President Donald Trump on Wednesday declared he would ask Congress for a $1.5 trillion defense budget in 2027, a massive $500 billion increase from this year’s Pentagon budget. The huge boost likely reflects how expensive some of Trump’s military ambitions are, from the Golden Dome air defense effort to his call for a new battleship design. Neither of those programs could be fully funded under current spending levels. The president provided few details in his post on Truth Social, other than to say the money would pay for his “Dream Military.” Trump did suggest that tariff revenues could cover the increase, but even if he managed to circumvent Congress’ constitutionally mandated power over spending, existing tariff collections would still be several hundred billion short of what the president plans to ask for. While finding half-a-trillion dollars in new spending would prove difficult, Trump and some congressional Republicans appeared confident they could do so. The budget reached $1 trillion this year thanks to $150 billion in new money Congress voted to pour into Pentagon coffers via a reconciliation bill, although much of that will be spread out over the next five years on various long-term projects. Lawmakers have yet to complete a defense spending bill for this fiscal year, although a final agreement is expected to increase Trump’s budget request by several billion dollars. Some Republicans have long argued for significant annual increases in Pentagon funding, with a topline total of around 5 percent of GDP, up from the current 3.5 percent. Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) called Trump’s aspirations “a good news story” after his administration proposed budgets defense hawks on Capitol Hill saw as lacking. “We think we need a permanent 4 percent [of GDP] or better,” Bacon said. “That’s what it’s gonna take to build our Navy, our Air Force, our ICBMs, our bombers, and take care of our troops.” The 2026 budget only reached $1 trillion due to the $150 billion added on by Congress. That one-time infusion gave a boost to Golden Dome as well as new initiatives to build more precision-guided munitions and air defense weapons. But the funding will need to be included in year-on-year spending legislation, something Trump’s new proposal appears to take into account. Trump’s surprise budget announcement came just hours after he sent defense stocks plunging by railing against the performance of major defense companies. In another social media post, Trump said he would not allow defense companies to buy back their own stocks, offer executives large salaries and issue dividends to shareholders. He also slammed the companies for moving too slowly, and charging too much, for weapons. “A lot of us are saying we want a commitment to a sustained spending [increase], not just a one-year,” Bacon said. The White House and Republicans have left open the possibility of another party-line megabill that could be used to increase defense spending again this year. It is unclear if GOP leaders are willing to pursue the procedurally and politically arduous approach again while they still maintain control of both chambers of Congress. Republicans would need to use that process again to accommodate even a portion of Trump’s request because Democrats are likely to balk at any move that slashes healthcare benefits, education and foreign aid in the ways Republicans have sought, said one defense lobbyist. “Golden Dome and Golden Fleet are completely unaffordable without budgets of this size, so the administration would need to come up with the numbers to back it up,” said the lobbyist, who was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive spending dynamics. “But my guess is that the extra money will have to be in reconciliation.” House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said overall defense spending “needs to go up,” but wouldn’t say if the massive increase pitched by Trump is realistic. “I’ll take any request the president makes seriously, and we’ll see,” Cole said. Another senior House appropriator, Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), hailed Trump as “absolutely right” in his own post. “For too long, we have underfunded our defense apparatus—undermining our national security and benefiting our foreign adversaries,” Womack said. “A strong national defense is critical to our long‑term prosperity and to protecting our country against every emerging threat. I commend President Trump for his leadership and look forward to working to advance a $1.5 trillion defense bill.”

