Ukraine-Russia war latest: Trump says not to ‘target Moscow' after asking about ‘hitting' Russian capital
"No, he shouldn't target Moscow," Mr Trump told reporters yesterday on the South Lawn of the White House when asked if Mr Zelensky should attack the Russian capital.
In a recent phone call, Mr Trump asked his Ukrainian counterpart why he had not struck Moscow to ramp up the pressure on the Kremlin. 'We can, if you give us the weapons," Mr Zelensky responded, a source told the The Washington Post.
The US president has privately encouraged Kyiv to step up strikes deep in Russian territory, the Financial Times reported.
He is considering sending Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, one of the weapons used by the US in its dramatic strikes on Iran last month, according to the Post.
It comes after the US president said he is 'disappointed but not done' with Russian president Vladimir Putin after threatening 100 per cent secondary tariffs on Moscow if it fails to agree a peace deal within 50 days.
Trump tells Zelensky to 'not target Moscow' after asking about strikes on Kremlin
Donald Trump has clarified that he does not want Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to target Moscow, and repeated that Russian president Vladimir Putin should agree to a ceasefire deal by a 50-day deadline or sanctions will kick in.
His comments came after The Financial Times, citing people briefed on discussions, reported on Tuesday that Trump had privately encouraged Ukraine to step up deep strikes on Russia.
The newspaper said that Mr Trump asked Mr Zelensky whether he could strike Moscow if the US provided long-range weapons.
"No, he shouldn't target Moscow," Mr Trump told reporters on the South Lawn of the White House when asked if Mr Zelensky should attack the Russian capital.
Mr Trump on Monday announced a toughened stance against Russia for its three-year-old war in Ukraine, promising a fresh wave of missiles and other weaponry for Ukraine. He gave Moscow 50 days to reach a ceasefire or face sanctions.
Arpan Rai16 July 2025 04:43
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
23 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Report: Trump escalates EU tariffs deal demands
President Donald Trump is escalating demands that a deal with the European Union on tariffs be reached. The president is reportedly making plans to slap the EU with tariffs of between 15 and 20 percent, as the two sides spar in talks that have caused market anxiety on both sides of the Atlantic. The latest development comes in a report by the Financial Times , which writes that 'hardened stance' would be a minimum tariff that will test the EU trading bloc's tolerance for pain. Trump on Saturday announced a 30 percent tariff to be slapped on imports from the EU and Mexico, in the latest tariff 'letter' announcement after securing only a handful of deals. In that note, Trump once again described a trade deficit – where the U.S. exports more than it imports from a country – as a snub. 'We have had years to discuss our Trading Relationship with The European Union, and we have concluded we must move away from these long-term, large, and persistent, Trade Deficits, engendered by your Tariff, and Non-Tariff, Policies, and Trade Barriers,' Trump wrote. 'Our relationship has been, unfortunately, far from Reciprocal.' That was a reference to the 'reciprocal' tariffs Trump first announced on 'Liberation Day' April 2, only to hit 'pause' after a market meltdown. The FT reports that Trump has been 'unmoved' by the EU's efforts to reduce auto tariffs of 25 percent, and is happy to keep the tariffs where they are as planned, citing people familiar with talks. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has stated the bloc's commitment to dialogue while adding, 'At the same time, we will take all necessary steps to safeguard EU interests, including the adoption of proportionate countermeasures if required," von der Leyen said in a statement.' Italian winemakers have warned that a 30 percent tariff is akin to a 'virtually an embargo' on the product. At the start of the trade war, one family importer told the Daily Mail they were facing a $1 million tax hit. German auto industry association BDI called the escalatory move 'incomprehensible,' and told NBC that 'the costs for our companies have already reached the billions—and with each passing day, the total continues to grow.' Americans could face shortages of wine, cheese, and pasta, a European agriculture association warned. French President Emmanuel Macron has also warned of preparing 'credible countermeasures.' The EU has been seeking to resolve the issue through talks – while preparing countermeasures that are getting the attention of U.S. exporters. American whiskey could also take a hit. The Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S. said in a statement this week that the EU suspension of a retaliatory tariff of 25 percent 'on American Whiskey over the last three years has allowed U.S. distillers to begin rebuilding their presence in our largest export market.' 'The EU's decision to put Bourbon back on its retaliatory target list is a serious setback and deeply alarming,' said association president Chris Swonger. 'This decision threatens to undo the hard-won progress made by American distillers and will be a crushing blow to the recovery of U.S. spirits exports to the EU.' U.S. exports to the EU surged when the retaliatory tariff got paused. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday the U.S. won't accept a delay of the August 1 deadline, after Trump in the past bristled at the idea of a TACO trade effect – which stands for 'Trump Always Chickens Out.' Michal Baranowski, Polish undersecretary of state at the ministry of economic development and technology, said that, as work continues in a bid to reach a deal, the first part of the EU's strategy is to negotiate with U.S. officials in good faith. While seeking a deal, 'let's prepare for countermeasures in case we don't [reach a deal]. And we have countermeasures on both the steel and aluminum tariffs as well as the initial package of 72 billion [euros] for so-called reciprocal tariffs,' Michal Baranowski, a Polish economy minister told CNBC. Trump on Tuesday announced a 19 percent tariff on Indonesia.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Photos of 'Good Trouble' protests across the US, from Chicago to Mar-a-Lago
