Trump could authorize long-range Ukrainian strikes on Russia – WaPo
US President Donald Trump is considering allowing Ukraine to launch long-range strikes into Russia using US-made ATACMS missiles, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday, citing sources.
According to the outlet, Trump could permit Ukraine to use the 18 ATACMS launchers that have already been delivered to fire at their full range of 300km. A source involved in the discussions told the Post that the decision would also likely include providing Kiev with additional ATACMS munitions.
While ATACMS would not reach Moscow or St. Petersburg, they would allow Ukraine to strike military bases, airfields, and supply depots deep inside Russia that are currently out of range, the Post said. The report also noted that Pentagon officials have for months pushed for deeper strikes into Russia to undermine its military. The report follows Trump’s 50-day ultimatum to Moscow in which he threatened to impose “severe” secondary tariffs of up to 100% on Russia’s trade partners if no progress towards peace is made.
Ukraine was first allowed to use US-supplied long-range missiles against targets deep inside Russia by the Biden administration in the autumn of 2024, although reportedly under geographic restrictions. By January, however, Ukrainian forces had largely exhausted the stocks of ATACMS provided by Washington during heavy fighting with Russian forces, according to an AP report at the time.
In some cases Ukraine has used ATACMS to strike civilian targets inside Russian territory. In the most widely covered incident last June, missile fragments fell on a beach in Crimea, killing four civilians and injuring more than 150.
The Post also reported that Trump had a phone call with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky last week, during which the US president wondered why Ukraine had not targeted Moscow. However, the White House insisted in a statement to the outlet that the comments should not be taken out of context.
Commenting on the report, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that “as a rule, all of this usually turns out to be fake,” adding that “sometimes there are indeed serious leaks, even in publications we once considered quite respectable.”
