Donald Trump Condemns U.S. Missile Support for Ukraine Amid Escalating Russia-Ukraine Conflict
A Ukrainian fighter during battle worked with an M101 howitzer on December 6 in Kharkiv, Ukraine.
A Ukrainian fighter during battle worked with an M101 howitzer on December 6 in Kharkiv, Ukraine.
Russia has welcomed a peace plan and expressed willingness to engage in dialogue, especially those headed by countries in the Global South and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa). This followed U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s call for an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine. Russia’s Foreign Ministry shared on social media that they are ready to negotiate and are open to peace initiatives. They also said Russian President Putin set the conditions for ending the fighting. However, they blamed Ukrainian President Zelensky for rejecting peace talks and blocking dialogue through a decree.
During the reopening of Notre-Dame Cathedral, Trump met with French President Macron and President Zelensky in Paris. After the meeting, Trump emphasised that there should be an immediate ceasefire and negotiations must start without delay. President Zelensky thanked Trump for his strong commitment to ending the war in Ukraine. Trump has repeatedly said he will end the nearly three-year-long conflict within 24 hours of taking office.
However, Zelensky criticized Russia, stating that they were responsible for the fall of Syria as they withdrew their support for Assad’s regime. He also said that over 800,000 Russian soldiers are in Ukraine, meaning nearly all of Russia’s military is engaged in fighting against Ukraine.
Former U.S. President Donald Trump has condemned the U.S. move to allow Ukraine to fire American-supplied missiles deep into Russian territory. The remarks follow an attack by Ukraine on a Russian military airfield near the Sea of Azov, with six U.S.-made ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) ballistic missiles. The attack has created a possibility of further escalation in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, which has been going on for nearly three years.
Russia responded to the attack by vowing to take “appropriate measures”. It fired an intermediate-range hypersonic ballistic missile, known as the ‘Oresnik’ (meaning “Nutcracker” in Russian), at Ukrainian targets on November 21. Russian officials have emphasized that Western-supplied long-range weapons used by Ukraine will not go unanswered, although it remains unclear exactly how Russia will retaliate beyond the missile launch. According to Russian President Vladimir Putin, this missile strike was a retaliation for earlier Ukrainian attacks on Russian soil that were carried out using missiles supplied by the U.S. and Britain.
Trump criticized these actions during an interview with Time Magazine, conducted before Thanksgiving but published later. He described Ukraine’s use of U.S.-supplied missiles to strike deep into Russian territory as “crazy” and argued that it dangerously escalates the conflict. He expressed frustration with the U.S. government for approving such missile strikes, which have the potential to push tensions between Russia and Ukraine — and their respective allies — into even more dangerous territory.
However, the businessman has told people that he will stop the war but hasn’t told anybody about the details of what his resolution may include. He is trying to call attention to himself by calling for a swift conclusion to the war with Ukraine after Russia launched all-out attacks in February 2022.
On the other hand, the Biden administration has just barely two months remaining during which the administration is giving increasing backing for Ukraine. This includes the declaration of more than $2 billion in additional aid, with the administration keen on strengthening Ukraine’s defences before leaving office. A new $988 million aid package has recently been approved for Ukraine. The administration’s efforts are aimed at shoring up Ukrainian military capabilities, especially as Russia’s forces continue to make advances in key areas of the conflict.
As the war approaches its climax, the U.S. government has also warned that Russia might use its new Oresnik hypersonic missiles again, following their deployment in the November strikes. The situation remains volatile, with both Russia and Ukraine preparing for further hostilities as international attention remains focused on how the conflict will evolve. Trump’s remarks and the continuing U.S. support for Ukraine reflect a growing divide in U.S. politics over how to deal with the Russia-Ukraine war.
About the Creator
Usman Zafar
I am Blogger and Writer.
Keep reading
More stories from Usman Zafar and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
G20 Leaders Unite for Global Ceasefires and Climate Action
Heads of the Gathering of 20 (G20) significant economies have called for "thorough" truces in both Gaza and Lebanon, while likewise focusing on the requirement for expanded collaboration on basic issues, for example, environmental change, neediness decrease, and burdening the super affluent.
By Usman Zafarabout a year ago in The Swamp
Which Countries Do Business With Iran — and What Could US Tariffs Mean?
