...
By Newsweek Editors
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
President Donald Trump appeared to draw a moral equivalence between reported Russian intelligence-sharing with Iran and U.S. support for Ukraine in comments that could further complicate relations with European allies and critics in Washington.
Asked whether Russia was providing Iran with satellite data to help target U.S. and Israeli missile defenses, Trump told the Financial Times: "I don't know one way or the other. But you could also make the case that we helped Ukraine to an extent.
"It's hard to say: ‘you're targeting us, but we've been helping Ukraine.’"
Read More on Analysis
The remarks came amid mounting reports that Moscow is supplying Tehran with targeting intelligence on American forces in the Middle East. Critics say Trump’s framing often echoes arguments used by the Kremlin to justify its own military actions.
The question goes beyond rhetoric. If Russia is indeed assisting Iranian targeting of U.S. forces, it would mark a rare case of a major nuclear power indirectly enabling attacks on American troops.
It also highlights a growing overlap between the Ukraine war and tensions in the Middle East, as Kyiv offers the U.S. and Gulf states its expertise on drone warfare to combat Iran.
If Moscow is helping Tehran target U.S. forces while Washington supports Ukrainian strikes on Russian assets, both powers could increasingly find themselves involved in indirect confrontations across multiple theaters.
Trump Points to Real Parallel
Since the early months of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, the United States has provided intelligence support that has helped Ukraine conduct strikes against Russian targets.
Reports in spring 2022 by outlets including The New York Times, NBC, and CBS, said U.S. intelligence contributed to Ukrainian attacks that killed Russian generals and sank the Moskva cruiser in the Black Sea.
The decision to carry out those strikes rested with Ukraine, and U.S. intelligence was not provided for specific attacks against Russian personnel, which would violate U.S. policy.
- Exclusive: Iran Kurdish Leader Says Ready to Join War if US Gives Support
But while Washington does not select targets for Ukrainian forces, it does provide battlefield intelligence on Russian movements, warnings of incoming aerial attacks, and surveillance data that can improve Ukraine’s targeting capabilities.
Senior U.S. officials have broadly confirmed this intelligence sharing since 2022.
The Trump administration temporarily paused intelligence sharing with Kyiv in early 2025 in an effort to pressure Ukraine into making concessions in peace negotiations with Russia.
The move followed the widely publicized Oval Office clash between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Intelligence sharing was later restored as relations improved, and is ongoing to this day.
Trump Has Echoed Russian Arguments Before
Trump’s latest comments also reflect a pattern in his rhetoric on the war, one his critics say echoes the Kremlin.
The president has frequently blamed Ukraine and NATO for triggering the conflict and has criticized Zelensky’s legitimacy, once describing him as a "dictator" because elections have been suspended under martial law.
Trump has also called for elections in Ukraine, a demand repeated by the Kremlin, but which cannot be implemented while the country remains under martial law during wartime.
Meanwhile, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, a good friend and close ally of the president, appeared to lend legitimacy to Russian referendums in occupied Ukrainian territory.
Witkoff told Tucker Carlson in March 2025 that the regions were Russian-speaking and that referendums indicated residents "want to be under Russian rule."
Democrats, Allies See Weakness
Trump’s approach to Russia has drawn sharp criticism from Democrats and many European leaders, who argue it risks emboldening Putin.
They are likely to interpret Trump’s comments on Russian intelligence-sharing with Iran through that lens, particularly as the administration simultaneously eases sanctions on Russian oil in response to rising global energy prices.
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat, told The Kyiv Independent: "What does Vladimir Putin have on Trump that makes him think he can get away with this s**t?"
Senator Elissa Slotkin, a Michigan Democrat and former CIA officer, warned that the issue could represent a dangerous escalation.
"If Russia is helping to kill U.S. forces, we have crossed a Rubicon," Slotkin wrote on X. "We have to take decisive action. Instead, we're giving them breaks on oil, and they’re making a ton of money."
European leaders have also expressed concern over the easing of sanctions on Russia, as Trump seeks to mitigate the oil price spike sparked by his war against Iran.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said, per DPA: "To ease sanctions now, for whatever reasons, we think that's wrong…We will…continue to increase the pressure on Moscow."
French President Emmanuel Macron added: "In no case should an increase in the price of oil lead us to change our position with regard to Russia."
Strategic Transparency or Concession?
Trump’s acknowledgment that the United States has helped Ukraine strike Russian targets could be interpreted as a form of strategic transparency for two reasons.
First, it helps to keep Russia onside and engaged. An alternative, tougher response to Russia sharing intelligence with Iran could alienate Moscow while Washington is pushing hard for peace in Ukraine.
It would also offer Russia a propaganda win by vindicating the Kremlin’s accusation of Western double standards.
Second, openly recognizing reciprocal intelligence support in proxy conflicts may reduce the risk of escalation by acknowledging the realities of great-power competition.
From that perspective, framing Russian assistance to Iran as comparable to U.S. support for Ukraine could help prevent the issue from spiraling into a broader confrontation.
But such framing risks legitimizing Russian support for attacks on U.S. forces and blurring the distinction between aiding a partner defending its territory and assisting attacks on American troops.
At the heart of the debate is a broader question about great-power competition: Whether acknowledging reciprocal proxy support reduces escalation risks or normalizes it.
Gamble on Engagement With Moscow
Trump’s comments reflect a broader strategy of engagement with Moscow aimed at ending the Ukraine war while reopening economic ties.
This marks a shift from the Biden administration’s policy of isolating Russia while balancing pressure on Moscow with efforts to avoid a direct NATO-Russia conflict.
Since returning to office, the Trump administration has pursued multiple rounds of talks with Russian officials and held a summit between Trump and Putin in Alaska in August 2025.
Trump’s initial multi-point peace plan for Ukraine would require Kyiv to accept territorial concessions and remain outside NATO in exchange for security guarantees and a phased lifting of sanctions on Russia.
As well as stabilizing the security situation in Europe, economic considerations are also part of the strategy.
The administration sees Russia as a potential major partner for investment in energy projects and resource extraction, but that only becomes viable with peace in Ukraine.
To that end, Trump officials argue that engagement with Moscow increases the chances of ending the war.
But critics, not least Ukraine, counter that it minimizes and ultimately rewards Russia’s role in fueling instability and violence in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.
Trump’s newest remarks highlight that central tension in his Russia policy.
Does engagement with Moscow reduce geopolitical risk or accommodate it?
Hey gang, Carlo Versano here. I hope you enjoyed this article. As Newsweek's Director of Politics and Culture and editor of the 1600 newsletter, I'm keen to hear what you think. Now, Newsweek is offering a new service to allow you to communicate directly with me in the form of a text message chat. You can sign up and get a direct line to me, as well as the reporters who work for me. You can shape our coverage.
As a Newsweek member, we're offering this service to you for free. You can sign up below, or read more about how it works here. Let's talk!
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines