“I get along with Zelenskyy, but, you know, I disagree with what he’s done, very, very severely disagree. This is a war that should have never happened,” Trump said at a White House press conference of Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and his recent statement that he cannot legally cede territory.
Advertisement
“I was a little bothered by the fact that Zelenskyy was saying, ‘Well, I have to get constitutional approval,’” Trump said. “I mean, he’s got approval to go into war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap because there will be some land-swapping going on.”
Trump announced last week he would host a meeting with Putin in Alaska to broker a peace agreement, and his comments to reporters Monday are the most detailed about his view of what needs to happen to persuade Putin to end the war.
His insinuation that Zelenskyy was somehow to blame for Putin’s invasion was a repeat of his attacks on the Ukrainian president during his Oval Office visit in February.
Advertisement
“What you’re doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country,” Trump told Zelenskyy then. “You’re not winning this. You have a damn good chance of coming out OK because of us.”
Six weeks later, Trump outright blamed Zelenskyy for starting the war. “You don’t start a war with someone 20 times your size and then hope people give you some missiles,” he said in an Oval Office photo opportunity with Salvadoran president Nayib Bukele.
Trump called the coming summit a “feel-out meeting” and that he would afterward call Zelenskky and America’s NATO allies in Europe, who have since the 2022 invasion been eager to counter Russia and help Ukraine and even more so since Trump returned to office in January.
Advertisement
He added that his discussions with Russia and others led to his belief that Ukraine would have to give away land to end the war. “I know that through Russia and through conversations with everybody,” Trump said.
Trump’s special envoy, his friend from New York real estate days Steve Witkoff, met with Putin last week and apparently misunderstood what Putin was saying. Witkoff reported back that Putin was willing to give up two Ukrainian regions and keep a third, when in fact Putin’s offer was to hang on to all three in return for stopping his attacks.
Trump on Monday also repeated his lie that the US under former President Joe Biden had given far more help to Ukraine than had Western Europe. “Biden approved $350 billion. Europe has spent $100 billion,” he said.
Advertisement
In reality, Europe has provided more assistance to Ukraine from the start, both in weapons and economic help.
Trump is scheduled to go to Alaska on Friday for his meeting with Putin, his first such summit with him since 2018, when in Helsinki he said he took the word of the former KGB agent over his own intelligence agencies about Russia’s work to help Trump win the 2016 election.
On Monday, though, Trump, who is 79, twice conflated Alaska with Russia itself. Alaska has belonged to the United States since 1867, when it was purchased from Russia, then under the rule of Czar Alexander II.
Advertisement
“I’m going to Russia on Friday,” Trump said, explaining his coming trip. An hour later, preparing to leave the podium, he said it again: “We’re going to Russia.”
Donald Trump has announced that he will be meeting Vladimir Putin in the American state of Alaska on Friday to discuss ending the Ukraine war.
It could be pivotal moment in the conflict, even though no one from Europe – including Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy – is thought to be invited to the talks.
The US president has already said there may be a land swap in exchange for peace, evidently overlooking how Russia started the war and occupies 20% of Ukraine.
While the talks themselves will have given the Kremlin a boost, choosing to hold them in Alaska will have caused further celebration in Russia.
Advertisement
Putin’s aide Yuri Ushakov told Russian state news agency TASS: “Russia and the US are close neighbours, sharing a common border.
“It seems quite logical for our delegation simply to fly across the Bering Strait and for the important and anticipated summit of leaders of these two countries to take place precisely in Alaska.”
They were expected to travel to neutral territory – Putin himself suggested the United Arab Emirates – but Trump has persuaded the Russian leader to come to the States.
The US does not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC so he will not risk arrest in the States.
It will be the first time he has visited the US in a decade, having last travelled to the States during Barack Obama’s second term.
It’s a small victory for Trump too, because it seems like he has the upper hand by forcing Putin to come to him on his territory.
