Key Points and Summary – In a stunning policy reversal, President Donald Trump reportedly asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy if they could conduct deep strikes into Russian territory, according to a Financial Times report on their July 4th phone call.
-Trump allegedly asked Zelenskyy if he could “hit Moscow” and “St. Petersburg too” if the U.S. provided the necessary long-range weapons.
-At the moment, there is no clear indication that such weapons are coming, but it looks like a trial balloon.
-Trump also stated later that he did not want to strike large Russian cities.
-The White House later clarified that Trump was “asking a question”.
-This aggressive new stance, which came a day after a “bad” call with Vladimir Putin, marks a dramatic pivot from Trump’s earlier efforts to pressure Ukraine into a peace deal and signals a new strategy of using significant military leverage to force Russia to the negotiating table.
America Is Now Making Russia Nervous on Ukraine
LONDON, UK – Quoting from anonymous sources, the City’s leading publication, the Financial Times, reported that on July 4, US President Donald Trump had asked Ukraine’s president if his military could hit Moscow. Trump was told “yes” – but only if the US provided the long-range strike weapons necessary.
In this telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump had inquired if Kyiv’s air and missile forces could attack not only Moscow but also Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hometown of St. Petersburg. The White House later stated he was “merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing”, the White House explained to the UK’s state-funded BBC in a statement.
“Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow?—Can you hit St Petersburg too?” It is reportedly exactly how the conversation with Zelensky transpired. As reported, the Ukrainian president reportedly replied in the affirmative, with his exact words having been: “Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons.”
This idea appears to have been a wartime equivalent of a “trial balloon.”
Only 11 days after this privately delivered encouragement to strike the Russian capital, the US administration stated on Tuesday that Washington was “not looking to do that”.
Trump put this question to Zelensky after he had experienced another “bad” call with Putin, again according to the Financial Times.
But after Monday’s meeting with Rutte, Trump explained his reversal on advocating for Ukraine to attack the Russian capital. When asked whether his motivations were part of his “switching sides” in the conflict, he explained: “I’m on nobody’s side. You know whose side I’m on? Humanity’s side.”
Are Longer-Range Weapons Coming Next?
When asked whether any long-range offensive missiles were under discussion as part of the packages to be sent to Ukraine, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said the scheme could include “all types” of weapons. His remarks were made during a meeting on Monday, July 14, with Trump in the Oval Office.
“It’s both defensive and offensive, so it’s all kinds of weapons. However, we did not discuss this in detail with the president yesterday. This is being worked through with the Pentagon, by the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, together with the Ukrainians,” he said.
The suggestion that long-range strike systems are being considered, some of which have never previously been supplied to Kyiv, has emerged after Trump expressed his increasing frustration with the Russian leader on multiple occasions.
Despite numerous entreaties by the US President, the former KGB lieutenant colonel has refused offers of a ceasefire and/or to sit down and negotiate with his Ukrainian counterpart.
The day of Trump’s Oval Office meeting with Rutte, he commented on Putin’s responsibility for the lack of progress in ending the hostilities. Trump told the BBC he was “disappointed” in Russian President Vladimir Putin. “But I’m not done with him,” he said.
New Air Attack Options Against Russia?
This dynamic has fueled speculation about what could be the next step in the escalation process, given the lack of any specificity about the “new” weaponry that would now be provided to Ukraine.
One of the systems mentioned that could be on Ukraine’s military list is the US-made AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), for which we have an original picture above to show its appearance. This long-range cruise missile is stealthy and much harder to detect or shoot down with an air defense battery.
The JASSM also has about 75 miles greater range than the other air-launched cruise missiles that have been provided to Ukraine to date. A combat aviation analyst who spoke with National Security Journal explained the advantages that a system like JASSM, with its more extended range, would give to Ukraine.
One is that JASSM would permit strikes on Russian air bases and other military sites from which Russia has been launching attacks into Ukrainian cities and killing civilians. Another is that with this weapon, Ukrainian pilots could launch at Russian targets while still in their airspace, which significantly reduces their risk of being shot down.
Putting more pressure on Putin with longer-range weaponry appeared to be what Trump had in mind when he spoke with Zelenskiy about the possibility of hitting Moscow or St. Petersburg. Trump had told Zelensky, Ukraine’s president, that he wanted Kyiv to “make them [the Russians] feel the pain” and in the process force Putin to the negotiating table.
Putin, meanwhile, vowed to keep fighting despite Trump’s threats of tougher sanctions on Moscow and sending these extra weapons for Ukraine, sources close to the Kremlin told Western media. Despite falling numbers and increasing negative indicators, the Russian president still believes his economy is strong enough to withstand the hardships of 100 per cent tariffs against Moscow’s main trading partners, which the US president had threatened to impose if Putin does not agree to a cessation of hostilities within 50 days.
About the Author: Reuben F. Johnson
Reuben F. Johnson has thirty-six years of experience analyzing and reporting on foreign weapons systems, defense technologies, and international arms export policy. Johnson is the Director of Research at the Casimir Pulaski Foundation. He is also a survivor of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. He worked for years in the American defense industry as a foreign technology analyst and later as a consultant for the U.S. Department of Defense, the Departments of the Navy and Air Force, and the governments of the United Kingdom and Australia. In 2022-2023, he won two awards in a row for his defense reporting. He holds a bachelor’s degree from DePauw University and a master’s degree from Miami University in Ohio, specializing in Soviet and Russian studies. He lives in Warsaw.
More Military
The U.S. Navy’s Submarine Crisis Is Real
Jim
July 20, 2025 at 7:13 pm
This reportage has come under intense scrutiny for the obvious implications. The U. S. supplying weapons for direct strikes on Moscow.
What would it say? What would it mean… a lot of people suggest we’d be a hair trigger away from a wider war… how wide… no one knows.
Trump has repudiated said reportage when questioned.
But it makes one wonder… is this war supporters pushing Trump or Trump getting caught up in the moment of the last conversation he had?
50 days… from July 14th, we’ll see what happens after September 2, 2025.
The Russians have refused to be pushed one way or the other, steadily advancing, but it sure would be nice if they made it a fait accompli by September 2, 2025.
If the hand writing is on the Wall that’s where the rubber meets the road.
What does Trump do?
What do the Russians do between now and September 2, 2025?
Do Trump’s threats mean anything anymore to the Russians?
Jim
July 20, 2025 at 10:34 pm
Trump said he wanted to stop the war… and he got elected in part on that pledge.
And the American People who voted for him believed him.
Now, it’s not looking so sure.
Trump needs to look at cutting a deal, not the one he wanted, but let’s not dive into a cold war and interminable confrontation bordering on all out war.
War supporters are still hoping for a Korea-style armistice. On the West side of the demarcation line whatever is left of Ukraine would become a de facto Nato member.
That was the issue that caused Russia to invade in 2022…. after many years of stating that was a red line.
It’s existential to Russia… Nato on their border is unacceptable to them or across from them in a Korean-style armistice… incorporated by de facto maneuvers.
Do you want to go to war over Ukraine being neutral, equal rights for Russian-speakers, and a constabulary military force… which they had from 1996 until 2014?
Minus territory annexation during the recent military operation.
Hard to swallow for Western eyes… after all the high hopes and assurances… and greedy expectations.
Trump is in a tough place, politically, no doubt. But his electorate put him there to make the tough decisions… and the tough stances and sell that to the American People… as a whole.
End the war without the permanent alienation of Russia the largest country in the World.
Regardless of those who want permanent embitterment and a forever war.
Just like Orwell’s 1984.
These people are wrong and at best misguided…