Zelenskyy Says US Gave No Warning of Russian Strikes on Kyiv Power Plants
Ukraine's president accuses Washington of a 'denial of reality' as a row with Trump over Russia sanctions and missile supplies deepens
By AXY Defense Desk ·
Key points
- Zelenskyy said Ukraine received no US warning before a Russian missile attack on Kyiv's power plants on Sunday evening.
- Ukrainian air force spokesperson Yuri Ihnat said no warning came before the strike at about 11pm, but a warning was received before a strike at about 3am.
- The dispute follows Trump's Friday waiver of a sweeping Russia sanctions package and Ukraine's complaints about slowed PAC-3 missile deliveries.
- Trump said on Truth Social that he was negotiating peace and did not want to drive Russia away from the bargaining table.
- Trump said he would consider a trilateral meeting with Russia and China on nuclear weapons and denuclearisation.
Ukraine did not receive a warning from the United States before a Russian missile attack on power plants in Kyiv on Sunday evening, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Monday, a claim that revives Kyiv's concern that Washington is withholding intelligence to pressure Ukraine into concessions to Moscow. Yuri Ihnat, a spokesperson for the Ukrainian air force, said on television on Monday morning that Ukraine had received no warning before the Russian missile barrage struck the power plants at about 11pm. Earlier, a Ukrainian government official had told the Guardian that the US had not warned the capital about the impending strike.
Ihnat added that Ukraine did receive a warning before a second strike, which came at about 3am. In a social media post on Monday morning, Zelenskyy wrote: “Once again, Russia launched a ballistic missile attack in multiple waves throughout the night, and once again, there was no warning from our partners.” He went further, saying that when the supply of missiles for Ukrainian air defence is blocked, and Russia receives sanctions relief or delays, “it is, unfortunately, a denial of reality on the part of our partners.”
The exchange is the latest flashpoint in a dispute that has grown over recent weeks, as the Ukrainian president has been forced to respond to US moves that benefit Russian President Vladimir Putin. Zelenskyy's accusation is not limited to a single missed alert. It links the timing of a Russian strike to a broader set of decisions that Kyiv believes are weakening its defences at a critical moment.
What Ukraine says happened on Sunday night
According to Ukrainian officials, the first wave of the attack on Kyiv's power plants arrived at about 11pm on Sunday with no advance warning from the United States, as Ukrainian officials understood it. The statement from Ihnat, broadcast on Monday morning, was the first official Ukrainian account of the timing of the alerts during the night. The Guardian's report also draws on a Ukrainian government official, who confirmed to the newspaper that the US had not warned Kyiv about the impending missile strike.
The later strike at about 3am was preceded by a warning, according to Ihnat. He presented this as evidence that an alert system functioned on at least one occasion during the night. That detail matters for two reasons. It suggests that Ukrainian forces were able to receive some advance notice of Russian activity, and it sharpens the question of why the earlier attack did not come with the same warning.
The reported attack was described by Zelenskyy as a ballistic missile assault launched in multiple waves. A ballistic missile is a weapon that travels along a high, arcing path before descending on its target at very high speed. Because these weapons fly quickly and are hard to track, the time between launch detection and impact can be short, which is why early notice is so valuable to air defence crews and to the teams protecting critical infrastructure.
The phrase “denial of reality” is the central charge in Zelenskyy's post. In the available reporting, he does not set out in detail which decisions he had in mind beyond the US moves described below, and the Guardian's material does not include a formal response from Washington to his statement.
A row over sanctions and missile supplies
Zelenskyy's complaint comes amid a series of recent US decisions that benefit Putin, according to the Guardian's reporting. On Friday, Donald Trump waived a sweeping package of sanctions on Russia. He told Congress that the pause on the legislation, which is named after the late senator Lindsey Graham and had been passed by both chambers, was in the national interest.
Sanctions are government restrictions that limit trade, finance and access to markets. A sanctions package passed by Congress is typically intended to raise the economic cost of a country's actions, in this case Russia's war against Ukraine. When such a package is waived or paused, it reduces that pressure. Supporters of a pause argue it can create room for diplomacy. Critics argue it removes leverage that Western governments have used to try to change Moscow's behaviour.
Ukraine has also complained that deliveries of PAC-3 air defence missiles from the United States have slowed. PAC-3 is a variant of the Patriot interceptor missile, a surface-to-air weapon designed to intercept incoming ballistic missiles and aircraft. Patriot systems have become central to Ukraine's efforts to protect cities and infrastructure from Russian strikes, and interceptor missiles are expensive and produced in limited numbers. That scarcity is one reason shortfalls in deliveries carry such weight in Kyiv.
Trump defended his position in a post on Truth Social on Sunday. He wrote: “My decision on Russia is a very simple one. I am in the process of negotiating peace in the war between Russia and Ukraine, and don't want to do anything that will drive, foolishly, Russia away from the bargaining table.” In the same post he said Zelenskyy “doesn't care” about ending the war, adding that he “probably never did,” and he criticised the scale of money that European countries have provided to Ukraine.
Those remarks show the core disagreement. Trump's position is that pressure on Moscow could disrupt a negotiation he says he is pursuing. Zelenskyy's position is that Russia is still firing ballistic missiles at Ukrainian cities, and that any reduction in sanctions or missile supplies strengthens Moscow while weakening Kyiv's ability to defend itself.
How the dispute developed
The current row has its roots in the wider war that began with Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Since then, Ukraine has depended heavily on Western military, financial and humanitarian support, and US weapons have been among the most important components of its air defence. Washington's role has been a constant feature of the conflict, and debates in the United States over how much to provide have often shaped the timing and scale of deliveries.