Advertisement
But there’s also a historical element to the meeting place, because Alaska used to Russian territory before it was sold to the US in the 19th Century.
A Russian negotiator, Kirill Dmitriev, who attended US envoy Steve Witkoff’s recent meeting with Putin, even called Alaska “a Russian-born American” which reflects the ties between their countries.
Russian nationalists have also repeatedly called for the land to be returned to Russia over the years.
Advertisement
Former Russian president and Putin ally, Dmitry Medvedev – who is now a senior security official – claimed in January 2024 that the US should return Alaska to Russia.
Donald Trump suddenly announced he was moving two of America’s nuclear submarines closer to Russia after “highly provocative statements” from a senior Kremlin official last week.
The declaration was quite a surprise, especially considering the US president has previously spoken of his fond friendship for Vladimir Putin and even expressed sympathy for his invasion of Ukraine.
Advertisement
As Kyiv’s most powerful ally – and the only major Western figure to show leniency towards Putin – Trump’s words matter.
So how did we get here? And just how concerned is the Kremlin about what might happen next?
Why did US nuclear rhetoric suddenly ramp up?
The US president has been trying to pressure Putin to end his war in Ukraine for months, even offering to oversee a peace deal which would reward the Russian president for his brutal invasion with Ukrainian territory.
Last week, while in Scotland, he said he was going to reduce his previous 50-day deadline for Russia to end the war down to 10 or 12 days – or the US would hit Russia with more sanctions.
Advertisement
Former Russian president, close Putin ally and the deputy chair of Russia’s Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, lashed out at the news on social media.
He claimed Trump was “playing the ultimatum game with Russia” and said “each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war”.
The president responded: “Tell Medvedev, the failed former Russian president who thinks he is still in power, to be careful what he says. He is entering very dangerous territory.”
Advertisement
Hours later, he posted: “Based on the highly provocative statements of the Former President of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev … I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that.
“Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances.”
He did not mention if the submarines were nuclear armed or nuclear powered, or where the “appropriate regions” are.
Advertisement
How did Russia respond?
After a weekend of silence, the Kremlin’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov finally addressed Trump’s shifting stance on Monday, telling reporters: “In this case, it is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process, that’s the first thing.
“But in general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way.
Advertisement
“Of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.”
He also claimed Moscow did not see Trump’s remarks as an escalation in nuclear tension, adding: “We do not believe that we are talking about any escalation now. It is clear that very complex, very sensitive issues are being discussed which, of course, are perceived very emotionally by many people.”
So, what does all this mean? HuffPost UK spoke to several experts to find out.
Not so chummy now: Trump, left, and Putin in 2018.
“He tried to put a kind of baseline underneath the escalation conversation with Russia around nuclear weapons,” the expert told HuffPost UK. “This is why the Russians haven’t responded because they’ve actually understood that this is quite a serious step.”
“Trump is the first US president I think to openly challenge this new position of Russia,” he said, explaining that the he two countries are now looking to re-establish a conversation about just what escalation looks like.
Advertisement
Melvin said this was a very different place to where the world was during the Cold War, when the US and the USSR were also in a standoff over nuclear weapons – and everyone used “careful language”.
He pointed out that Trump’s post on TruthSocial was without its usual capital letters or exclamation marks, perhaps indicating it was a more serious and a “calculated response by the United States”.
The specialist said Moscow’s delay in reply probably stemmed from Russia being unable to decide whether to escalate or just make a rhetorical statement.
Advertisement
“Russia has been anxious to avoid direct confrontation with the US, even though they basically talk about being in a war with the States,” he said.
Melvin claimed other western leaders will “will broadly support” Trump’s latest comments, because “there has been some concern that Russia has been blurring the line between conventional wars and nuclear”.
“This is actually a step towards re-imposing a stronger distinction,” he noted.
He said: “With the submarine comment, Trump has discovered another means of appearing ‘tough on Russia’ without actually doing anything that would be of concern to Moscow – and there are plenty of other reasons why he might be seeking headlines that suggest he is taking a firmer line with Putin.”
