Trump to Zelenskyy: Hit Russia Where It Hurts

In a significant shift in U.S. policy and rhetoric regarding the conflict in Ukraine, President Donald Trump privately urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to intensify strikes deep inside Russian territory.

According to a Financial Times report, two officials familiar with a July 4 conversation revealed that Trump asked Zelenskyy whether Ukraine could target Moscow if provided with long-range American weaponry.

This call came a day after Trump spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin, in what he described as a disappointing exchange that signaled Putin’s lack of willingness to end the war with Ukraine.

During the Independence Day call, Trump explicitly questioned Zelenskyy about Kyiv’s capability to hit key Russian cities, including Moscow and St. Petersburg.

Zelenskyy reportedly responded affirmatively, saying Ukraine could strike these targets if supplied with the appropriate weaponry.

Trump supported this approach, characterizing it as a method to “make them [the Russians] feel the pain” and pressure the Kremlin into negotiations.

Following the call, U.S. aides provided Ukraine with a list of long-range strike systems that could potentially be transferred via third-party channels.

Although the U.S. has been reportedly hesitant about providing Tomahawk cruise missiles, which are capable of precision strikes up to 1,600 kilometers away, according to multiple sources.

This development marks a dramatic reversal from Trump’s earlier stance during his presidency and post-presidency period.

At the time he had expressed reluctance to escalate U.S. involvement in the Ukrainian conflict and had shown a generally conciliatory tone towards Putin.

Previously, Trump had prioritized diplomatic engagement with Russia, pushing for ceasefire agreements which, while endorsed by Washington, failed as Russian forces frequently responded with heavy bombardments and indiscriminate missile strikes targeting Ukrainian cities.

His recent pivot towards enabling Ukraine to mount offensive operations deep within Russian territory reflects a shift in tactics aimed at altering the strategic balance on the ground.

Further signifying this change, Trump publicly announced plans to authorize the sale of billions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine.

These were reportedly routed through NATO allies including the United Kingdom, France, and Germany.

This multilateral approach appears designed to boost Ukraine’s defensive and offensive capacities while distributing political responsibility among NATO members.

Among the expected deliveries are advanced air defense systems such as the Patriot missiles to help Ukraine defend against relentless Russian airstrikes.

However, comprehensive details about the weapon packages remain unclear, and Pentagon officials continue to review the scope of military aid suitable for Kyiv.

The urgency with which Trump has intensified support for Ukraine seems linked to his strained conversations with Putin.

On July 3, Putin reportedly informed Trump of a forthcoming major Russian offensive aiming to capture additional Ukrainian territory.

He said it was particularly in Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson regions.

This news reportedly frustrated Trump, who criticized Putin for his aggressive plans and expressed his determination to assist Ukraine in repelling these offensives.

Subsequently, Trump indicated he was preparing a “big statement” on Russia and reinforcing his commitment to thwart Moscow’s expansionist ambitions.

Despite Trump’s more assertive posture, reactions from Moscow have been dismissive and hostile.

Russian officials and state media mocked Trump’s threats of severe economic sanctions and military aid transfers to Ukraine as “theatrical ultimatums” and attempts to continue the war rather than seek peace.

Kremlin spokespeople emphasized their preference for diplomatic solutions but condemned what they termed unacceptable ultimatums from Washington.

Moscow maintains that it is ready for peace talks but rejects external demands presented as coercive pressure.

This escalating dynamic between the United States, Ukraine, and Russia unfolds amid a protracted war that has devastated millions of lives.

The war has also reshaped European and global security architectures.

Trump’s renewed engagement, encouraging Kyiv to conduct deep strikes in Russia, reflects a willingness to escalate the conflict to force Moscow’s hand.

This approach risks broadening the war but could also pressure Putin into negotiations if the Russian leadership feels significant strategic pain.

In summary, Donald Trump’s private encouragement to Ukraine to strike Russian heartlands, combined with his effort to supply long-range weapon systems, marks a significant turning point in U.S. involvement in the Ukraine conflict.

It signals a shift from caution towards active support for more offensive Ukrainian operations intended to alter Russia’s strategic calculations and coerce the Kremlin into peace talks.

With Russia dismissing these moves as provocations, the situation remains volatile, underscoring the unpredictability of a conflict where diplomatic, military, and geopolitical factors intersect critically.

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook