Skip to main content

Trump gives Ukraine OK to produce Patriot missiles as war with Russia drags on

President Donald Trump holds a bilateral meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy alongside the NATO leaders summit at the Bestepe Presidential Compound in Ankara, Turkey, July 8, 2026. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

(ANKARA, Turkey) — President Donald Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Wednesday the U.S. will give Ukraine a license to produce Patriot air defense systems.

“One of the things we’re going to be talking about is, you’ll — we’re going to give a license to you to make Patriots. That’s pretty cool, right?” Trump told Zelenskyy during a bilateral meeting at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey.

“This way he can’t complain that we’re not giving him enough. I said, ‘Make them yourself,'” Trump added.

Trump said the company that manufactures Patriot systems hasn’t been informed yet, but “that’ll work out all right.”

But when asked whether Trump would be willing to provide Patriot interceptors to Ukraine up front while production gets into place, the president said the U.S. didn’t have that many missiles.

“We have Patriots, but we don’t have that many. We need them for ourselves, too,” he said.

The meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy in Ankara came as expenditures of U.S. Patriot PAC-3 interceptor missiles in Ukraine and the Middle East have dramatically outpaced current production capabilities, resulting in a critical global shortage as the Russia-Ukraine war drags on.

“We need to find a way to get as quick as possible, as much as possible, missiles for Patriot systems. This is the most important thing,” Zelenskyy said at a defense industry forum at the alliance’s annual summit on Tuesday.

Russia has sought to exploit this shortfall by launching concentrated bombardments of ballistic missiles and drone swarms at Ukrainian targets, overwhelming the country’s defenses and resulting in scores of civilian deaths. 

On Wednesday, Zelenskyy praised the U.S. for its support throughout the war. 

“Mr. President, thank you very much for this meeting. And we’re thankful, as always, to your support, American support, bipartisan support,” he said.

Russia’s ‘last major advantage’

In an address to members of the NATO alliance on Tuesday, Zelenskyy stressed the critical nature of the shortage and argued it was time for Europe to produce its own systems to counter Russian ballistic missiles, calling the rocket-powered missiles Moscow’s “last major advantage.”

“We all value the Patriot system. It’s an excellent system,” he said. “But today’s wars have shown current Patriot production is not enough to meet the growing demand for protection against ballistic missiles. That is a fact.”

For his part, Trump presented a rosier outlook — asserting that an end to the conflict in Ukraine, which is now in its fifth year, could be on the horizon. 

“I think we’re getting much closer than people realize, and President Putin wants it to end,” Trump said on Monday. “And President Zelenskyy actually wants it to end now.”

Trump also downplayed the impact of the war in Ukraine on Tuesday, saying “it doesn’t affect us” and depicting the conflict as a European issue. Trump had promised to end the war on Day 1 in office — a pledge he later said was hyperbolic.

Trump’s comments come amid Russian escalation in recent days. On Monday, Russian strikes targeted Ukraine’s military-industrial complex and energy infrastructure in and around Kyiv, according to Russia’s defense ministry.

Zelenskyy has been warning the Trump administration about the crucial depletion of interceptor missiles for several weeks. He is also pressing the U.S. to expedite a license that would allow Ukraine to manufacture Patriot batteries and interceptors domestically.

A strained relationship

The bilateral meeting tested the strength of Trump and Zelenskyy’s sometimes-rocky relationship at a time when Ukraine is facing new vulnerabilities on the battlefield and diplomacy with Russia has largely stalled. 

Trump, on Wednesday, described Zelenskyy as a “difficult character,” but said they have a good relationship.

The leader’s first meeting of Trump’s second term — a February 2025 conversation in the Oval Office — devolved into a shouting match after Trump expressed skepticism about Ukraine’s position in the conflict and called for more gratitude from Zelenskyy for U.S. support.

But Trump appeared to grow more sympathetic to the Ukrainian cause over the past year as repeated efforts to bring Russian President Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table fell flat.

A watershed moment came last July when, after repeatedly pausing military aid to Ukraine, Trump agreed to supply weapons to Ukraine if they were purchased from the U.S. by NATO allies.

And there have been signs over the past month that Trump is reengaging in efforts to bring peace to Ukraine and once again eager to coordinate a deal between Zelenskyy and Putin. 

During their bilateral meeting, Trump said he spoke with Putin about the Russian president’s desire to set up a meeting in Moscow, though Zelenskyy wouldn’t commit to such a meeting.

Trump held calls with Zelenskyy and Putin over the weekend as both leaders congratulated the president on the 250th anniversary of the United States’ independence. 

It’s unclear how substantive the conversations were, though a Kremlin aide said that Trump spoke to Putin for 90 minutes and again offered to help end the war. Zelenskyy said he had “a very good call” with Trump and conveyed there was a “real prospect” for peace.

Trump last met with Zelenskyy at the G7 summit in June, where he, at times, appeared friendly to Ukraine’s cause — describing Russia as the “offensive” party in the conflict and saying he was “going to do whatever” he could to strike a deal.