The specialist said: “Trump has taken every possible step to pressure Russia, short of actually doing something.”
Advertisement
He concluded: “Whatever Trump’s latest verbal salvo at Moscow may be, there’s one thing it isn’t: a strategy for dealing with Russia, let alone a sensible or coherent one.”
Giles claimed the Kremlin will be watching Trump closely, but “perhaps as much out of curiosity as of concern as to what he will do next.”
‘The Kremlin was unprepared’
Russia analyst from the Institute for the Study of War, Christina Harward, told HuffPost UK that Russia’s response has been “incredibly limited thus far”.
Advertisement
She pointed out that there’s been no response from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the Russian Ministry of Defence.
“High-ranking Russian officials very often parrot the same phrases as each other, telling us that Russian officials’ public rhetoric is highly coordinated within the Kremlin itself,” she said.
“The Kremlin is also known to disseminate manuals to Russian state media with clear instructions about how to cover certain current events.
Advertisement
“The fact that we didn’t see a coordinated response over the weekend to Trump’s announcement indicates that the Kremlin was unprepared for this move and is likely still working on how to publicly react. We may start to see a more unified official reaction in the coming days.”
What now?
While the specialists seem split over just how much impact Trump’s comments will have on the Kremlin, only one thing seems certain right now: Putin still has no plans to withdraw from Ukraine any time soon.
US special presidential envoy Steve Witkoff is set to visit Moscow this week to discuss peace talks, days before Trump’s new tariffs against Russia are set to kick in (August 9).
Advertisement
But Russia continues to target Ukraine almost every single night with drone and missile attacks, while Putin is still pushing to gain control over four Ukrainian regions to which Moscow currently occupies, and a promise from Kyiv will never join Nato.
Russia’s former transport minister has been found dead in his car just hours after it was revealed he had been sacked by Vladimir Putin.
Initial investigations suggest Roman Starovoit took his own life using a handgun.
In a statement, the Investigative Committee of Russia said: “The body of the former minister of transport of the Russian Federation, Roman Vladimirovich Starovoit, was discovered in his personal vehicle with a gunshot wound today in the Odintsovo city district.”
Advertisement
The statement added: “The main version is suicide.”
Andrei Kartapolov, head of the Russian parliament’s defence committee, said Starovoit had died “quite a while ago”.
Earlier on Monday, it was announced that Putin had sacked Starovoit after just over a year in the job.
He had been governor of the Kursk region, which borders Ukraine, for nearly five years before taking on his ministerial role.
Advertisement
Before Starovoit’s dismissal, Russian airlines had cancelled nearly 500 flights and delayed almost 2,000 since Saturday because of the threat of Ukrainian drones.
He was replaced as transport minister by his deputy, Andrei Nikitin.
A Kremlin spokesperson said: “At present, in the president’s opinion, Andrei Nikitin’s professional qualities and experience will best contribute to ensuring that this agency, which the president described as extremely important, fulfils its tasks and functions.”
More than 18,000 Russian soldiers have been reported to the courts for being absent without leave since Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, the UK says.
According to the latest update on X from the Ministry of Defence (MoD), 18,159 troops have been faced with a decade-long prison sentence for going AWOL between February 2022 and May 2025.
Advertisement
That is a criminal offence in Russia and a staggering 17,721 (86.2%) of those soldiers were prosecuted.
Citing Russian independent news outlet Mediazona, the MoD said a further 2,379 soldiers were reported to the courts for desertion or refusing orders.
The British officials pointed out there are multiple reasons a soldier could desert.
“Brutal discipline in the Russian Armed Forces, poor medical treatment for injured soldiers and inadequate military training all likely contribute,” the MoD said.
Advertisement
Putin’s soldiers could end up serving on the frontline against Ukraine within 14 days of signing a contract – and just five days of relevant military training.
The MoD continued: “This all runs counter to the official narrative that the Russian leadership values the military service of those who fight in Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine.
“It is a realistic possibility that those prosecuted could commute their sentence by serving in the Russian Storm-Z convict assault units.”
Advertisement
There have been multiple reports of low morale among Russian troops ever since Putin invaded.
In 2023, UK intelligence suggested thousands of Russian casualties in Ukraine were linked to “alcohol consumption” and that soldiers could be “coerced” into joining to boost recruitment numbers.
Despite this chaos within the Russian forces, Putin is still dragging his heels over possible ceasefire talks with Ukraine – even when US mediators suggest terms more favourable to Moscow than Kyiv.
It included plans to build up to 12 new nuclear-powered submarines, six new munitions factories and thousands more long-range weapons.
The authors of the SDR have made it clear defence spending will have to increase to 3% of gross domestic product (GDP) for its recommendations to be carried out.
However, Starmer has refused to guarantee that the government will hit that target in the next parliament.
So broadcaster Andrew Neil suggested on Monday that Russia would be “smiling” over the spending plans.
Speaking on Times Radio, he said: “Without a firm commitment to raising defence spending to 3% of GDP early in the next parliament, the defence review is barely worth the paper it’s written on.
Advertisement
“If they don’t put Britain on a war-footing now, the new subs won’t be deployed for at least a decade – by which time, we could all be speaking Russian.”
“The Kremlin must be smiling,” he added.
Former head of the army General Sir Patrick Sanders also told Times Radio he is “really worried” the government is not acting fast enough.
Asked what he believes Putin will be thinking now, Sanders said: “This is one of Europe’s greatest powers, it’s the one that has been the greatest thorn in my side when it comes to challenging me on Ukraine and supporting the Ukrainians, but it doesn’t appear yet to have woken up to the fact that it is not just Ukraine’s fight, this is Europe’s fight and Europe are threatened by Russia.
Advertisement
“We’ve got to be able to deter Russia because that is so much cheaper than fighting a war with them,” he said.
Keir Starmer delivers his speech during a visit to the BAE Systems’Govan facility, in Glasgow, Scotland, Monday June 2, 2025.
via Associated Press
Former Tory defence secretary Ben Wallace also told LBC this morning that Putin will now think the west are “not serious”.
Advertisement
“Putin knows more than anyone how much the war is costing,” Wallace said. “And he will say two things; one, that the west aren’t serious because they’re not really spending the money, and secondly, what we see in Ukraine, is that the west aren’t serious enough because it doesn’t want to put young people in harm’s way and young people are not joining their Armed Forces.”
Pointing to the government’s reluctance to set a time frame for spending 3% of GDP on defence, he said: “Imagine conversations in the Kremlin where they say, ‘no, no, it’s an ambition’.”
Wallace claimed the government has now “resorted to spin and claiming other people’s policies” too, adding: “That is a regret.”
Advertisement
Senior consulting fellow with the Russia and Eurasia programme at Chatham House, Keir Giles, agreed that the “biggest question mark”over the SDR is over how it will be funded.
“With Keir Starmer still refusing to commit to the funding level that is required as a baseline for the review’s recommendations to be met, it will take a change of heart in government to make use of [the SDR’s] most important findings,” Giles told HuffPost UK.
Keir Starmer has put the UK on a war footing as he warned of “growing Russian aggression” at sea, in the air and cyberspace.
The prime minister said he wanted to deliver “peace through strength” as he launched the government’s strategic defence review (SDR).
Advertisement
But a row broke out over how Labour plans to pay for its plans, which include building up to 12 new attack submarines, thousands of long-range missiles, six munitions factories and billions of pounds worth of nuclear warheads.
Starmer refused to echo defence secretary John Healey in confirming that defence spending will increase to 3% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2034.
In a major speech in Glasgow, the PM said: “We are moving to warfighting readiness as the central purpose of our armed forces.
Advertisement
“When we are being directly threatened by states with advanced military forces, the most effective way to deter them is to be ready – and, frankly, to show them that we’re ready – to deliver peace through strength.”
