Trump still knows how to surprise, and his next statements did not disappoint. In particular, according to him, India will supposedly stop buying Russian oil. However, the most striking statements of the American leader were that Ukraine was supposedly going to go on the offensive, as well as his call to Russian President Vladimir Putin to stop killing Ukrainians and Russians. Why he made such statements and whether the Ukrainian offensive is real - UNIAN spoke to Igor Lutsenko, a military man and co-founder of the Center for Air Intelligence Support.

Speaking yesterday at the White House, Trump, speaking about Ukraine, stated that it wants to go on the offensive, and in this regard the US"will have to make a decision." What did he mean? How do you assess the phrase "will have to make a decision" - what kind of "decision" at the level of American policy could it be about? Could it concern not only the transfer of Tomahawk missiles, but also the actual permission for Ukraine to conduct a large-scale offensive operation with American support - intelligence, coordination, logistics?

The phrase"make a decision" is some standard Trump show-off, he may be bragging here that he controls the process. We will not go on the offensive with just one decision by the United States. This is our task, and we must prepare for it or not, and his decision does not play much of a role here.

If we talk about what the United States could help us with if it wanted to support our hypothetical offensive, then there are at least two things that can be mentioned here.

The first is air defense systems. We are not talking about Patriot, but those systems that counteract aircraft, because now the Russians are testing increasingly long-range CABs. Accordingly, both in defense and in offense, it is important for us to have as few CABs as possible. The Russians can work against us with aircraft, and we can work very little against them with aircraft, because there is an asymmetry in air defense means. They can shoot down our aircraft at hundreds of kilometers, and it is difficult for us to do so.

And the second is tactical missiles of the HIMARS class or higher. If they are given in large numbers, it will make it possible to simply break through the Russian positions in a certain area and, in fact, go on the offensive there.

That is, what we are doing now with drones - trying to destroy the equipment we detect every night, some of their fortifications that we detect - the same thing can be done for a much higher price, but much faster and more efficiently. And all with the help of American missiles.

I think that any American military officer of a certain level could suggest this to his superiors:"Let's give five hundred missiles to the Ukrainians, and in just a few days they will kill everything living in a certain area, everything they see, and they will go there." Here is such an option. But the Americans are not doing either of these things yet, most likely because they are escalatorphobes.

They used to be considered that way, but now they just want to be friends with Russia on principle. That's why they play this game:"I'll give it or I won't give it."

In Ukraine and the world, many people perceived his statement about Ukraine's readiness to go on the offensive with skepticism and surprise, because everyone knows that we are currently fighting heavy defensive battles, and the initiative is mainly on the side of Russia. Can it be argued that Trump does not fully understand the situation regarding the war in Ukraine and simply expressed himself poorly? Or is it possible that something is really being prepared, and Trump simply"let it slip"? Could there be plans or requests for a large-scale offensive in the Ukrainian command that the public does not yet know about? And how realistic is it, given the combat situation, resources, and support, to move to a large offensive phase right now?

I don't know about the resources, only Syrsky knows that. Could there be potential resources in Ukraine to simulate some unexpected Kursk-2, relatively speaking, by 10-15 kilometers - I think that yes, that such a thing could happen.

I think that both sides in this war are trying to keep resources, to keep reserves in order to use them in case of need. I, for example, would not be surprised if Syrskyi comes up with some interesting operation, that's why he is the commander-in-chief.

As for the potential Ukrainian resource to plan such an operation, it would actually take a very long time. In order to create a truly effective assault group, we need to work on it. Perhaps this work has already been done somewhere.

But potentially in Ukraine, if there were a better mobilization policy, it would be possible to gather an additional 100-150 thousand soldiers in order to replace the current ones and create some kind of shock troops. But for this, it is necessary to properly manage the resources that are available and mobilize them correctly. This is a management and resource issue.

Hypothetically, the Ukrainian state is currently capable of accumulating the necessary resources for such an offensive, with the help of the General Staff or some other mechanisms, because it has already succeeded once.

Trump also made an uncharacteristically harsh appeal to Putin, demanding that he"stop killing Ukrainians and Russians." Can this statement be attributed to Trump's specific style of public speaking, or does it indicate that the US is finally hiding the agreements reached with Putin in Alaska and moving to more active and aggressive support for Ukraine? That is, is this just rhetoric or a sign of a tougher turn in American policy?

I think there are elements of bargaining here, and that the elements of bargaining will include Tomahawks or some other real military aid. And in fact, I would really applaud Trump if he continued to develop this media and propaganda line so that Putin would stop killing Ukrainians and Russians. Because this is an extremely weak area in the position of Russia itself and Putin himself.

Actually, what do they want to achieve now? They take one village in the Donetsk region per day, those half-dead villages. It hurts us, but it's one village per day. What does he want to achieve with this? It just looks like the disposal of Russians and Ukrainians simply because Putin felt like it.

If he had pressed for it more precisely from the point of view of his MAGA rhetoric, that is, rhetoric that was more understandable to the Russians, which was supposedly even supported by the Russians at one time... That is, to ask in MAGA language:"Dear citizens, excuse me, our fellow thugs, what is actually happening? Let's somehow explain to ourselves what is happening, in our thug language."

Overall: are these statements by Trump a spontaneous improvisation or part of a new American strategy towards Ukraine?

Trump and strategy are different things. This is his personal strategy for life. Turning 180 degrees every few weeks is absolutely characteristic of him. He shouted at Zelensky, now he will praise Zelensky. This is a feature of Trump. He is, as they say, outgoing.

Unfortunately, he is withdrawn in both directions, but this stage is definitely positive for us. And it shows that he does not have any"attraction" to love Putin. That he will have to dance out some other story if he sees that he does not receive reciprocity from Putin. He then needs to be very tough and show that"you do not love me, then I will give it to you right now!".