French President Emmanuel Macron — the host of the G7 summit — said after the meeting that he was optimistic about Trump’s support for Ukraine, claiming he observed “a real change in comparison to recent months” in his attitude. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

‘Decades in Sports’: How the 1980s Miami Hurricanes became one of the most hated teams in sports history

(CNN) — Editor’s note: Watch CNN Original Series “Decades in Sports” on the CNN app. Across six episodes, the series explores the defining moments, athletes and cultural shifts that shaped sports over the past six decades, from the television revolution and Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, right up to the impact of social media on today’s biggest stars.There have been plenty of dominant teams in the 150-plus-year history of college football, but few have left a bigger mark on the sport than the Miami Hurricanes did during the 1980s.The Canes were a team that went against the grain, trash-talking in a way that constantly got under their opponents’ skin, celebrating wildly after big plays and dancing in the end zone after touchdowns with a swagger that stood out as much as their bright orange jerseys.“That made them such a phenomenon,” says John U. Bacon, author of Fourth and Long: The Fight for the Soul of College Football, as the Hurricanes’ bold, brash and arrogant style transformed college football into something closer to theater.As Bacon also highlights in the series, “The Hurricanes were the bad boys of college football.” However, their impact was felt far beyond the gridiron, as the 1986 squad was even labeled the most hated team of all time by Sports Illustrated.For context, the 25-team list devised by Sports Illustrated featured some of the most polarizing teams in US sports history, such as the 1988-89 Detroit Pistons (widely known as the “Bad Boys”), the 2010-11 Miami Heat (universally recognized as the team that kickstarted the “superteam” era in the NBA) and the 2007 New England Patriots (who became the ultimate villains of the NFL after the infamous “Spygate” scandal.But it was this college football program which topped them all. As Bacon says, “They were more popular in Miami than the Dolphins, and the Dolphins had (1984 NFL MVP) Dan Marino.”Why Miami was so hatedThe Canes’ boisterous antics were not just empty calories – they backed it up when they stepped onto the field.Like many polarizing sports teams throughout history, Miami garnered attention because it won. Winning made the Hurricanes easy to root against, but also impossible to ignore.However, what truly set them apart is how they embraced the role of the villain.Before facing defending national champion and top-ranked Oklahoma in September 1986 in front of over 70,000 fans at the Orange Bowl, the Hurricanes famously defied protocol and refused to shake hands with the Sooners, sparking a heated exchange between the top two teams right in front of the TV cameras.Game officials intervened and even threatened to throw a penalty flag if Miami snubbed the pre-game handshake. But the Hurricanes didn’t budge and backed up their pre-game antics by beating the Sooners 28-16.Their “style ruffled a lot of feathers,” says Dr. Todd Boyd, Professor of Cinema and Music Studies at USC. But the more people disliked Miami, the more the team seemed to embrace it.Later that same season, they took it a step further.When landing in Tempe, Arizona, for the 1987 Fiesta Bowl against Penn State, which served as the national championship game, the Hurricanes famously stepped off their plane wearing full camouflage military fatigues in an attempt to intimidate the Nittany Lions.It didn’t work on that occasion, as Miami fell 14-10 in the title game. But the following year, the “Bad Boy” Hurricanes came out on top, going unbeaten and taking down the Oklahoma Sooners – again – 20-14 to win the national championship.As Van Lathan – journalist and podcaster at The Ringer – says in the series, “The 80s were an anti-hero decade.”Lathan went on to highlight that, during that time, “We are re-examining what is OK in the name of coming out on top. This is a post-Watergate America … and whatever it takes, we are going to win.”No one embodied that shift more than this group from South Florida: It was win by any means necessary.As sports journalist and podcaster Bomani Jones highlights: “It became the dominant culture of the sport.”However, none of this would have been possible without a coach who not only allowed his players the space to go about their business in such a controversial manner, but one who encouraged the brash and boisterous behavior they took to stadiums across the country: Jimmy Johnson.The Jimmy Johnson effectWhen Johnson arrived in South Florida in 1984, he had pretty big shoes to fill.Howard Schnellenberger – who helped build Miami’s college football program into one of the elite programs over five seasons – had just departed after leading the Hurricanes to their first national championship, upsetting the unbeaten, top-ranked Nebraska Cornhuskers 31-30 at the Orange Bowl.However, despite Schnellenberger being the original architect of Miami’s success, it was under Johnson that the Hurricanes truly peaked.After going 18-7 in his first two seasons, Miami went 34-2 in his final three, winning the national championship in 1987 and narrowly losing one 14-10 to Penn State in 1986 after Johnson led the Hurricanes to the first undefeated regular season in program history.But it was the culture Johnson cultivated in South Florida that made his tenure so memorable.There was a shift happening in sports in the 1980s, with players becoming more brash and expressive. It is something that is celebrated today but was highly frowned upon at the time.Johnson’s genius was not only in recognizing that shift, but also in allowing his players to be their authentic selves out on the field, because as Jones highlights in the series: “The Florida boys are different, (and) they have a really good time when they play their football.“Normally, when you get a lot of players who like to dance when they score a touchdown and like to talk a bunch of sh*t when they play, you have a coach who is trying to tamp that down and get them to behave a little bit more respectably…“Jimmy Johnson loved it! He loved it as much as they did. He’s like, ‘As long as we win, you can do whatever you want.’”On its face, it sounds simple, but it was highly effective and it was an era that redefined what a college football powerhouse could look like. They were rough around the edges, bold, brash and arrogant – but that’s what made them who they were.Better to be remembered for something than not remembered at all. And no one will forget the 1980s Miami Hurricanes, the “Bad Boys of college football.”The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story