The US announced the suspension of “certain arms shipments” to Ukraine, including air defence missiles, on 2 July. It justified the decision by stating that it “puts US interests first”. The move comes amid growing US concern over Ukraine’s ongoing war with Russia, its escalating costs, and widening US-European differences on how to address it, as well as the Trump administration’s concern over decreasing US military reserves essential to supporting Kyiv.
Meanwhile, Europe is calling for greater support for Ukraine against Russia, which they perceive as a threat to European interests. Against this backdrop, the German government stated on 4 July that it is engaged in intensive talks to purchase Patriot air defence systems for Ukraine. Germany, the second-largest donor to Ukraine after the US, is seeking to play a more prominent role in sustaining support for Kyiv, especially as American backing is weakening under the Trump administration.
This is following a meeting a few days ago in the Hague between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is facing intensified Russian air strikes.
The latest US decision to scale back support for Kyiv is not unprecedented.
On 13 February, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth spoke at NATO headquarters in Brussels, disclosing some details of a US plan to end the war. He stated that Ukraine could not reclaim full sovereignty over its territory and that discussions of NATO membership must be suspended before any negotiations could begin. In this light, the Trump administration revoked the US-Ukraine Strategic Partnership Charter, which had affirmed Washington’s commitment to Ukraine’s territorial integrity and its support for Kyiv’s integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions such as NATO and the European Union.
A set of fundamental considerations probably prompted the Trump administration’s decision to ban certain arms licences to Ukraine. First is the US desire to pressure Kyiv and its supporting countries to bring the Ukrainian crisis to an end and open the door to a political resolution of the conflict. Secondly, Ukraine appears to have declined in importance on the US list of priorities following the failure of Trump’s efforts to reach a peaceful settlement and his growing preoccupation with other crises, particularly in the Middle East.
The Trump administration is facing domestic pressure over its approach to Ukraine, with Trump coming under criticism from some of his own supporters over the government’s military relationship with Kyiv. Numerous voices have urged him to publicly address the rising civilian toll. Moreover, estimates point to a growing number of Republicans calling for greater distance from the Ukraine conflict, especially as the US seeks to repair relations with Moscow and capitalise on the rapprochement between Trump and Putin to advance bilateral ties.
It is in this context that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s remarks on 27 June can be understood. He stated that “relations between Russia and the US have begun to stabilise,” crediting this shift to Trump’s efforts. Putin added that he holds “great respect for Trump” and is ready to meet with him.
Another factor is the call by senior officials in the US Department of Defence to impose stricter control on arms sales to Ukraine. The Pentagon stated on 4 July that Trump’s election was aimed at safeguarding US interests, criticising the Biden administration for supplying weapons to Ukraine without oversight and at the expense of US military needs for arms and ammunition.
The US decision to suspend some arms shipments to Ukraine may have several repercussions, however. It is likely to provoke strong opposition from a broad segment of Democrats, who support aiding Kyiv in its confrontation with Moscow and view Russia as a continuing threat to American interests in various regions, particularly Central Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.
The decision is also expected to be met with Ukrainian objection. Zelensky has described it as disappointing and as sending an ambiguous message to Russia. Kyiv warned that halting US arms shipments could embolden Russia to prolong the war, which has now entered its fourth year. In a statement on 2 July, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry said that “any delay or procrastination in supporting Ukraine’s defence capabilities will only encourage the aggressor to continue with war and terrorism, rather than seek peace.”
The US decision, however, was welcomed in Russia. The Kremlin’s spokesperson stated that “the fewer weapons are supplied to Ukraine, the closer we will get to the end of the special military operation.”
At the same time, the US move may offer Moscow an opportunity to intensify military pressure on Kyiv by escalating strikes on Ukrainian territory and expanding its presence on the ground, more so given that a reduction in US arms supplies could negatively affect Ukraine’s military plans and undermine its military doctrine.
The decision is also likely to strain US-European relations, especially with European powers that oppose Trump’s approach to the Ukrainian war and continue to advocate for the use of hard power to counter Russian ambitions.
Indeed, the US decision will influence the trajectory of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. US arms are a critical component of Ukraine’s military strength; suspending their delivery means the US backtracks on its support for Kyiv’s position and rights in its struggle against Russia.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 10 July, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: