‘Can you hit Moscow': Donald Trump's extraordinary question to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky revealed as US puts pressure on Putin to end war
The contents of a call between Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart were revealed by the UK's Financial Times on Tuesday, just one day after the US President ramped up pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the war.
"Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow? . . . Can you hit St Petersburg too?" the US president asked his Ukrainian counterpart in a conversation held on July 4.
Citing multiple sources, the outlet said the US President was asking about whether Ukraine could make Russia 'feel the pain' of the ongoing war.
'Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons,' Mr Zelensky reportedly said in response.
President Trump responded to the reports by saying Ukraine 'should not target Moscow', with the White House saying the US President was "merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing".
When asked whether he was now on Ukraine's side, the US President said he was 'on nobody's side'.
'You know the side I'm on? Humanities side,' Trump said.
'I want to stop the killing of thousands of people a week. I want to stop the killing. I want the killing to stop in the Ukraine-Russia war. That's the side I'm on.'
The contents of Trump's call with Zelensky were revealed one day after the US President announced his administration would provide Ukraine with a major haul of 'top of the line weapons' and issued an ultimatum to President Putin.
During a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, President Trump said he was 'very unhappy' with Putin and that if the Russian President failed to agree a deal to end the war within 50 days the US would impose a '100 per cent' tariffs on Russian goods and Russia's trade partners.
"We're going to be doing secondary tariffs if we don't have a deal in 50 days, it's very simple,' President Trump said.
The secondary sanctions would see India and China hit with massive tariffs unless they stopped buying Russian oil, a trade worth hundreds of billions.
Trump also said the US would allow NATO allies to transfer Patriot missile systems, which would boost Ukraine's air defence.
The US will then replenish the stocks in the countries that send them, with the cost being borne by the US's NATO allies.
"We're going to make top-of-the-line weapons, and they'll be sent to NATO," Trump said.
"We're going to have some come very soon, within days.
Rutte said Germany, Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Canada all wanted to be a part of rearming Ukraine.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Princess Diana campaigned to ban these deadly weapons. Some of Europe wants them back
The memory of Diana, however, is helping campaigners mount their case against the new plans out of fear the mines laid in the next few years will sit beneath the soil for decades, killing and wounding civilians. Loading The HALO Trust, the non-profit organisation that guided Diana through the minefield in Angola, where it was steadily clearing the weapons, said the visit by Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, also helped the campaign. 'The duke's support comes at a crucial time when the Ottawa Treaty is challenged by more conflicts raging across the globe than ever before,' the HALO Trust head of policy, James Denselow, told this masthead. The trust has removed 2 million landmines over 35 years and continues to work in countries such as Angola, Ukraine and Afghanistan. It destroyed 58,000 mines last year and cleared 7500 hectares. MAG International, set up by a British army engineer who saw mines killing civilians in Afghanistan, also rejects the new moves to lay minefields. 'Any military utility of anti-personnel mines is outweighed by their immediate and long-term impact on civilians,' said Josephine Dresner, the organisation's director of policy. Dresner rejected the idea that a minefield along the remote border between Finland and Russia might not pose the same threat, saying the danger remains even in sparsely populated areas. And she said the example set by Poland and the Baltic States would make it harder to restrain other countries, for example, Angola, from burying mines in future. 'If Angola were to decide in future to use anti-personnel mines to address a national security threat, no actor who has justified Finland's actions could legitimately criticise Angola's,' she said. Loading The president of Finland, Alexander Stubb, has defended his decisions in light of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 'When Russia attacked, our opinion, rules changed,' he told this masthead in a feature published earlier this month. At NATO headquarters in Brussels, the peak defence organisation is not taking sides. Norway, however, has criticised its neighbours and will not quit the treaty. 'If we start weakening our commitment, it makes it easier for warring factions around the world to use these weapons again because it reduces the stigma,' Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide told Reuters in April. The land border between Norway and Russia is about 200 kilometres long, while the border between Finland and Russia stretches for more than 1300 kilometres. Finnish policy is shaped in part by the Winter War that began in November 1939 when Russia invaded Finland. Diana's advocacy helped produce the Ottawa Treaty within a year of her visit to Angola, but it was controversial at the time. One British government minister said she was a 'loose cannon' and badly advised. Asked about this in Angola, she played down her actions. 'I'm only trying to highlight a problem that's going on all around the world, that's all,' she said. In fact, her words shaped a global debate on arms control. Now they echo decades later – even if some in Europe do not want to hear them.
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
Princess Diana campaigned to ban these deadly weapons. Some of Europe wants them back
The memory of Diana, however, is helping campaigners mount their case against the new plans out of fear the mines laid in the next few years will sit beneath the soil for decades, killing and wounding civilians. Loading The HALO Trust, the non-profit organisation that guided Diana through the minefield in Angola, where it was steadily clearing the weapons, said the visit by Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, also helped the campaign. 'The duke's support comes at a crucial time when the Ottawa Treaty is challenged by more conflicts raging across the globe than ever before,' the HALO Trust head of policy, James Denselow, told this masthead. The trust has removed 2 million landmines over 35 years and continues to work in countries such as Angola, Ukraine and Afghanistan. It destroyed 58,000 mines last year and cleared 7500 hectares. MAG International, set up by a British army engineer who saw mines killing civilians in Afghanistan, also rejects the new moves to lay minefields. 'Any military utility of anti-personnel mines is outweighed by their immediate and long-term impact on civilians,' said Josephine Dresner, the organisation's director of policy. Dresner rejected the idea that a minefield along the remote border between Finland and Russia might not pose the same threat, saying the danger remains even in sparsely populated areas. And she said the example set by Poland and the Baltic States would make it harder to restrain other countries, for example, Angola, from burying mines in future. 'If Angola were to decide in future to use anti-personnel mines to address a national security threat, no actor who has justified Finland's actions could legitimately criticise Angola's,' she said. Loading The president of Finland, Alexander Stubb, has defended his decisions in light of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 'When Russia attacked, our opinion, rules changed,' he told this masthead in a feature published earlier this month. At NATO headquarters in Brussels, the peak defence organisation is not taking sides. Norway, however, has criticised its neighbours and will not quit the treaty. 'If we start weakening our commitment, it makes it easier for warring factions around the world to use these weapons again because it reduces the stigma,' Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide told Reuters in April. The land border between Norway and Russia is about 200 kilometres long, while the border between Finland and Russia stretches for more than 1300 kilometres. Finnish policy is shaped in part by the Winter War that began in November 1939 when Russia invaded Finland. Diana's advocacy helped produce the Ottawa Treaty within a year of her visit to Angola, but it was controversial at the time. One British government minister said she was a 'loose cannon' and badly advised. Asked about this in Angola, she played down her actions. 'I'm only trying to highlight a problem that's going on all around the world, that's all,' she said. In fact, her words shaped a global debate on arms control. Now they echo decades later – even if some in Europe do not want to hear them.
Sky News AU
4 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Australia needs the United States for defence, but the US needs Australia too: Albanese government
The trip began with US defence official Elbridge Colby saying that a condition of the AUKUS pact should be that Australia agrees to join the US in any China Taiwan conflict. The Financial Times reported Mr Colby pressed both Australia and Japan to say what role they would play if the US and China went to war over Taiwan. The Albanese government has disregarded these kinds of statements, figuring Mr Colby has about as much status as Australia's Assistant Defence Minister Peter Khalil. Sources indicate that while Australia needs the United States for defence security, the US also needs Australia. However, shadow defence minister Angus Taylor told Sky News that the government should align with the US on its Taiwan position. 'We have a commitment, as does the United States to the status quo in and around Taiwan,' Mr Taylor said on Friday. 'That means peace in the Taiwan Strait. That means a secure Taiwan.' While critics accused the prime minister of engaging in soft diplomacy and indulging in nostalgia during his China visit, Mr Albanese has insisted the trip was a success. In a statement concluding his diplomatic visit, Mr Albanese said the trip "marks another important step in the Australia-China relationship". "A stable and constructive relationship with China is in Australia's national interest," he said on Friday. "We will cooperate where we can, disagree where we must and engage in our national interest." The prime minister said he had made Australia's position on regional security 'very clear' to the Chinese leadership. He raised concerns over Chinese military activity near Australia, particularly naval operations in international waters that coincided with Operation Talisman Sabre. However, he avoided clashing with Chinese President Xi Jinping over the Darwin Port, China's support for Russia or military drills near Australian waters. 'President Xi Jinping said that China engaged in exercises just as Australia engages in exercises,' Mr Albanese said. 'I said what I said at the time … but that we were concerned about the notice and the ways that it happened, including the live-fire exercises.' In response, President Xi reportedly defended China's actions, saying Beijing had the right to conduct its own military drills. The opposition has attacked Mr Albanese's trip to China, characterising it as bloated and lacking hard outcomes. Shadow finance minister James Paterson told Sky News the visit was 'starting to look a little bit indulgent'. 'I do wonder whether… a visit to Chengdu to pose with some pandas… is strictly necessary as part of a six-day visit to China,' he said. 'There is so much else at stake in our other international relationships.' Former Home Affairs Secretary Mike Pezzullo echoed the criticism, suggesting the prime minister should have tried to meet with the US instead. 'I wouldn't have done the six days with the pandas and all the rest of it,' Mr Pezzullo told Sky News on Satruday. 'I would have had a shorter, sharper visit. The engagement with the President is important… but the rest of it was optional.' He also said he would have encouraged the prime minister to have 'blunt' discussions behind closed doors about Taiwan, stressing that any conflict would drag Australia in and have devastating consequences.
