Trump’s big con convinced too many that Patriot interceptors were coming to Ukraine
The actual reporting of war and politics these days in most media outlets can be incredibly weak. The system often seems broken – reporting White House-inspired narratives that have no basis in fact as actual events, and replacing rigor with herd behavior.
The latest batch of stories in many of the major outlets, about Trump’s now pivoting to support Ukraine and of his definitely agreeing to give Ukraine a license to build Patriot interceptors (or indeed whole Patriot systems), showed better than anything how this process worked.
The White House and MAGA supporters of Ukraine (who actually constantly betray the Ukrainians) want to get this narrative out for certain politically beneficial reasons. They started spreading the story and the press ran with it. The result was a dishonest narrative spread far and fast – and it actually became the common wisdom although it was not true.
The White House could also use the press to spread such stories because officials have understood just how weak and pliant much of the media is. Doing what I have done over the last few years has been learning experience (and not it a good way) about how much of the media (and much of the think-tank community) works.
The key thing in both worlds is not being accurate or truthful as much as it is gaining access to power and being seen to be smart. Access and perceived intelligence – usually drastically greater than real intelligence – are the currency of these worlds.
To maintain access, some reporters and commentators will say exactly what the White House wants, time and again, even after the White House narrative has been shown to be nonsense (many times).
When it comes to think tanks, many are not interested in attempting even-handed or rigorous research; instead, they want to impress funders and also maintain access, and thus they publish crap to appeal to power and maintain their perceived viability (in most cases they have none). This means that much of what is produced in think-tanks is of laughable quality, meant to signal access and support, not to actually analyze a problem or policy.
In other words, the output is often weak, shallow and even deceptive at times. And we have seen that in spades over the last few weeks. The output also hurts. Last week I showed how listening to that narrative has hurt Ukraine – how having hope that the narrative about Trump changing his mind and aiding them has helped Putin bombard their cities.
This week I thought it would be worthwhile to talk about how such a con takes place and can be so widely amplified.
Anatomy of a con
Donald Trump has known from the moment that he became president again that Ukraine was desperate for Patriot missiles. Indeed, he knew it so well that he used that information both to boast about his own power and also to abuse the Ukrainians as supplicants.
Remember, he loves things that make him seem powerful. Knowing that the Ukrainians were desperate for Patriot interceptors, as the Russians were bombarding their cities and people, is exactly the kind of thing that turns him on.
Trump knew from the start how dependent Ukraine was on Patriots
Examples of Trump knowing how desperately Ukraine needs Patriots
How can I say that? Well, he went to great lengths to tell the world – not in a way that somehow politically helped him, but just because he could. Lets start with examples from very early into his second term:
April 14, 2025 – Oval Office: Just before Trump was down to meet with El Salvadoran president Bukele, he was asked whether he had spoken to Zelensky about his offer to purchase more Patriot batteries, Trump replied:
Oh, I don’t know. He’s always looking to purchase missiles. You know? He’s against – listen, when you start a war, you got to know that you can win the war, right?
He continued on to insult Ukraine by saying that you don’t start a war against somebody twenty times your size and then hope that people give you some missiles – implying that Ukraine had decided to start the war.
June 25, 2025 – NATO summit press conference: The clearest “I know what they want” statement by Trump about Ukraine’s desperate need for Patriots, and crucially it is an unprompted elaboration rather than a yes/no answer. Asked by a Ukrainian reporter, whose husband was serving in the Ukrainian army, about giving Ukraine Patriots, Trump responded:
Good. So let me just tell you, they do want to have the anti-missile missiles. Okay. As they call them, the Patriots. And we’re going to see if we can make some available. They’re very hard to get. We need them too. We were supplying them to Israel and they’re very effective, 100% effective. Hard to believe how effective. And they do want that more than any other thing, as you probably know.
July 13, 2025 – Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland: Asked whether he would still send ten entire Patriot systems, which had supposedly been promised, Trump said he hadn’t agreed on the number yet but that he understood that Ukraine “desperately” needed them.
By the way, this exact time was part of the con when Trump was acting all angry at Putin, and talking about getting tough on Russia – only to turn around and roll out the Red Carpet in Alaska a few weeks later.
Examples of the administration cutting Patriot supplies to Ukraine
In other words, it is clear that Trump knows how much Ukraine desperately needs Patriots and how much leverage that gives him – and he is enjoying it. However, what the US actually does in 2025 and 2026 is regularly slow down and even stop Ukraine from getting promised Patriots. Here are some examples.
March 2025 – blanket aid suspension: After the ambush of Zelensky in the Oval Office, the administration paused all aid to Ukraine, including Patriots in transit or already in Poland, until Ukrainian leaders showed more “appreciation,” with a White House official saying the administration was “pausing and reviewing our aid to ensure that it is contributing to a solution.” Intelligence sharing was cut too.
July 2025 – the DOD halt: Dozens of Patriot interceptors, (as well as thousands of 155mm rounds, 100+ Hellfires, 250+ GMLRS, plus Stingers, AIMs and grenade launchers) were halted on their way to Ukraine. Note the timing: just before Trump goes to great lengths to say how much he knows Ukraine needs Patriots.
This kind of cat and mouse game with the administration tormenting Ukraine over Patriots continues for the entire year. And then Trump’s War with Iran breaks out and Patriot deliveries practically stop. For all of 2026, according to Zelensky, deliveries of Patriots to Ukraine were running at a paltry one-third level of the reduced flow of 2025.
It is important to understand the timeline – as it shows that the Patriot shortage was known in the administration from the start, was used to damage Ukraine multiple times and, in the end, resulted in far fewer Patriots for Ukraine than had been promised.
Trump promises a Patriot license as part of the con
Now, move back to one month ago. On July 9, Trump promised Zelensky, surprisingly to some, that he would allow Ukraine to have a license to make its own Patriot interceptors (or indeed whole Patriot systems). Now this was a big part of the con – and it was a con.
First, there had been no preparation for this move at all – the defense companies involved had not been informed and allowed to prepare. In other words, the promise was not substantial; it was a tactic.
Second, Trump was feeling pressure because all of his boasting about Russia being powerful and crushing Ukraine was looking decidedly silly as Ukraine was striking back.
Third, Trump did not want to give Ukraine Patriot interceptors at that moment, because he knew that Ukraine was basically out – and this gave Putin an opportunity to bombard Ukraine with impunity. So he could dangle the license idea and keep Ukraine from getting the interceptors it needed at that moment.
In other words, it was an empty promise, with no substance behind it, the upshot of which was to delay any help for Ukraine for a considerable period. It was a political maneuver to serve Trump’s needs and help Putin while making it seem the US was about to help Ukraine. It was a con.
The press goes wild about Trump now siding with Ukraine
If you look back at the reporting about Trump and Ukraine from July 9 until just a few days ago, you will see the real political advantages Trump accrued from the con. Even though he had no intention of allowing Ukraine to build Patriots, this move, fed by anonymous White House sources, as always, was part of Trump pivoting to Ukraine, of Trump being “wowed” by Ukrainian achievements or even, most hysterically, of Trump being finally frustrated enough with Putin to be willing to hurt Russia (this, by the way, was about the fourth time that Trump had “finally” been so frustrated by Putin).
The stories appeared in almost all the major press, and they were so shockingly similar in tone and content that you can only see how a certain narrative was being pushed.
This is what I mean about being cynical about the level of reporting that is being sent out. It is parroting lines, not rigorous analysis.
Here are three examples from major outlets from the last four days of July – and what is particularly freaky is that all the headlines have almost exactly the same phrasing. That is a lot of warming.
Thankfully for it, the New York Times adopted the same narrative language, but did at least present the warming as a question, not a definite.
So, overall, the con had worked a charm.
The con culminates and the Patriot license is shown to be nonsense
Of course all good things must come to an end – and all good cons too. On July 31, 2026, after this final rush of press stories about how pro-Ukraine Trump was becoming, Trump pulled the rug out completely from under Ukraine. He started musing publicly about how he might not, after all that, give Ukraine a Patriot license.
Moreover, it turned out that Trump, precisely when we were told that he was warming towards Ukraine, had nixed an emergency request from Zelensky for interceptors as the Ukrainians basically had none.
So not only was Ukraine not going to get the license, it was being strung along on getting any new missiles. This has left the Ukrainians desperate, as they really are defenseless against Russian ballistic missiles. Zelensky is now left trying to sell the idea of Ukraine eventually receiving a tiny number of new interceptors, maybe just old PURL ones, as something.
He was conned.
The power of a Trump con is that people want to believe it, and because the press is so supine and willing to spread White House stories uncritically, they amplify it. Yes, Ukrainians really did believe that Trump was warming to them – not just because they wanted to (and they did want to) but because they were being told this constantly by the American press. There was nothing but hot air and dreams (and a desperate desire to retain access to Washington sources) behind all the stories about Trump moving over to Ukraine’s side.
The con worked a charm – though if there was a press with the willingness to confront White House narratives and point out that repeatedly how Trump had served Putin’s interests, it might not have been so damaging.
Another narrative shift
With Trump having maneuvered so effectively that Ukraine is now defenseless against ballistic missiles, there have been arguments that the whole idea that Ukraine was taking some of the initiative in the war was somehow flawed, and that Putin was regaining the initiative. There was this piece in the Spectator, for instance.
This is an overreaction. On the battlefield, the basics of the situation still favor the Ukrainian strategy of causing massive Russian casualties while saving their own lives (which hopefully is even gaining ground under General Drapatyi).
And the data support this. ISW’s most recent update on the Russian summer offensive (it is already into August – so much of the summer is gone) shows that Russian advances are miniscule, far below the small advances of 2025, and Russian casualties are now more than 40,000 a month.
It is Russia that is still struggling to generate soldiers to replace losses – and that means that the idea of Russia having a societal wide mobilization is being discussed more and more.
Ukrainian mid-range strike continues to hammer Russian logistics in occupied Ukraine. The Ukrainians seem to have “fire control” now on the highway into Crimea. So the Russian army is struggling, suffering massive losses and its logistic situation is getting worse, not better.
In long range strikes, when Ukraine focuses on refineries, it can still do great damage. That means that Russia is still going to generate less income going forward and that will hurt the Russian war machine.
So, yes, Ukraine is going to suffer a great deal in the coming months through civilian losses and some successful Russian strategic attacks – thanks in part to how the USA has conned the Ukrainians. That is undeniable. However, the Russian military is still failing badly this summer – and that will not change.
Keep that in mind.
Phillips O’Brien is a pr0fessor of strategic studies at the University of St. Andrew. This article originally appeared on his substack Phillips’s Newsletter. It is republished with permission.