PARIS — Europe’s disunited governments are in denial about the extent to which violence is shaping global politics and must step up to assert their combined force as a hard power, the chief of defense staff of the French military has warned in a sweeping interview. “A weakened Europe may find itself tomorrow as a hunted animal, after two centuries of the West setting the tone,” General Thierry Burkhard said in unusually outspoken remarks to POLITICO and French newspaper Libération.  “It’s not only about armed forces, but about the fact that hard power dynamics now prevail.” Burkhard warned that Europe’s fragmented countries would have to bind together more tightly as a strategic force to counteract the “spheres of influence” being built by China, Russia and the U.S. “On the one hand, European countries have never been so strong. On the other, there is a form of denial from governments and populations in the face of the level of violence in the world today,” he added. The French general’s reality check echoes a growing number of warnings about Europe’s weakness. Former European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi also stressed last week the EU had to stop pretending it could exercise global influence just as an economic force and consumer market. He insisted the bloc had received a “very brutal wake-up call” from Donald Trump that it needed to think in far more strategic terms about security and defense spending. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Wednesday accused the European Union of sliding into irrelevance on the world stage. “We must be willing to pay the price of our freedom and our independence,” she said. Burkhard, who leaves his job at the end of the month to be replaced by Air Force General Fabien Mandon, has been at the helm of France’s military since 2021. Under his watch, France’s armed forces boosted their presence on Europe’s eastern flank and became more active in NATO while preparing for high-intensity warfare. In the past months, the French general also co-chaired the coalition of the willing, a group of countries working on security guarantees for Ukraine in case of a ceasefire with Russia. Burkhard described a world defined by four political factors: The use of force to resolve conflicts; a push by countries including China, Russia, North Korea and Iran to challenge the West; the power of information warfare; and the impact of climate change.  “More than Russian tanks, the establishment of a de-Westernized alternative order threatens Europeans. If Russia can break Europe without an armed attack, that is the path it will choose,” France’s highest-ranking military officer said, speaking in his office at the armed forces ministry’s Paris headquarters, known as Balard. “In tomorrow’s world, the strategic solidarity uniting European countries must be very, very strong. No country in Europe can be a major player alone,” Burkhard added. “It’s not about building something against the United States or even against Russia, but rather about achieving the critical mass needed to have influence and avoid being sold off by the slice.” The challenge for Europeans has always been to speak with one voice, especially when it comes to defense policy. Madrid’s push to be exempt from NATO’s new 5 percent of GDP defense spending target, following comments by Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez that Russia doesn’t pose an immediate threat to Spain, highlights how differently European nations perceive threats. “The difficulty with European defense is to encompass the strategic interests of European countries as a whole,” Burkhard said. “Estonians do not have the same strategic vision as the Portuguese; no one can deny that. A middle ground must be found.”  ‘MOMENTUM’ FOR UKRAINE SECURITY GUARANTEES  Those strategic interests include preserving Ukrainian independence, and there is growing pressure on European countries to step up. Despite many unanswered questions, discussions around security guarantees for Kyiv picked up steam in the past weeks, following Trump’s Aug. 15 Alaska meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.  “The U.S. president’s very strong desire to reach a peace agreement is bringing new momentum,” Burkhard said, speaking one day after flying back from Washington for military talks. After a White House gathering with Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy, France’s Emmanuel Macron, Germany’s Friedrich Merz and Meloni, among others, the Trump administration even signaled openness to contribute to security guarantees. That could reportedly include intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets, as well as command and control and air support.  For most European capitals, U.S. military backing is a precondition to engage in any effort to monitor a potential peace agreement in Ukraine.  “The Americans mainly believe that the Europeans must demonstrate their commitment to taking responsibility,” Burkhard stressed. “It’s a chicken or egg dilemma: Some countries are only prepared to commit if there are American guarantees. But it’s not really a military debate, it’s a political one.”  While the “best security guarantees would be to demonstrate American determination in the event of a peace agreement violation,” military operations could include troops in Ukraine, air patrols over the country, ensuring that shipping traffic resumes in the Black Sea, and helping to build the Ukrainian army, the French general explained.  “To restore the Ukrainians’ confidence, we need to send the signal that European countries, possibly supported in some way by the United States, are ready to provide guarantees,” the French general said. “Providing guarantees often means taking risks.”  The danger is that any military contingent becomes involved in the war — especially as the Kremlin repeatedly said it doesn’t want European troops in Ukraine. That’s why the rules of engagement — meaning what militaries in Ukraine would do in case of a Russian attack — remain a key question. “If you are going to uphold a peace agreement, the rules of engagement are self-defense. That’s quite logical,” Burkhard said.  ‘CHOSEN’ VS ‘IMPOSED’ WARS  The high intensity conflict in Ukraine is triggering a deep rethink of how Western armed forces operate, according to Burkhard.  “We have moved from chosen wars — in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Mali — to imposed wars,” the French general said. In what he calls “chosen wars,” political and military leaders retain control over how much ammunition is fired, how long troops remain and how many personnel are deployed. Imposed wars are existential conflicts with no such choices. “If the Ukrainians don’t fight 100 percent [against Russia], they will disappear. That’s what imposed wars mean,” he added.  To face the new reality, Burkhard argued, Western armed forces have to diversify their arsenals. “The question of ‘what kills what and at what cost’ is central. If we only develop high-tech weapons that kill but are actually very, very expensive, we will probably not succeed,” he said, adding that armed forces also need low-cost weapons of attrition. The French general pushed back against the argument that the French armed forces could only last a few days in a high intensity conflict because munitions stocks are too low. France would not fight Russia on its own but alongside NATO allies, he emphasized.  “Our ammunition stocks are not as high as they should be because we have focused more on chosen wars,” Burkhard added. “Does it mean the French armed forces are not able to engage in operations? No. They can do so tonight if necessary.” 

President Donald Trump is weighing a new military aid package for Ukraine worth hundreds of millions of dollars, according to two people familiar with the plan, the first potential aid from the administration to the beleaguered country. The discussions come just over a week after the Pentagon blindsided many in the White House by abruptly halting part of an existing aid package with thousands of artillery rounds and precision ammunition. Trump has said that aid will resume. A new weapons package would underline the administration’s internal divisions over Ukraine assistance as its battle against Russia grinds past a third year. The money would come from a fund Congress approved last year under President Joe Biden that allows the Defense Department to take weapons out of U.S. military’s stockpiles for Ukraine. The fund, known as presidential drawdown authority, still holds about $3.8 billion. Trump, who has expressed frustration with the Kremlin’s refusal to help broker an end to the war, hinted in a Thursday interview with NBC News about “a major statement” on Monday involving Russia. He teased the announcement again on Friday, when asked by reporters about Russia’s overnight bombardment of a Ukrainian maternity hospital. “You’ll be seeing things happen,” he said. Neither the White House nor the Pentagon responded to requests for comment. Reuters first reported that the administration was considering new aid. NATO nations, meanwhile, are working on a larger deal to purchase U.S. weapons for Ukraine, said a congressional aide, who like others, was granted anonymity to discuss internal conversations. POLITICO reported earlier this month that Kyiv is asking Washington to let Europe buy American weapons. “We send weapons to NATO, and NATO is going to reimburse the full cost of those weapons,” Trump said in the NBC interview. Defense Department officials said they halted the weapons shipments due to concerns about U.S. stockpiles. But some officials disagreed that these relatively small shipments would have an adverse impact on U.S capabilities. The issue led Deputy Defense Secretary Steven Feinberg to call defense industry executives into his office for a meeting last month to discuss concerns over the stockpiles, according to a person briefed on the conversation. That person said the concerns were similar to those articulated by the Biden administration in its final months: the Ukraine war, along with continued operations in the Middle East, was taking a toll on the Pentagon’s munitions stockpiles. Feinberg, who handles the Pentagon’s budgeting process, is considering sending Congress a proposal for a new munitions funding package, according to the person, and is pushing the defense industry to speed up its production of air defenses and precision rockets and missiles. The aid package for Ukraine that was halted this month included 30 Patriot air defense missiles and hundreds of precision weapons that Ukraine uses for offensive and defensive purposes. Some 8,000 155mm howitzers shells and 250 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System rockets have started moving into Ukraine, but it is unclear if and when the Patriot air defense missiles will move, according to one of the people familiar with the situation. The potential new military assistance, the first from the U.S. since January, comes as Ukraine’s cities have faced the heaviest Russian drone and missile bombardments yet. Russian attacks on Ukraine overnight killed nine people and left dozens wounded.