Starmer said “the front line is here” as he warned that the UK faces greater threats now than at any time since the end of the Cold War more than 30 years ago.
He said: “We face war in Europe, new nuclear risks, daily cyber attacks. Growing Russian aggression in our waters, menacing our skies.
Advertisement
“Their reckless actions driving up the cost of living here at home, creating economic pain and hitting working people the hardest.
“A new era in the threats we face demands a new era for defence and security, not just to survive in this new world – but to lead.”
However, the SDR’s own authors have warned that the military budget must hit that 3% target if the government’s military plans are to be affordable.
Meanwhile, at a Nato summit later this month, member states will be told that they should increase their defence spending to 3.5% of GDP.
Opposition parties criticised the government for failing to set out how it will pay for its defence spending plans.
Advertisement
Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge said: “All of Labour’s strategic defence review promises will be taken with a pinch of salt unless they can show there will actually be enough money to pay for them.”
Lib Dem defence spokesperson Helen Maguire said ministers were showing “a worrying lack of urgency”.
“Unless Labour commits to holding cross-party talks on how to reach 3% much more rapidly than the mid-2030s, this announcement risks becoming a damp squib,” she said.
Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice said: “The commitments made in this defence review are completely empty if Labour does not commit to spending 3% of GDP on defence.”
He added: “I’ve always said that he wants ALL of Ukraine, not just a piece of it, and maybe that’s proving to be right, but if he does, it will lead to the downfall of Russia!”
Trump has tried to force both Ukraine and Russia to negotiate an end to the war even though the conflict was triggered by Putin’s land grab in 2022.
The US president has often expressed sympathy towards Russia’s aggression and suggested Ukraine will have to concede land in the name of peace.
Advertisement
However, four months after Trump formally took office, Putin is yet to agree to even a 30-day ceasefire.
Even so, after Trump’s sudden rant against Putin on his social media platform Truth Social, the Kremlin’s spokesperson Dmitry Peskov clearly tried to strike a more conciliatory tone in his response.
Advertisement
He said: “Of course, the start of the negotiation process, for which the American side made a lot of effort, is a very important achievement and we are truly grateful to the Americans and personally to President Trump for their help in organising and launching this negotiation process.
“It’s a very important achievement. Of course, at the same time this is a very important moment which is connected to an emotional overload of everyone involved and emotional reactions.
“We carefully monitor all the reactions. However, President Putin takes those decisions which are necessary for the security of our country.
Advertisement
“We all witnessed how the Kyiv regime threatened foreign leaders before they came to Moscow to commemorate Victory Day. Everyone heard these threats by the Kyiv regime.
“And many leaders who were here witnessed attempts by the Kyiv regime to strike Russian territory with drones, large cities, even the capital, on the eve of such an important day. These attempts continue. We are forced to take measures and President Putin does what is necessary to provide security for Russia.”
The response completely overlooked the US president’s renewed threat of imposing fresh sanctions on Russia.
Advertisement
Trump told reporters on Sunday night he was “absolutely” considering new
He continued: “I don’t know what the hell happened to Putin. I’ve known him a long time. Always gotten along with him.
“But he’s sending rockets into cities and killing people, and I don’t like it at all.”
Meanwhile, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch appears to have been praised by the Russian Embassy in London, after she said on Sunday that Ukraine was fighting “a proxy war” against Russia on western Europe’s behalf.
Her remarks were then quoted approvingly by the Embassy, which said Badenoch had “finally called a spade a spade”.
At Donald Trump’s insistence, Zelenskyy flew to Turkey for the first face-to-face discussions between Ukraine and Russia since early 2022, when Putin invaded.
Advertisement
However, the Russian leader has snubbed Kyiv by choosing not to attend Thursday’s negotiations in Istanbul – despite personally suggesting the direct talks between the warring countries last week.