Iran’s Economy Under Persistent Pressure Iran has lived under varying degrees of US and international sanctions for decades, yet it has never been fully cut off from the global economy. Despite restrictions on banking, energy exports, shipping, and technology, Iran continues to trade with a network of countries willing—or able—to navigate sanctions. Now, with renewed discussion in Washington about expanding US tariffs and secondary trade penalties, questions are growing about which countries do business with Iran, how that trade works, and what tougher US measures could mean for global markets, regional stability, and ordinary people inside Iran. China: Iran’s Most Important Trading Partner China is by far Iran’s largest economic partner. It imports significant volumes of Iranian oil, often at discounted prices, and exports machinery, electronics, consumer goods, and industrial equipment to Iran. Much of this trade operates through indirect channels, rebranded shipments, and complex financial arrangements designed to avoid sanctions. Beijing officially opposes unilateral US sanctions, arguing they violate international norms. If the US were to impose broader tariffs or secondary penalties targeting countries that trade with Iran, China could face increased friction with Washington—but analysts note that China has historically been willing to absorb such pressure when strategic interests are at stake. Russia: Strategic and Economic Cooperation Russia and Iran have deepened ties in recent years, driven by shared opposition to US influence and overlapping interests in energy and security. Trade between the two includes energy cooperation, arms-related technology, agricultural goods, and industrial products. Western sanctions on Russia have pushed Moscow to seek alternative trade networks, making Iran a useful partner. Proposed US tariffs aimed at Iran-linked trade are unlikely to deter Russia significantly, given that Moscow already operates largely outside Western economic systems. However, expanded penalties could further harden global economic blocs, accelerating the shift toward non-dollar trade mechanisms. Turkey: Balancing Trade and Alliances Turkey occupies a complicated middle ground. As a NATO member, it maintains formal alignment with the US and Europe, yet it also trades extensively with Iran—particularly in energy, food, and consumer goods. Ankara has historically sought sanctions waivers to continue importing Iranian gas, arguing that energy security leaves it with limited alternatives. US tariffs targeting Iran-related trade could force Turkey into difficult choices between economic needs and alliance commitments. Any escalation would likely test already strained US-Turkey relations. India: Energy Needs and Strategic Caution India once relied heavily on Iranian oil and invested in infrastructure projects such as Iran’s Chabahar port. While New Delhi reduced trade after US sanctions intensified, it has not fully disengaged. India walks a careful line: maintaining relations with Iran for regional access and energy diversification, while avoiding direct confrontation with Washington. Broad US tariffs could further discourage Indian companies from re-engaging with Iran, reinforcing India’s gradual shift toward alternative suppliers. European Union: Limited but Symbolic Trade Official EU-Iran trade has declined sharply under US sanctions, particularly after Washington withdrew from the nuclear deal. What remains is largely humanitarian—food, medicine, and medical equipment—technically exempt from sanctions. European governments oppose US secondary sanctions in principle but often struggle to protect their companies from US financial pressure. Expanded tariffs could further chill even legal trade, reinforcing Europe’s limited economic footprint in Iran. Regional Partners: Iraq, UAE, and Neighbors Iran maintains significant trade with neighboring countries: Iraq imports Iranian electricity, gas, food, and construction materials United Arab Emirates, particularly Dubai, acts as a major re-export hub Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asian states trade fuel, agriculture, and consumer goods US tariffs targeting Iran-linked trade could have ripple effects across the Middle East, especially for economies that rely on cross-border commerce and energy imports. Washington often grants limited waivers to avoid destabilizing allies like Iraq, but broader tariff regimes could complicate that approach. How Iran Moves Money Despite Sanctions Sanctions have forced Iran to rely on non-traditional financial channels, including barter systems, local currencies, cryptocurrency experiments, and informal money networks. Any new US tariff strategy would likely aim to disrupt these workarounds by penalizing intermediaries—shipping companies, insurers, ports, and banks—that facilitate Iran-related trade. However, experts warn that the more formal channels are closed, the more trade moves underground, reducing transparency and increasing corruption. What US Tariffs Could Mean in Practice If the US imposes new tariffs or secondary trade penalties linked to Iran, the effects could include: Higher costs for countries importing Iranian goods Increased risk for companies operating in gray markets Reduced access to consumer goods and medicine inside Iran Further isolation of Iran from global financial systems Supporters argue tariffs could strengthen leverage over Tehran without military action. Critics counter that economic pressure disproportionately harms civilians while entrenching hardliners. Impact on Ordinary Iranians Inside Iran, sanctions and trade restrictions have contributed to inflation, currency devaluation, unemployment, and shortages of imported goods. While the government often blames external pressure, public frustration remains high. Additional tariffs could worsen living conditions, even if humanitarian goods are technically exempt. Aid organizations warn that banking restrictions often block legal imports in practice, regardless of policy intent. A Global Test of Economic Power At its core, the debate over tariffs and Iran is about how much economic power the US can still project unilaterally. As more countries seek alternatives to dollar-based trade, Washington’s ability to enforce compliance is being tested. Yet the US financial system remains deeply influential, meaning many companies and governments will continue to err on the side of caution. Conclusion: Pressure, Trade, and Unintended Consequences Iran continues to do business with a diverse group of countries despite years of sanctions. China, Russia, regional neighbors, and cautious global players keep trade flowing—often quietly and indirectly. New US tariffs could tighten the economic vise, but they also risk reshaping global trade patterns, straining alliances, and deepening hardship for ordinary Iranians. Whether tariffs bring strategic leverage or unintended fallout will depend on how broadly—and how carefully—they are applied. One thing is certain: in a fragmented global economy, pressure on Iran does not stop at Iran’s borders.
By Aarif Lashari6 days ago in The Swamp
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.