ukraine most likely mean in practice? We (Ukraine) have a long history of security guarantees, which started with the Budapest Memorandum in 1994 (a non-aggression pact cosigned by the US, the UK and Russia in return for Ukraine surrendering the nuclear weapons it inherited from the USSR). We don't believe in paper guarantees. We need a strong Ukrainian defence industry which is totally integrated into the European defence structure. That's why we should base Ukrainian security on deterrence, like deterrence against aggression against the Baltic states or an invasion of Moldova. A joint approach means a European security system including Ukraine. Some might think this could mean French boots on the ground. Of course we don't need it, because we have one of the strongest armies in the world. Instead, we need help integrating Ukrainian forces in the European defence system. This means providing Ukraine with long-range capacities: ballistic missiles, cruise missiles. European forces should provide us with the equipment with the joint understanding that we are using the equipment to protect us and them. FRANCE 24: Why is the prospect of European boots on the ground unlikely to ensure peace in Ukraine? It shouldn't be forgotten that Russia is imperialistic; it only cares about Ukraine as an extension of its empire. It sounds impossible in the 21st century, but Putin lives in this paradigm. If they want to live in an empire, then we should be strong enough to [stand up to] the empire. Sending several thousand troops to Ukrainian territory is not the solution. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni had an interesting idea during the talks at the White House to provide security guarantees modelled on NATO's Article 5 (the principle of collective defence, in which an attack on one is considered an attack on all). Yet this will be impossible to implement. The next Russian aggression towards Ukraine will get the same reaction – or non-reaction – from Western allies. We had a bad experience with the Budapest Memorandum. The United Kingdom signed it, and the United States signed it. These countries guaranteed the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine. But when Russia attacked Crimea, nothing happened. FRANCE 24: Why do you advocate for a defence-industry approach to supporting Kyiv? Joint capacities are easier to formulate and build upon. I think for now we can talk about a defence-industry approach with elements that will support Ukraine: monitoring, intelligence, the training of Ukrainian armed forces, support with ammunition and elements to keep Russia out of the front line. If the US doesn't want to sell us certain technologies, we should be able to develop them ourselves. European defence security policy is mostly Europe focusing on defence. The Ukrainian approach is the same as Europe's, yet we need to create modern, breakthrough technologies like long-range ballistic missiles. No country in Europe is building these and we need them. We also need joint capacities in missile defence – missile defence should be joint because it's impossible for one country to build them on its own. There needs to be a multi-layer European defence system. In Ukraine, we have attacks by [Iranian-made] Shahed drones every night. We need to build a common system. It would be a disaster if a Shahed drone hit Estonia, for example, and the same should apply to Ukraine. We have several layers [of defence] in Ukraine: drone interception, helicopters, fighter jets – all of these layers function together. Since Russia is a nuclear power, we should have a joint European nuclear doctrine. France and the United Kingdom have nuclear capacities; how to share these resources is something to be considered. When Putin talks about 'demilitarisation', it's so that he can take advantage. With a strong army in Ukraine, Putin won't be able to attack again. Without this – even with all the guarantees and all the paper in the world – Ukraine won't be safe. FRANCE 24: What would the US role be in a Ukrainian security guarantee? Europe doesn't have ballistic missiles and it depends on the US – this is a big problem. Europe depends on the F-16 fighter jets. We shouldn't depend on the moods of US President Donald Trump; he might say, 'You can have F-16s today' and tomorrow he could change his mind. The US is an important provider but not the main provider. That's why there should be a joint approach [involving] both the armed forces and the defence industry. When we are talking about security guarantees, and especially boots on the ground, Trump doesn't want to participate in this – so NATO can't participate. Trump is trying to divide us. There is an ocean between the US and Russia, while between Europe and Russia there is nothing. If we imagine that Russian President Vladimir Putin and Zelensky sign a peace agreement, the next step is how to [enforce] it. There will be complex mechanisms at work. For example, Putin will likely propose China as a peacekeeper, while rejecting any NATO forces on the ground in Ukraine. There are going to be many additional discussions. FRANCE 24: Ukraine obviously feels betrayed after the Budapest Memorandum failed to ensure its security. What other precedents are there for Russia breaking agreements? All the time. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, there was the 1997 Russian-Ukrainian Friendship Treaty. There were security guarantees of Russia respecting borders and the sovereignty of Ukraine. We had a lot of agreements involving the Black Sea. Everything was destroyed by Russia. When someone says we should sign a treaty with Russia, we say, 'Guys, go home.' Today it's paper; tomorrow it's nothing.