The present dispute also reflects a shift in tone between Kyiv and the Trump administration. Trump has repeatedly said he wants to end the war through negotiation, and he has presented himself as a dealmaker. Ukrainian officials have said they support a durable peace but insist that any settlement must be acceptable to Kyiv and must not reward Russia's invasion. The public exchange between Zelenskyy and Trump, which has included sharp personal criticism from both sides, has made those differences more visible.
The immediate trigger for the latest escalation was the combination of three developments: the Friday waiver of the sanctions package, Ukraine's complaints about slowed PAC-3 deliveries, and the Sunday night strike on Kyiv's power plants. Taken together, they have led Zelenskyy to argue that the United States is effectively undermining Ukraine's defences at the same time it talks about peace.
Why early warning matters for Ukraine's air defence
Russia has repeatedly targeted Ukraine's energy system with missile and drone attacks since 2022, and power plants have been among the most frequent targets. For ordinary residents, the consequences of such strikes can include blackouts, interruptions to heating and water supply, and disruption to hospitals, transport and communications. Those effects are especially serious during cold months, when homes depend on reliable electricity and heat.
An early warning does not stop a missile by itself. Interceptors have to be available in sufficient numbers and positioned to engage incoming weapons. For military crews, advance notice allows them to prepare launchers, move to protected positions and focus limited interceptors on the most dangerous targets. For energy workers, it gives time to take emergency measures that can reduce damage and speed up restoration.
This is why Ukrainian officials have linked warnings and missile supplies in their complaints. If a warning is missed, defenders have less time to respond. If interceptor stocks are low, even a well-timed alert may not lead to a successful interception. Analysts who follow the conflict generally view intelligence sharing and weapons deliveries as connected, although the exact role of intelligence in any particular attack is rarely disclosed publicly.
The Guardian's reporting does not establish whether the US had information about the Sunday strike that it did not pass on, or whether the lack of warning was the result of a technical problem, a policy choice or a gap in coordination. Those questions remain unanswered in the material available. Without an explanation from Washington, the dispute rests largely on Ukraine's account and on the political context in which it is being made.
Trump's remarks on Russia, China and nuclear weapons
Trump's comments on Monday widened the story beyond Ukraine. He told reporters he would consider a trilateral meeting with Russia and China. He said: “We would have it to talk about nuclear weapons and denuclearisation. If President Xi wants to have it, I'd have it.” Xi Jinping is China's leader.
Denuclearisation refers to the reduction or elimination of nuclear weapons, usually through agreed limits, verification and dismantlement. A three-way meeting of this kind would bring together the three largest nuclear powers in one format, which would be unusual and would raise questions about how Ukraine's security would be handled. The quoted remarks do not refer directly to Ukraine, which is notable given that the war is the subject of the peace effort Trump has described.
For Kyiv, the combination of a sanctions pause, slower missile deliveries and a proposed discussion involving Moscow and Beijing raises a basic question about its place in any eventual settlement. Ukrainian officials have said that any agreement must be acceptable to Ukraine. The row between the two presidents makes that question more pressing, because it suggests that the terms of a deal could be shaped without Kyiv's full participation.
What to watch next
Several developments will show whether this dispute is contained or deepens. The first is whether Washington responds to Ukraine's claim of a missing warning and explains how intelligence is shared during Russian strikes. A clear answer would help define whether the gap was procedural, technical or political, and it would shape how Kyiv and its partners plan for future attacks.
The second is whether PAC-3 deliveries resume at a pace that Ukraine considers adequate. Interceptor supply is a practical measure of support, and it will be closely watched by Ukrainian officials, who have repeatedly stressed that air defence is a daily necessity rather than a long-term project. The third is whether the sanctions pause remains in place. Its future will influence Russia's incentives in any negotiations and may affect how European partners coordinate their own measures.
Analysts are likely to watch whether further strikes on power infrastructure follow in the coming nights, and whether Russia exploits any perceived gap in Western support. Ukrainian officials are likely to press for faster delivery of air defence systems, and European governments may be asked to fill any shortfall. Trump's proposed trilateral meeting, if it goes ahead, would be another signal of how Washington intends to balance its engagement with Moscow and Beijing against its commitments to Kyiv.
For ordinary Ukrainians, the immediate question is more direct: whether the next warning arrives in time to give air defence crews and energy workers a chance to respond.
Questions and answers
Did the US warn Ukraine before the Russian strike on Kyiv power plants?
According to Zelenskyy and Ukrainian air force spokesperson Yuri Ihnat, Ukraine received no warning before the strike on Kyiv's power plants at about 11pm on Sunday. Ihnat said Ukraine did receive a warning before a second strike at about 3am.
Why is Ukraine complaining about US missile deliveries?
Ukraine has said deliveries of PAC-3 air defence missiles from the United States have slowed. Zelenskyy linked those delays and a sanctions waiver to what he called a denial of reality on the part of Ukraine's partners.
What sanctions did Trump waive on Russia?
On Friday, Trump waived a sweeping package of sanctions on Russia and told Congress the pause on the legislation, named after the late senator Lindsey Graham, was in the national interest. The package had been passed by both chambers of Congress.
What did Trump say about Zelenskyy and the war?
In a Truth Social post on Sunday, Trump said he was negotiating peace and did not want to drive Russia away from the bargaining table. He also said Zelenskyy 'doesn't care' about ending the war and 'probably never did'.
Topics: Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Donald Trump, Kyiv power plants, Russian missile attacks, PAC-3 air defence missiles, Russia sanctions waiver, Ukraine air defence
Sources: The Guardian Ukraine