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Republicans keep voting for bills they say they don't like
WASHINGTON — Two weeks after he cast a decisive vote to pass a sweeping domestic policy bill that cuts Medicaid by about $1 trillion, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., introduced a bill to repeal some of those cuts. 'Now is the time to prevent any future cuts to Medicaid from going into effect,' Hawley said in a statement. It sparked mockery from the normally mild-mannered Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., who posted on X: 'Just so I'm clear… he's introducing a bill….to repeal the bill… he voted for….two weeks ago?' Hawley said he feared the party's megabill would cause long-term harm if the Medicaid cuts are fully implemented, but still voted for it because it will deliver more hospital money for Missouri in the first four years. 'You can't get everything you want in one piece of legislation. I like a lot of what we did. I don't like some of it,' he told reporters after unveiling his own measure on Tuesday. The move represents a trend in Congress during President Donald Trump's second term. Republican lawmakers across the ideological spectrum keep casting votes in favor of bills even while warning that they're deeply flawed, and may require fixing down the road. In some cases, lawmakers explicitly threaten to vote 'no' on bills before eventually folding and voting 'yes.' It isn't unusual for lawmakers to back legislation they call imperfect. But this year, that contrast has become more stark. It comes as Trump has solidified his grasp over the GOP base, resulting in lawmakers growing increasingly leery of crossing him and risking their political futures. Nowhere has that dynamic been more pronounced than with the ultraconservative House Freedom Caucus, whose members have repeatedly threatened to oppose bills before acquiescing under pressure from Trump. With Trump's megabill, they complained about red ink: It's slated to add $3.3 trillion to the national debt over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. 'What the Senate did is unconscionable,' Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., said in a Rules Committee meeting, vowing that 'I'll vote against it here and I'll vote against it on the floor.' He ultimately voted for that bill, unamended, after conservatives were told Congress would consider future bills to lower the debt. In the House, a faction of swing-district Republicans voted for clean energy cuts in the " big, beautiful bill" while voicing their hope that the Senate would undo them. That didn't happen, and nearly all of them voted for the legislation regardless. Across the Capitol, after Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, cast another key vote to approve the megabill, she said she 'struggled mightily with the impact on the most vulnerable in this country, when you look to Medicaid and SNAP,' and called on the House to make changes. They didn't. The House passed it as written and sent it to Trump to become law. "Do I like this bill? No. But I tried to take care of Alaska's interests,' Murkowski told NBC News after the Senate vote earlier this month. 'But I know, I know that in many parts of the country, there are Americans that are not going to be advantaged by this bill. I don't like that,' she added. In another case, Rep. David Valadao, R-Calif., who represents a battleground district with a high share of Medicaid recipients, threatened to vote against the entire Senate bill if it maintained the steeper cuts to the program. 'I will not support a final bill that eliminates vital funding streams our hospitals rely on, including provider taxes and state directed payments,' he said in a statement, urging the Senate to 'stick to the Medicaid provisions' in the earlier House version of the bill; 'otherwise, I will vote no.' Valadao's request was ignored. Five days later he voted for the Senate bill when it returned to the House, securing final passage. (His office didn't respond to queries about the contradiction.) In the end, just three Republicans who expressed concerns about Medicaid voted against the bill: Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who had just announced he wouldn't seek re-election, as well as Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick R-Pa., who are set to face tough races in next years midterms. And Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who consistently voted against the megabill throughout the process over deficit concerns, is now facing the threat of a Trump-backed primary challenge. A similar trend occurred on the $9 billion package of spending cuts to NPR, PBS and foreign aid that passed Congress this week and was sent to Trump's desk. In the run-up to the votes, multiple Republicans expressed serious concerns with the substance of the bill, its deference to the executive branch and the damage it could do to bipartisan dealmaking on government funding if one side can undo the parts it doesn't like on a party-line basis. 'I suspect we're going to find out there are some things that we're going to regret. Some second and third order effects. And I suspect that when we do we'll have to come back and fix it,' said Tillis, before voting in favor of the bill. Tillis told NBC News he was 'trying to have a positive view about how this rescission is going to be implemented' and that if he's unsatisfied it will change his attitude to future rescissions bills. Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the chair of the Armed Services Committee, said he was troubled that Congress wasn't detailing which programs were cut and deferring to the White House. 'It concerns me — as perhaps approaching a disregard for the constitutional responsibilities of the legislative branch under Article I,' said Wicker, who voted for the bill. 'And in this situation it will amount to the House and Senate basically saying: We concede that decision voluntarily to the executive branch.'