France 24
27 minutes ago
- France 24
US hits ICC with more sanctions, targets French judge involved in Netanyahu arrest warrant
The United States on Wednesday imposed sanctions on four more International Criminal Court judges or prosecutors, including from allies France and Canada, in a new effort to hobble the tribunal particularly over actions against Israel. 'The Court is a national security threat that has been an instrument for lawfare against the United States and our close ally Israel,' Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement, using a term popular with President Donald Trump 's supporters. Rubio said that the four people targeted from the tribunal based in The Hague had sought to investigate or prosecute nationals from the United States or Israel 'without the consent of either nation". The four include Judge Nicolas Guillou of France, who is presiding over a case in which an arrest warrant was issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The case was brought forward by the State of Palestine, which is not recognised by Washington but, unlike Israel or the United States, has acceded to the statute that set up the tribunal in The Hague. Guillou, a veteran jurist, had worked for several years in the United States assisting the Justice Department with judicial cooperation during Barack Obama's presidency. Also targeted in the latest US sanctions was a Canadian judge, Kimberly Prost, who was involved in a case that authorized an investigation into alleged crimes committed during the war in Afghanistan, including by US forces. Under the sanctions, the United States will bar entry of the ICC judges to the United States and block any property they have in the world's largest economy – measures more often taken against US adversaries than individuals from close allies. US hits ICC judges with sanctions over investigation into Israel 01:52 Rubio also slapped sanctions on two deputy prosecutors – Nazhat Shameem Khan of Fiji and Mame Mandiaye Niang of Senegal. The State Department said the two were punished by the United States for supporting 'illegitimate ICC actions against Israel", including by supporting the arrest warrants against Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant. The Trump administration has roundly rejected the authority of the court, which is backed by almost all European democracies and was set up as a court of last resort when national systems do not allow for justice. Trump on Friday welcomed Russian President Vladimir Putin to Alaska even though Putin faces an ICC arrest warrant, a factor that has stopped him from traveling more widely since he ordered the invasion of Ukraine. Rubio slapped sanctions on four other ICC judges in June.
France 24
an hour ago
- France 24
Trump raises pressure on central bank, calls for Fed governor to resign
"Cook must resign, now!!!" Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, while sharing a Bloomberg news report on how the Federal Housing Finance Agency's director has called for greater scrutiny of Cook over a pair of mortgages. FHFA director Bill Pulte -- a staunch ally of Trump -- had reportedly written a letter to the US attorney general calling for an investigation of Cook while suggesting that she might have committed a criminal offense. The Trump administration has pursued allegations of mortgage fraud against high-profile Democrats who are seen as political adversaries of the president. It was not immediately clear if such a probe will take place targeting Cook, the first Black woman to serve on the central bank's board. The president is also limited in his ability to remove officials from the central bank. A Supreme Court order recently suggested that Fed officials cannot be taken out of their jobs over policy disagreements, meaning they have to be removed for "cause," which could be interpreted to mean wrongdoing. 'A disaster' The US leader's targeting of Cook, who sits on the Fed's rate-setting committee, comes after his repeated broadsides against Powell while the central bank kept the benchmark lending rate unchanged this year. On Tuesday night, Trump again called for a "major rate cut," saying there was "no inflation" and claiming that the Fed's policymaking was harming the housing industry due to elevated mortgage rates. He called Powell "a disaster" in a social media post. Although the US consumer price index, a key inflation gauge, was steady at 2.7 percent in July, it remains higher than it was a few months earlier. Fed officials have been trying to ensure inflation is kept in check -- despite the effects of Trump's sweeping tariffs -- while balancing risks to the labor market as they mull the right time for further rate cuts. Cook took office as a Fed governor in May 2022 and was reappointed to the board in September 2023. She was sworn in later that same month for a term ending in 2038. She has previously served on the Council of Economic Advisers under former president Barack Obama. Earlier this year, Trump suggested that what he called an overly costly renovation of the Fed's headquarters could be a reason to oust Powell, before backing off the threat. Powell's term as Fed chair ends in May 2026.