Amid uncertainty over American military aid to Ukraine and Europe’s call to do more, President Donald Trump announced NATO will fund and send weapons to Kyiv. Last week, the U.S. halted shipments of some air defense missiles and other precision munitions to Ukraine, POLITICO first reported, before reversing course and resuming deliveries this week.  Then, on Thursday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz confirmed Berlin is prepared to acquire additional Patriot air defense systems for Ukraine. It also comes after Kyiv asked Washington to let Europe buy U.S. weapons for Ukraine.  Perhaps feeling the heat, Trump told NBC News late Thursday that: “We’re sending weapons to NATO, and NATO is paying for those weapons, a hundred percent.” “We’re going to be sending Patriots to NATO, and then NATO will distribute that,” he added. Across Europe, there’s a feeling of whiplash over the Trump administration’s recent Ukraine policy reversals plus confusion about who is making decisions at the Pentagon, while Kyiv worries that the aid package passed under the previous administration could soon run out, and the Republican-dominated U.S. Congress shows no sign of approving a new one. “We discussed with our partners the possibility of purchasing the necessary weapons packages in Europe and primarily in the U.S.,” Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Thursday. “We’re talking about air defense systems, ammunition, and so on.” Though Trump’s commitment to Ukraine has been uncertain since his return to office, he has in recent months voiced frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin and his refusal to end the war. In his NBC interview, Trump again expressed disappointment in Russia and said he would make “a major statement” Monday — though the contents of that are unknown for now.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz appealed to U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday to stand with Europe in defending Ukraine.  “Stay with us and stay with the Europeans,” Merz said at the recovery conference for Ukraine in Rome. “We are looking for a stable political order in this world. Stay with us on this side and on this page of our common history.” Trump’s willingness to continue U.S. support for Ukraine has been in question in recent weeks and months, particularly as his administration has dithered on supporting a substantial new sanctions bill targeting Russia under consideration in the U.S. Senate. At the beginning of July, the Pentagon halted shipments of some air defense missiles and other precision munitions to Ukraine. This week, however, Senate leaders said Trump was ready to throw his support behind the sanction package and the U.S. resumed paused weapons deliveries. That has raised hopes in Europe that the Trump administration’s support for Ukraine has grown more steadfast amid Russia’s escalating bombardment of Ukraine. In his comments Thursday, Merz also criticized Slovakia and its prime minister for holding back passage of an 18th package of EU sanctions against Russia. Under Prime Minister Robert Fico, who hails from the country’s leftist-populist Smer party, EU and NATO member Slovakia has broken ranks with Western allies on Ukraine, including by halting military aid to Kyiv amid Russia’s ongoing invasion. “I urgently ask Slovakia and its prime minister to give up the resistance and to free the way” for the sanctions package, said Merz. The chancellor also reiterated German support for Ukraine’s path to EU membership. The Ukraine Recovery Conference this week in Rome has drawn international leaders to make commitments on the embattled country’s reconstruction. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced the creation of the European Flagship Fund for the Reconstruction of Ukraine at the conference on Thursday.

President Donald Trump, appearing fed up, accused the Russian President Vladimir Putin of spouting “bullshit” and said he was “very strongly” considering supporting a punishing sanctions bill to bring Russia to heel. The legislation, which has broad bipartisan support, would impose high tariffs on countries that import Russian energy and implement secondary sanctions on foreign firms that support Russian energy production. While the legislation has for some time had the votes to pass in both chambers of Congress, Republican leadership has not brought it to the floor, waiting for a signal from Trump. “I’m looking at. It’s an optional bill,” Trump said during a Tuesday Cabinet meeting. “It’s totally at my option. They pass it totally at my option, and to terminate totally at my option. And I’m looking at it very strongly.” Trump hastold allies privately that he doesn’t believe sanctions would be effective in deterring Putin; and, during a meeting last month with Germany’s chancellor, he criticized the legislation as “a harsh bill, very harsh.” But his comments during the Cabinet meeting signaled that he could be changing his mind, or at the very least encouraging the Senate to send the bill to his desk while stopping short of committing to signing it into law — a means, said one person familiar with the administration’s thinking and granted anonymity to discuss it, of increasing the president’s options and leverage over Putin. Trump’s comments are the latest signal of a broadening rift between him and Putin, who the president once hoped would help him quickly end the war in Ukraine. Trump has noticeably cooled toward Putin since the Russian leader refused to attend a summit in Istanbul that the U.S. organized in an effort to wind down hostilities in Ukraine. Putin, instead, has intensified attacks on Kyiv and other population centers. “I don’t know what the hell happened to Putin,” Trump said in May, before posting on social media, “He has gone absolutely CRAZY.” At last month’s NATO summit in the Netherlands, Trump was chummy with allies, supportive of the alliance and held a long meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump reiterated Tuesday that he was “very unhappy” with Putin, with whom he spoke for more than an hour last Thursday. “We get a lot of bullshit thrown at us by Putin, [if] you want to know the truth,” Trump said. Trump’s remarks come less than 24 hours after he said that he intended to restart weapons shipments to Ukraine, which were halted last week following a Pentagon review that cited concerns about munitions shortages potentially impacting American military readiness. Although the White House insisted that the review hadn’t come as a surprise to the president, Trump on Tuesday claimed not to know who at the Pentagon oversaw the review and decided to pause Ukraine aid. “I don’t know,” he replied. “You tell me.”

Halted shipments of some American military aid to Ukraine could resume after a series of high-level meetings in Italy and Ukraine over the coming week, according to two people familiar with the planning. These meetings could be the key to resuming some of the aid, which POLITICO first reported were paused earlier this month. President Donald Trump’s Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg will meet with Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov in Rome at an international aid conference followed by a meeting in Kyiv this week and next, with the issue of aid sure to be at the top of the agenda. The Ukrainian government sees the resumption of air defense and precision munitions as critical to its war effort, as Russia has hit civilian targets hard in some of the largest drone and missile strikes of the war over the last two weeks. The U.S. has indicated to Kyiv that deliveries of engineering equipment and some armored vehicles will resume soon, though no timeline has been given yet, according to the people, who were granted anonymity to share details of ongoing discussions. The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment. The Kyiv meeting between Kellogg and Umerov was not originally intended to address U.S. military aid, and was “set up before news of the arms pause came to light last week,” Kellogg spokesperson Morgan Murphy said in response to a request for comment about the meetings. The Pentagon’s abrupt halt of missile defense and precision-guided munitions for Ukraine last week came as a shock to Ukraine and caught many lawmakers and Trump allies off guard. It also raised new questions among U.S. allies across the Atlantic about whether America was more broadly stepping back from military support for Kyiv. The munitions pause appeared counter to comments Trump made last month after meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the NATO summit in The Hague, where he indicated he was willing to step up the shipment of air defense systems to Ukraine. “They do want to have the anti-missile missiles, as they call them, and we’re going to see if we can make some available,” Trump said. “They’re very hard to get.” Trump discussed the aid pause on