Zelensky denies attacking Moscow, vows to start counteroffensive

A still image taken from video shows a flying object exploding in an intense burst of light near the dome of the Kremlin Senate building during the alleged Ukrainian drone attack in Moscow in this image taken from video obtained by Reuters on May 3, 2023. (Reuters)
Short Url
Updated 04 May 2023
Follow

Zelensky denies attacking Moscow, vows to start counteroffensive

  • Russia accused Ukraine on Wednesday of attacking the Kremlin with drones overnight
  • Ukraine’s president on surprise visit to Finland

HELSINKI/KYIV Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky rejected on Wednesday Moscow’s claim that Kyiv had attempted to attack the Kremlin and said his country would soon start a counteroffensive on its own soil against Russian forces.

Russia earlier on Wednesday accused Ukraine of a failed attempt to assassinate President Vladimir Putin in a drone attack on the Kremlin citadel in central Moscow, and threatened to retaliate.
Speaking at a press conference in Finland, NATO’s newest member, Zelensky said his concern was to defend Ukraine’s own cities and villages against the Russian invasion launched almost 15 months ago.
“We don’t attack Putin, or Moscow, we fight on our territory,” Zelensky said.
Asked why it was in Russia’s interests to accuse Ukraine of trying to assassinate Putin, Zelensky said: “It’s very simple. Russia has no victories. He (Putin) can no longer motivate his society, and he can’t just send his troops to their death anymore... now he needs to somehow motivate his people to go forward.”
The Ukrainian president also said he was sure the West would supply Kyiv with modern war planes if his country was successful on the battlefield, citing prior examples that had led to Ukraine being granted new types of military aid.
“This is why I am sure we will soon have aircraft. Because we will soon conduct an offensive, and after it I am sure we will be given planes. I would rather it was the other way round, as it would be easier for us, but it is like it is, and we are grateful for everything,” Zelensky said.
“We need them. Really need them,” he said.
Finnish President Sauli Niinisto said Finland could not donate its US-made Hornets fighters because they were old and few other countries in Europe had similar models, so it would not make sense to build up a service chain.




Danish PM Mette Frederiksen, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and Finnish President Sauli Niinisto meet the press during the Nordic-Ukrainian Summit in Helsinki, Finland, on May 3, 2023. (Mads Claus Rasmussen via REUTERS)

Case for NATO membership
The Ukrainian president’s visit to Finland, one of only a few journeys he has made abroad since the Russian invasion, was announced only after his arrival amid tight security in the Finnish capital.
He reiterated his case for Ukraine to join NATO, the Western military alliance of which Finland last month became the 31st member in direct response to Russia’s invasion.
“We need security guarantees today, while we are not in NATO,” Zelensky said.
“But in any case, our goal is to have full membership in the alliance. This is one of the reasons why I am here today. The second reason, or to be honest the priority, is strengthening our army.”
Zelensky held bilateral talks with Niinisto as well as a regional summit that included the prime ministers of Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Iceland, all of which said they supported Ukraine’s ultimate goal of becoming a member of the EU and NATO.
Hundreds of people gathered in central Helsinki to see Zelensky arrive, cheering as he appeared in front of the presidential palace.

Zelensky said Russia did not appear to be interested in extending the Black Sea grain deal that has allowed vital food exports, but that Kyiv was focused on looking for partners to continue the deal due to expire on May 18.
Asked about the grain deal and whether the alleged attack on the Kremlin would affect negotiations, he said: “I don’t see interest from Russia to continue the grain initiative, but this happens every time. But we are not looking for interest from Russia. We are looking for the fulfilment of the agreements with our partners.”


War powers resolution fails in Senate as 2 Republicans bow to Trump pressure

Updated 15 January 2026
Follow

War powers resolution fails in Senate as 2 Republicans bow to Trump pressure

WASHINGTON: Senate Republicans voted to dismiss a war powers resolution Wednesday that would have limited President Donald Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks on Venezuela after two GOP senators reversed course on supporting the legislation.
Trump put intense pressure on five Republican senators who joined with Democrats to advance the resolution last week and ultimately prevailed in heading off passage of the legislation. Two of the Republicans — Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Todd Young of Indiana — flipped under the pressure.
Vice President JD Vance had to break the 50-50 deadlock in the Senate on a Republican motion to dismiss the bill.
The outcome of the high-profile vote demonstrated how Trump still has command over much of the Republican conference, yet the razor-thin vote tally also showed the growing concern on Capitol Hill over the president’s aggressive foreign policy ambitions.
Democrats forced the debate after US troops captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in a surprise nighttime raid earlier this month
“Here we have one of the most successful attacks ever and they find a way to be against it. It’s pretty amazing. And it’s a shame,” Trump said at a speech in Michigan Tuesday. He also hurled insults at several of the Republicans who advanced the legislation, calling Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky a “stone cold loser” and Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine “disasters.” Those three Republicans stuck to their support for the legislation.
Trump’s latest comments followed earlier phone calls with the senators, which they described as terse. The president’s fury underscored how the war powers vote had taken on new political significance as Trump also threatens military action to accomplish his goal of possessing Greenland.
The legislation, even if it had cleared the Senate, had virtually no chance of becoming law because it would eventually need to be signed by Trump himself. But it represented both a test of GOP loyalty to the president and a marker for how much leeway the Republican-controlled Senate is willing to give Trump to use the military abroad. Republican angst over his recent foreign policy moves — especially threats of using military force to seize Greenland from a NATO ally — is still running high in Congress.
Two Republicans reconsider
Hawley, who helped advance the war powers resolution last week, said Trump’s message during a phone call was that the legislation “really ties my hands.” The senator said he had a follow-up phone call with Secretary of State Marco Rubio Monday and was told “point blank, we’re not going to do ground troops.”
The senator added that he also received assurances that the Trump administration will follow constitutional requirements if it becomes necessary to deploy troops again to the South American country.
“We’re getting along very well with Venezuela,” Trump told reporters at a ceremony for the signing of an unrelated bill Wednesday.
As senators went to the floor for the vote Wednesday evening, Young also told reporters he was no longer in support. He said that he had extensive conversations with Rubio and received assurances that the secretary of state will appear at a public hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Young also shared a letter from Rubio that stated the president will “seek congressional authorization in advance (circumstances permitting)” if he engaged in “major military operations” in Venezuela.
The senators also said his efforts were also instrumental in pushing the administration to release Wednesday a 22-page Justice Department memo laying out the legal justification for the snatch-and-grab operation against Maduro.
That memo, which was heavily redacted, indicates that the administration, for now, has no plans to ramp up military operations in Venezuela.
“We were assured that there is no contingency plan to engage in any substantial and sustained operation that would amount to a constitutional war,” according to the memo signed by Assistant Attorney General Elliot Gaiser.
Trump’s shifting rationale for military intervention
Trump has used a series of legal arguments for his campaign against Maduro.
As he built up a naval force in the Caribbean and destroyed vessels that were allegedly carrying drugs from Venezuela, the Trump administration tapped wartime powers under the global war on terror by designating drug cartels as terrorist organizations.
The administration has claimed the capture of Maduro himself was actually a law enforcement operation, essentially to extradite the Venezuelan president to stand trial for charges in the US that were filed in 2020.
Paul criticized the administration for first describing its military build-up in Caribbean as a counternarcotics operation but now floating Venezuela’s vast oil reserves as a reason for maintaining pressure.
“The bait and switch has already happened,” he said.
Trump’s foreign policy worries Congress
Lawmakers, including a significant number of Republicans, have been alarmed by Trump’s recent foreign policy talk. In recent weeks, he has pledged that the US will “run” Venezuela for years to come, threatened military action to take possession of Greenland and told Iranians protesting their government that ” help is on its way.”
Senior Republicans have tried to massage the relationship between Trump and Denmark, a NATO ally that holds Greenland as a semi-autonomous territory. But Danish officials emerged from a meeting with Vance and Rubio Wednesday saying a “fundamental disagreement” over Greenland remains.
“What happened tonight is a roadmap to another endless war,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said at a news conference following the vote.
More than half of US adults believe President Donald Trump has “gone too far” in using the US military to intervene in other countries, according to a new AP-NORC poll.
House Democrats have also filed a similar war powers resolution and can force a vote on it as soon as next week.
How Republican leaders dismissed the bill

Last week’s procedural vote on the war powers resolution was supposed to set up hours of debate and a vote on final passage. But Republican leaders began searching for a way to defuse the conflict between their members and Trump as well as move on quickly to other business.
Once Hawley and Young changed their support for the bill, Republicans were able to successfully challenge whether it was appropriate when the Trump administration has said US troops are not currently deployed in Venezuela.
“We’re not currently conducting military operations there,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune in a floor speech. “But Democrats are taking up this bill because their anti-Trump hysteria knows no bounds.”
Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine, who has brought a series of war powers resolutions this year, accused Republicans of burying a debate about the merits of an ongoing campaign of attacks and threats against Venezuela.
“If this cause and if this legal basis were so righteous, the administration and its supporters would not be afraid to have this debate before the public and the United States Senate,” he said in a floor speech.