WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump is receiving accolades from his staunchest supporters for delaying the delivery of certain weapons to Ukraine. This comes in response to recent skepticism among some backers regarding the Republican President’s dedication to avoiding involvement in international disputes.
This week’s declaration to halt shipments of vital air defense systems, precision-guided artillery, and other military supplies to Ukraine follows just weeks after Trump directed the U.S. military to launch attacks on Iranian nuclear sites.
The assaults on these locations in Iran led to some fervent advocates of the “Make America Great Again” initiative to question if Trump was breaking his promise to avoid dragging America into unnecessary military engagements, particularly as he involved the U.S. armed forces in the conflict between Israel and Tehran.
With the Ukraine pause, which affects a crucial resupply of Patriot missiles, Trump is sending the message to his most enthusiastic backers that he is committed to following through on his campaign pledge to wind down American support for Ukraine’s efforts to repel Russia, a conflict he has repeatedly described as a costly boondoggle for U.S. taxpayers.
“The choice was this: either prioritize equipping our own troops with a munition in short supply (and which was used to defend U.S. troops last week) or provide them to a country where there are limited U.S. interests,” Dan Caldwell, who was ousted as a senior adviser to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, posted on X.
Caldwell publicly worried before the Iran strikes that U.S. involvement could incite a major war and ultimately cost American lives.
Far-right influencer Jack Posobiec, another ardent MAGA backer, warned as Trump weighed whether to carry out strikes on Iran last month that such a move “would disastrously split the Trump coalition.”
He was quick to cheer the news about pausing some weapons deliveries to Ukraine: “America FIRST,” Posobiec posted on X.
Both the White House and the Pentagon have justified the move as being consistent with Trump’s campaign pledge to limit U.S. involvement in foreign wars.
“The president was elected on an America first platform to put America first,” Pentagon chief spokesman Sean Parnell said.
At the same time, the decision is stirring anxiety among those in the more hawkish wing of the Republican Party. Many are flummoxed by Trump’s halting the flow of U.S. arms just as Russia accelerates its unrelenting assault on Ukraine.
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, a Pennsylvania Republican who hails from a district that former Vice President Kamala Harris won in 2024, wrote to Trump and the Pentagon on Wednesday expressing “serious concern” about the decision and requesting an emergency briefing.
“We can’t let (Russian President Vladimir) Putin prevail now. President Trump knows that too and it’s why he’s been advocating for peace,” Rep. Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican, wrote on X. “Now is the time to show Putin we mean business. And that starts with ensuring Ukraine has the weapons Congress authorized to pressure Putin to the negotiating table.”
Trump spoke by phone with Putin on Thursday, the sixth call between the leaders since Trump’s return to office. The leaders discussed Iran, Ukraine and other issues but did not specifically address the suspension of some U.S. weapons shipments to Ukraine, according to Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s foreign affairs adviser.
Zelenskyy said in Denmark after meeting with major European Union backers that he hopes to talk to Trump in the coming days about the suspension.
The administration says it is part of global review of the U.S. stockpile and is a necessary audit after sending nearly $70 billion in arms to Ukraine since Putin launched the war on Ukraine in February 2022.
The pause was coordinated by Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby.
Colby, before taking his position, spoke publicly about the need to focus U.S. strategy more on China, widely seen as the United States’ biggest economic and military competitor. At his Senate confirmation hearing in March, he said the U.S. doesn’t have a “multi-war military.”
“This is the restrainers like Colby flexing their muscle and saying, ‘Hey, the Pacific is more important,’” said retired Navy Adm. Mark Montgomery, an analyst at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
Backers of a more restrained U.S. foreign policy say the move is necessary, given an unsettled Middle East, rising challenges in Asia and the stress placed on the U.S. defense industrial complex after more than three years of war in Ukraine.
“You’re really coming up to the point where continuing to provide aid to Ukraine is putting at risk the U.S. ability to operate in future crises,” said Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities. “And you don’t know when those crises are going to happen.”
“So you have to be a little bit cautious,” she added.
Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