When the Kremlin confirmed Putin was simply sending a low-calibre delegation in his place, Zelenskyy told reporters it was clear Moscow was not “serious” about ending the war.
“Russia does not feel that it needs to end [the war], which means there is not enough political, economic and other pressure on the Russian Federation,” the Ukrainian president said.
Advertisement
“And so we ask, if there is no ceasefire, if there are no serious decisions… we ask for appropriate sanctions.”
Zelenskyy still sent a delegation headed up by Ukraine’s defence minister for the talks in Istanbul but stayed in Ankara himself for talks with his Turkish counterpart.
According to Russian state news agency TASS, Putin’s top diplomat was less than happy with the Ukrainian president’s attack on the Kremlin.
Advertisement
Speaking on Thursday, Sergei Lavrov said: “First, Zelenskyy made some statements demanding that Putin attend in person. A nothing man. It’s clear to everyone – except perhaps to him and those pulling his strings.”
The Kremlin has been trying to discredit Zelenskyy ever since launching a full-scale invasion on Ukraine more than three years ago.
Putin’s false claim that Zelenskyy is not a legitimate president was even picked up by Trump earlier this year, as the American president claimed he is a “dictator without elections.”
Advertisement
But once Moscow started to drag its heels over negotiations, Trump began to accuse Putin of not wanting to end the war.
The Ukrainian president also pointed out on Thursday that Trump has been pressuring Kyiv “more than the Russians”.
He said: “You have to pressurise the side that does not want to end the war. The position of Turkey and the United States, you saw that President Trump thought it would help to pressurise both sides – I think they pressurised us more than the Russians.
Advertisement
“Ukraine is fighting for itself. We are not ready to lose our lives and land. That does not mean we are aggressors.”
After his Russian counterpart offered to “resume negotiations” on ending the Ukraine war in Turkey last week, the Ukrainian president agreed – as long as there was a “full and lasting ceasefire”.
Advertisement
Writing on X, Zelenskyy said: “We await a full and lasting ceasefire, starting from tomorrow, to provide the necessary basis for diplomacy. There is no point in prolonging the killings. And I will be waiting or Putin in Turkey on Thursday. Personally. I hope that this time the Russians will not look excuses.”
The Kremlin has not directly responded to the Ukrainian president’s remarks but a Russian senator dismissed them altogether on Monday.
Speaking to Rossiya-24 TV broadcast, the federation council’s deputy speaker, Konstantin Kosachev, said: “It’s pure theatrics, a total farce.
Advertisement
“That’s not how high high-level meetings are arranged, especially given the seriousness of the situation.”
The senator claimed this would be an “impromptu” meeting and that is not the way to conduct such important negotiations.
He said: “Zelenskyy should known this from his own bitter experience, when he came unprepared to his meeting with President Trump in the White House in February, ending in a complete fiasco for him.”
Advertisement
The Ukrainian president was actually very prepared for his meeting in the White House in February, but he had to cut the visit short after Trump and his vice-president JD Vanceberated him in front of the press.
At the time Trump was much more aligned with the Kremlin but he has since improved his relationship with Kyiv, and has even questioned if Putin really does want to stop the war.
Even though it was the Russian president who suggested further peace talks in Istanbul on Thursday, Kosachev claimed Zelensky is trying to “turn the tables” on Russia so he can call Putin uncooperative.
Advertisement
The senior Russian politician continued: “Zelensky does not need a meeting with the Russian president now. He should be afraid of meeting with him. And I am sure that he is afraid, because, as Mr Trump rightly says, he holds no cards. It is true, and Zelensky is in a terrible situation.”
Meanwhile, the Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov just told reporters that Putin is serious about peace talks.
“This approach, aimed precisely at finding a real diplomatic solution to the Ukrainian crisis, eliminating the root causes of the conflict and establishing lasting peace, has met with understanding and support from the leaders of many countries.”
Advertisement
He cut off any further questions by saying: “That’s all. I’ve said everything I could about this story.”