President Donald Trump reportedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to strike the heart of Russia—specifically Moscow and St. Petersburg—if given access to long-range American weapons, according to two sources cited by the Financial Times. The July 4 phone call, described as bold and unfiltered, revealed Trump’s frustration with Russia’s ongoing war campaign and hinted at a major shift in U.S. posture if his conditions aren’t met.

“Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow? Can you hit St. Petersburg too?” Trump allegedly asked during the call. According to sources, Zelenskyy replied confidently: “Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons.”

This wasn’t just rhetorical. The conversation reportedly led to a follow-up meeting in Rome between U.S. and Ukrainian officials, where discussions began on what specific long-range systems could be exchanged. The suggestion to strike Russia’s most symbolic cities, if true, represents a remarkable pivot from prior U.S. policy, which often sought to limit Ukrainian operations to defensive and close-range tactics.

On Monday, the Trump administration took a major step by greenlighting offensive weapons transfers through NATO, giving Vladimir Putin a 50-day deadline to broker peace or face massive tariffs. “Very unhappy” with the Russian leader’s stalling tactics, Trump is now positioning the United States as ready to escalate both militarily and economically if Moscow doesn’t act.

According to Financial Times sources, Trump expressed his support for deep strikes as a way to “make them [the Russians] feel the pain.” This new tone coincides with growing bipartisan momentum in Congress, where lawmakers are drafting a bill that would permit the administration to slap 500% tariffs on countries still purchasing Russian energy exports.

Putin, for his part, reportedly remains unmoved. Kremlin insiders told Reuters that Russia is prepared to weather another round of sanctions and continue prosecuting the war. Whether that resilience holds if Russian cities come under direct threat is another matter entirely.

The idea of striking deep into Russian territory has long been considered a red line—even by Kyiv’s Western allies. But Trump’s pressure campaign is changing that calculus. With a potential second Trump presidency unfolding, he appears willing to take a more aggressive line than his predecessor, threatening both economic and military pain if the Kremlin doesn’t back down.

Earlier this month, the Trump administration briefly paused Patriot missile shipments to Ukraine, citing a stockpile review. But that decision was reversed just days later, another signal that the U.S. might be returning to a posture of direct deterrence through strength.

Zelenskyy, who has publicly pleaded for more powerful weapons for over two years, likely welcomed Trump’s assertiveness. But the potential blowback from strikes on Russian cities could trigger a dangerous escalation with nuclear undertones—something Trump himself warned about during his 2024 campaign, even as he criticized Biden’s “weakness” abroad.

The White House and Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry did not respond to requests for comment. However, Trump’s allies are already framing his latest move as a sign of “peace through strength,” betting that pressure—not appeasement—will bring Putin to the table.

If the July 4 call and subsequent Rome meeting prove to be a turning point, Ukraine may soon receive the kind of offensive firepower it’s long requested. Whether that leads to peace—or a deeper conflagration—depends largely on what happens in the next 50 days.