a call Friday with Zelenskyy, and also addressed a potential ceasefire agreement with Russia. The Ukrainian president said it was “probably the best conversation we have had during this whole time, the most productive.” That call came a day after Trump spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin, a conversation Trump indicated did not go well. He was “very unhappy” with the Putin call, he told reporters over the weekend. “It just seems like he wants to go all the way and just keep killing people. It’s not good. I wasn’t happy with it.” In contrast, he indicated that the call with Zelenskyy was more productive, and suggested that more weapons could soon be on the way. When asked about supplying more Patriot air defense missiles to Ukraine — which were stopped under orders from the Pentagon — Trump replied, “Yeah, we might … they’re going to need something because they’re being hit pretty hard.” On Monday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt indicated that the aid stoppage wasn’t permanent, portraying it as “a pause, to review, to ensure that everything the Pentagon is pushing out there is in the best interests of our military and our men and women in uniform.” Some of the weapons denied to Ukraine included 8,400 155mm artillery rounds, 142 Hellfire missiles and 252 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System missiles, which can precisely hit targets up to 50 miles away. Most significantly, the halted shipment also included 30 Patriot missiles used for shooting down Russian missiles and drones, which have been pounding apartment buildings and other civilian infrastructure in Kyiv. “The air defense munitions — the Patriots — are obviously the big one because Russia is producing so many UAVs that are becoming harder to hit with Ukraine’s mobile air defenses,” said Rob Lee, who studies the Russia-Ukraine war for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. “Russia is actually targeting the defense industry, and sometimes they have success and they destroy factories, so providing air defense systems is important because it also helps Ukraine produce its own munitions so it can sustain the fight itself,” Lee added. The stepped-up Russian attacks killed at least 11 civilians and injured more than 80 others, including children, Ukrainian officials said Monday. Over the past week, Russia launched at least 1,270 drones, 39 missiles and 1,000 glide bombs at different areas of Ukraine, Zelenskyy said Monday. Eli Stokols contributed reporting.

AARHUS, Denmark — A U.S. decision to stop delivering some key munitions to Ukraine is damaging for NATO and the European Union, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said Thursday. “If the U.S. decides not to provide Ukraine with what is needed it would be a serious setback for Ukraine and for Europe and for NATO,” she told a news conference in Aarhus, Denmark standing beside European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.  “The war in Ukraine has never only been about Ukraine,” she added. “This is a war about the future of Europe and therefore of course we will look into the decisions made in Washington.” Frederiksen’s comments come after the White House confirmed earlier this week that the U.S. would stop sending air defense missiles and some precision munitions to Ukraine, corroborating a report by POLITICO.   Denmark is one of Ukraine’s strongest backers, having contributed nearly €10 billion in military and civilian support since Russia’s February 2022 full-scale invasion, and Frederiksen has been one of the loudest voices in the EU calling to maintain the pressure on Russia. “If there are any gaps [left by the U.S.], I personally believe that we should be willing to fill them,” she added. Speaking minutes later at a separate press conference alongside Frederiksen and von der Leyen, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Kyiv is counting on the “continuation of American support,” but noted there are some items — namely Patriot missiles that Ukraine uses to shoot down Russian drones and missiles — that Europe can’t immediately replace. Asked about President Donald Trump’s planned Thursday conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Zelenskyy said Moscow had failed to abide by the terms of a ceasefire and noted he would be speaking with Trump in the coming days. Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Moscow had failed to abide by the terms of a ceasefire and noted he would be speaking with Donald Trump in the coming days. | Julien Warnand/EPA Pressed on what kind of support the EU would be able to give Ukraine, the bloc’s top two officials — European Council President António Costa and von der Leyen — stressed that Brussels remains fully committed to backing Kyiv, and noted that EU countries had provided €24 billion in total military aid for Ukraine so far this year, including 2 million artillery shells. While that amount is larger than the U.S. contribution, it is substantially less than what the U.S. and Europe were able to muster jointly before Washington wound down its aid to Kyiv.

The Pentagon’s decision to halt some weapons shipments to Ukraine blindsided even people who are usually closely briefed on such matters, including members of Congress, State Department officials and key European allies, according to six people familiar with the situation. The surprise move on Monday has fueled concern and frustration, including among top Republicans, that one senior Pentagon official appeared to hold outsized influence over the decision. The pause — reported first by POLITICO — was driven by Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby and a small circle of advisers over concerns that certain weapons stockpiles in the U.S. were running low. Even allies of President Donald Trump were frustrated by the move, and accused officials such as Colby — who led a review of U.S. munitions stockpiles that preceded the freeze — of pushing the move forward without notifying the rest of the administration or others. They noted that the decision to halt the weapons shipments to Ukraine seemed to be made with little coordination within the administration after massive cuts to the National Security Council shrank the once-powerful policy body to a fraction of its former size. “I think it’s all made by the DOD policy director, this Colby guy. We essentially don’t have a national security adviser,” said Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas). “I’m not even sure [Secretary of State Marco] Rubio was consulted on this one … There’s internal division in the White House.” The move caused bewilderment and whiplash in Ukraine and raised questions across the Atlantic about whether America was stepping back permanently from military support of Kyiv — just as Trump appeared to warm to the idea of sending more aid to protect Ukraine from Russian bombardments. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, wrote to Trump on Tuesday to request an emergency briefing from the White House and Department of Defense on the pause on military aid, which was approved during the Biden administration. One U.S. official said the Pentagon’s decision was uncoordinated and caught the State Department by surprise. The U.S. official, along with the others, was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive conversations. Two other U.S. officials said Pentagon leadership did not seek any input from the State Department, the U.S. embassy in Kyiv or Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg’s team before pulling back a shipment of critical arms that were already on the ground in Poland. Some in the Joint Staff were also opposed to the halt, both officials and a person familiar with the discussions said. Both the White House and the State Department pushed back on the notion that the munitions pause caught administration officials off guard. “This is false,” said a White House official who was granted anonymity to talk about an ongoing review. “The president and top officials expect the DOD to regularly review aid allocations to ensure they are in line with the America First agenda.” But the official wouldn’t say exactly when the president and top aides were made aware of the decision to stop the weapons shipment, saying only that they knew “prior to the story” POLITICO published on Tuesday. Colby did not immediately respond to a request for comment on his role in the decision. In a statement sent from a White House spokesperson Tuesday evening, Colby said that the Pentagon “continues to provide the president with robust options to continue military aid to Ukraine” while “rigorously examining and adapting its approach … while also preserving U.S. forces’ readiness.” He said the original reporting was “an attempt to portray division that does not exist.” During a Friday briefing on Ukraine for Congress, officials from the State Department and the Pentagon made no mention of the pause and are not answering official inquiries about it, a congressional aide said. The aide added that Ukraine has a “critical need for continued replenishment of various arms given continued Russian assault,” particularly air defense like Patriot interceptors, long-range rockets and conventional shells, which have been stopped. Across the Atlantic, European diplomats and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s team were scrambling to find out why the U.S. had abruptly frozen aid once the White House confirmed the news. Neither Zelenskyy nor the European Union received advanced notice, according to a European official and a Ukrainian adviser. The U.S. and Ukraine are working to set up a call between Trump and Zelenskyy, two people familiar with the planning said. The idea was set in motion on Tuesday as word began filtering out that the U.S. had slammed the brakes on shipments of the weapons to Ukraine. “The U.S. is informing Ukraine [of the decision] today in Kyiv and a phone call will also be organized very soon between Trump and Zelenskyy,” said a European diplomat familiar with the planning. “The U.S. says this is not a pause, not a suspension. The U.S. is still very much in the process of determining how best to support Ukrainian defense. This is still a priority.” Zelenskyy, in a statement on Wednesday, said that Ukrainian officials were in touch with their U.S. counterparts to try to get clarity on the situation. “One way or another, we must ensure protection for our people,” the Ukrainian leader said. The episode underscores the outsized role that Colby is playing in the agency — and how tightly decisions are being held within some parts of the Pentagon’s ranks. As one of the few officials with prior government experience, Colby “understands how paper moves in the building in a way most other people who are there now just don’t,” said one former Pentagon official. “The front office at the Pentagon has been hollowed out and most people there don’t have any experience in government, which is also true at the National Security Council” at the White House, the person added. Colby was one of the primary authors of the 2018 National Defense Strategy during the first Trump administration. He is also heading up a Pentagon review of the AUKUS submarine pact with Australia and the United Kingdom, an assessment that also came as a surprise to key Trump administration officials. Meanwhile, lawmakers in both parties said they were surprised by the Trump administration’s decision, with some questioning why Congress was not consulted beforehand. Such a move would be required before pausing weapons shipments that were already approved by lawmakers. “The Biden administration would come in with what the Ukrainians wanted, what we could supply, and then we’d have discussions about what would be expedited or put in the pipeline,” Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), the ranking member on the House panel overseeing DOD’s budget. “Those conversations are not taking place now.” House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said he found out about the decision from news accounts — but he had no complaints. “I don’t have any reason at this point to doubt the explanation that was given — that we’ve reached critical shortages of our own,” Cole said in an interview. “I know how much more material we’ve gone through, more than anybody six months ago thought we would, because of what happened in the Middle East. So there are limits. We have real problems with our industrial base. I expect the president’s first obligation is to look after the defense of the United States.”Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), the chair of the House Armed Services Committee, initially said he wasn’t aware of a delay. But after his staff received a readout from the Pentagon, Rogers called it “just a regular pause to look and see what our stockpiles are,” after recent military operations in the Middle East. The Armed Services Committee, Rogers said, is waiting for more information. “They’re just getting a good count. And there are three different categories [of munitions] where they think we’re a little bit below where we should be for our own purposes,” he said. “We’re trying to get them to give us some final details of what those three categories are.” Ultimately, the Pentagon should publicly clarify why it paused the weapons shipments, he said. “They just need to be more transparent about this because people are confusing this with our commitment to Ukraine,” Rogers said. “It has nothing to do with that.” The panel’s top Democrat, Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), said he was “blindsided — because this administration does not communicate with us at all.” Joe Gould contributed reporting.

The Pentagon has halted shipments of some air defense missiles and other precision munitions to Ukraine due to worries that U.S. weapons stockpiles have fallen too low. The decision was driven by the Pentagon’s policy chief, Elbridge Colby, and was made after a review of Pentagon munitions stockpiles, leading to concerns that the total number of artillery rounds, air defense missiles and precision munitions was sinking, according to three people familiar with the issue. The initial decision to withhold some aid promised during the Biden administration came in early June, according to the people, but is only taking effect now as Ukraine is beating back some of the largest Russian barrages of missiles and drones at civilian targets in Kyiv and elsewhere. The people were granted anonymity to discuss current operations. The Pentagon and White House did not respond to a request for comment. Russia over the weekend launched its biggest aerial attack on Ukraine since the start of the three-year war, with a reported 477 drones and decoys and 60 missiles. Of these, 249 were reportedly shot down and 226 were lost, likely having been electronically jammed. The move by the Pentagon to halt some of the shipments stoked fears among Ukraine’s allies in Congress that the country would be left vulnerable to further Russian airstrikes. The munitions are a mix of air defenses and precision weapons that have been flowing to Ukraine for much of the past two-plus years. The weapons are a mix of two different streams of support the U.S has provided Ukraine, both under the Biden administration. Some come from drawdowns on current stockpiles, with the DOD receiving money to replenish those munitions as quickly as possible. The second comes from the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, in which the U.S. funds the purchase of weapons for Ukraine from American defense firms. The money has been used to put weapons under contract for the Ukrainian government. Money in the fund was all obligated by the end of the Biden administration, with deliveries coming whenever the systems are ready. The drawdowns from current stockpiles have continued under the Trump administration, which has been using up the last of the $61 billion in funding to replenish U.S. stocks of weapons and provide billions in aid for Israel and other partners. The Trump administration has not requested any further aid, though there is enough left over from the Biden administration to last Ukraine several more months, according to an administration official. Joe Gould contributed to this report.