Trump Says No to ‘Foolish’ US Missile Attacks on Russia

The incoming president told Time he “strongly disagrees” with firing U.S. missiles into Russia, words that could soothe nuclear tensions between Washington and Moscow, reports Joe Lauria.

President-elect Donald Trump accused the Biden administration of “escalating this war” in Ukraine and “making it worse” by allowing U.S. long-range ATACMS missiles to be fired from Ukraine deep into Russia.

“I disagree very vehemently with sending missiles hundreds of miles into Russia,” Trump told Time magazine in an interview published on Thursday. He said:

“Why are we doing that? We’re just escalating this war and making it worse. That should not have been allowed to be done. Now they’re doing not only missiles, but they’re doing other types of weapons. And I think that’s a very big mistake, very big mistake.”

Last Thursday former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter was on a day-long venture in the labyrinth of House office buildings on Capitol Hill to lobby members of Congress and their staffs to prevent the U.S. from attacking Russia with ATACMS.

That alone, Ritter argued, would reduce the threat of a nuclear exchange with Russia, which had warned would be possible if the missile attacks continue.

Among the steps Ritter recommended to Republican Congressmen was to get word to Trump’s transition team to get Trump to make an immediate statement that after he is sworn in he will order a cessation of ATACMS being fired into Russia.

Such a statement from Trump, Ritter argued on Capitol Hill, would lessen tension with Moscow over the ATACMS and possibly avert catastrophe.  Trump’s comments to Time was what Ritter had in mind.

Trump  said:

‘” think the most dangerous thing right now is what’s happening, where Zelensky has decided, with the approval of, I assume, the President, to start shooting missiles into Russia. I think that’s a major escalation. I think it’s a foolish decision. But I would imagine people are waiting until I get in before anything happens. I would imagine. I think that would be very smart to do that.”

Ritter entering Congressional office at the Capitol to warn of nuclear war. (Joe Lauria)

Biden’s Inexplicable & Reckless Change in Course

Just two months ago, in September, President Joe Biden had bowed to the realists in the Pentagon to oppose allowing long-range British Storm Shadow missiles from being fired by Ukraine deep into Russia out of fear it would lead to a direct NATO-Russia military confrontation with all that that entails.

Putin warned at the time that because British soldiers on the ground in Ukraine would actually launch the British missiles into Russia with U.S. geostrategic support, it “will mean that NATO countries — the United States and European countries — are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us.” 

That was a clear warning that British and U.S. targets could be hit. Biden thus wisely backed off. 

It was the second time that Biden had sided with the Pentagon against the neocons in his administration when it came to avoiding direct war with Russia.

The first time was in March 2022 when his neocon Secretary of State Antony Blinken stepped out of line to announce that the U.S. would give NATO-member Poland a “green light” to send Mig-29 fighter jets to Ukraine to enforce a no-fly zone against Russian aircraft.

Members of Congress and the media then piled the pressure on Biden to approve it until cooler heads at the U.S. Defense Department, the greatest purveyor of violence in history, stepped in to stop it.

Biden ultimately sided with the Pentagon, and he couldn’t be more explicit why. He opposed a NATO no-fly zone over Ukraine fighting Russian aircraft, he said, because “that’s called World War III, okay? Let’s get it straight here, guys. We will not fight the third world war in Ukraine.”

But then, after his party lost the White House in November, Biden suddenly reversed himself on his sensible positions and is defied the Pentagon to roll the dice that Russia’s warnings are bluffs that won’t lead to nuclear conflict. 

While he previously would not even authorize British long-range missile attacks into Russia in September, let alone U.S. ATACMS, he authorized the ATACMS, risking Russia taking direct action against U.S. targets. 

It remains to be seen if Trump’s words can reassure the Kremlin.

Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and other newspapers, including The Montreal Gazette, the London Daily Mail and The Star of Johannesburg. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London, a financial reporter for Bloomberg News and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times. He is the author of two books, A Political Odyssey, with Sen. Mike Gravel, foreword by Daniel Ellsberg; and How I Lost By Hillary Clinton, foreword by Julian Assange.

Share: