Ukraine-Russia war latest: Trump says ‘Putin is afraid of the US but not Europe’ in latest attack on allies

breaking: Russia fires Oreshnik hypersonic missile at Ukraine, signaling possible escalation

Overnight, Moscow launched its new hypersonic Oreshnik missile against Ukraine, striking western targets near the European Union border. The weapon, which Russian officials say can carry multiple warheads, previously saw only a test use in 2024 wiht dummy payloads. If tonight’s strike carried live warheads, it would mark a notable shift in how this system is deployed.

Early accounts describe damage to infrastructure described by Moscow as critical, with Ukrainian authorities not yet able to gauge the full extent. Echoing recent Russian strikes, Kyiv reports that the attack targeted silent infrastructure and left many residents exposed to freezing conditions.

Analysts note that the oreshnik’s defining feature is its multi-warhead capability, allowing several targets to be hit concurrently. The missile traces its roots to the RS-26 Rubezh, a system originally developed as an intercontinental option, underscoring its potential to blend long-range reach with rapid, broad striking power. While such weapons can carry either nuclear or conventional payloads, there is no public indication that nuclear forces were involved in this latest attack.

International reaction swirled as the world’s powers prepared a Security Council session to discuss Russia’s latest strikes. Western allies promptly backed Ukraine’s bid for an emergency meeting, underscoring concerns about the humanitarian toll and broader strategic implications.

Russia has suggested the strike was in response to Ukrainian actions around Vladimir Putin’s residences, a narrative Kyiv rejects. European governments condemned the attack as an escalatory move aimed at instilling fear,while Ukraine urged open diplomacy and stronger deterrence against further aggression.

In Kyiv, the bombardment left thousands of homes without heat in sub-zero weather, with reported casualties including emergency responders. Official figures indicate several people were killed and numerous others injured as the city faced harsh winter conditions.

What we know now

Details remain developing,but the overnight attack marks at least the second demonstrated use of the Oreshnik since its 2024 testing phase. Ukrainian authorities warned the impact coudl have broader regional spillovers,heightening urgency for allied security measures.

Key facts at a glance

Aspect	details
Missile	Oreshnik hypersonic ballistic missile
Purpose	Potential explosive payload; multi-warhead capability
Previous use	Test with dummy warheads, November 2024
Target area	Western Ukraine, near the EU border
Damage level	extent not fully clear; infrastructure struck
Basis	Derived from RS-26 Rubezh
Nuclear component	No public indication of nuclear payload in this strike

Evergreen insights: why this matters beyond today

• Hypersonic capability: The Oreshnik’s speed and multi-warhead design complicate defenses, increasing the strategic profile of Russia’s arms repertoire and prompting more aggressive missile-defense planning.
• Deterrence dynamics: A shift from test-avoiding to live-fire use signals a higher risk calculus for both Moscow and Kyiv’s international backers, perhaps prompting intensified sanctions, aid, and diplomatic maneuvering.
• Regional security implications: Attacks near the EU border raise concerns about spillovers, civilian harm, and the resilience of energy and infrastructure networks in winter conditions.
• International responses: Expect heightened UN and alliance discussions on defensive postures, crisis management, and the boundaries of war conduct under evolving warfare technology.

Context and implications for readers

Analysts say the Oreshnik’s design—capable of delivering several warheads—could foreshadow a broader tactic of saturating defenses and complicating retaliatory planning. The incident underscores the fragility of civilian infrastructure during peak winter months and intensifies the call for robust air defenses and civilian protection measures from NATO, the EU, and partner nations.

For ongoing coverage, authorities in Kyiv and allied capitals have signaled they will pursue accountability for civilian harms and pursue diplomatic channels to de-escalate, while preparing for potential further incursions in what some describe as a riskier phase of the conflict.

Reader questions

How should Western defense strategies adapt to hypersonic,multi-warhead threats in a winter security surroundings?

What balance should be struck between diplomatic engagement and firm deterrence to prevent further escalation?

Further reading: details and updates from major outlets remain essential as events unfold. For related analyses and expert commentary, see coverage from Reuters and other authoritative sources mentioned in this report.

Call to action

Share your thoughts on how the international community can respond to this evolving threat. Do you believe current defense and diplomatic efforts are enough to deter further escalation?

Follow updates and join the discussion as the Security council convenes and new facts becomes available.

External notes: For broader context on the Oreshnik system and its testing history, readers can consult Reuters’ in-depth explainer and official defense briefings from allied governments.

Stay informed with ongoing reporting and self-reliant analysis as the situation develops.

Cyber‑espionage campaign on German energy grids (late December 2025)

trump’s Recent Remarks on the ukraine‑Russia Conflict

• statement headline: Former President Donald Trump declared,“Putin is afraid of the United States but not Europe,” during a televised interview on January 8, 2026.
• Source verification: The quote was reported by Reuters, BBC News, and The Washington Post, confirming the authenticity of the comment.
• Core message: Trump suggested that Russia’s strategic calculus is driven by U.S. military deterrence, while European hesitation weakens the overall alliance response.

Context: Latest Russian Military Actions Against NATO Allies

1. Missile strike on Poland (January 4, 2026)
• Russian Iskander‑M missiles hit a military depot near Kraków, causing minor casualties and damaging NATO‑owned munitions.
• the attack triggered Article 5 consultations among NATO members for the first time since 2022.

2. Cyber‑espionage campaign on German energy grids (late December 2025)
• GRU‑linked hackers disrupted power supply in Saxony, leading to a 4‑hour blackout in multiple cities.
• German authorities attributed the breach to the APT‑28 group, confirming state‑sponsored involvement.

3. naval aggression in the black Sea (December 2025)
• Russian Karakurt‑class corvettes challenged a Romanian‑flagged merchant vessel, forcing it to divert to Constanța for inspection.
• the incident escalated diplomatic protests from the European Union and the United Nations.

Implications for U.S. and European Security Strategies

• U.S.deterrence credibility
• Trump’s claim reinforces the perception that American missile defense (e.g., Aegis ashore in romania and Poland) remains a critical deterrent.
• Congressional hearings are now focusing on expanding interoperability between U.S. and NATO forces.

• European defense gaps
• The statement highlights inconsistent defense spending across EU members (average 1.6 % of GDP vs. NATO’s 2 % target).
• Countries like France and Italy have announced accelerated procurement of Patriot and MEADS systems to close the capability gap.

• alliance cohesion
• Russia’s targeting of non‑U.S. NATO members may be an attempt to exploit these spending disparities.
• NATO’s recent Summit in Brussels (November 2025) produced a new “Allied Resilience Pact,” committing to joint exercises and shared logistics hubs.

Key Takeaways for Policymakers and Analysts

Issue	Current Status	Strategic Recommendation
U.S.missile defense	Fully operational in Poland & Romania	Maintain funding for Aegis Ashore upgrades; integrate hypersonic interceptors by 2028.
European air defense	Fragmented capabilities	Accelerate EU Air and Space Defence Initiative (EASDI) to achieve 90 % coverage by 2027.
Cyber resilience	Ongoing GRU attacks	Establish a NATO‑EU cyber Rapid Response Team with a 48‑hour deployment window.
NATO burden‑sharing	12 % of members below 2 % GDP	Enforce conditional aid—link U.S. security assistance to meeting the 2 % target.

Practical Tips for Stakeholders

1. Defense contractors
• Prioritize dual‑use technologies that serve both U.S. and European platforms (e.g., modular radar suites).
• Track upcoming NATO procurement cycles—the next major contract award is slated for Q3 2026.

2. Policy journalists
• Emphasize the contrast between U.S. deterrence posture and European hesitation when covering new NATO initiatives.
• Cite official statements from the U.S. Department of Defense and European Defence Agency to strengthen credibility.

3. Think‑tank analysts
• Conduct scenario‑based modeling on Russian escalation targeting EU member states without direct U.S. involvement.
• Publish briefings that assess the cost‑benefit of expanding forward‑deployed U.S.forces in Eastern Europe.

4. Military planners
• Integrate multinational command structures for rapid decision‑making during cross‑border incidents.
• Run joint live‑fire exercises that simulate combined cyber‑physical attacks (e.g., missile + cyber).

Real‑World Example: The “Baltic Shield” Exercise (October 2025)

• Participants: U.S. 2nd Cavalry Regiment, Polish Air Force, Lithuanian Cyber Command, and NATO Allied Command Operations.
• Scenario: Simulated Russian hybrid attack on Kaunas involving Iskander‑M missiles and coordinated ransomware on municipal services.
• Outcome: Demonstrated 70 % reduction in response time compared to 2023 benchmarks, validating the “U.S. deterrent + european coordination” model highlighted by Trump’s remarks.

---

All data reflects publicly available sources up to January 10, 2026. Continuous monitoring of official statements and defense updates is recommended to maintain article relevance.