What Tomahawks would change for Kyiv—and why Washington is split

Tomahawks could reshape Ukraine strikes

US President Donald Trump is considering authorising Tomahawk cruise missiles for Ukraine, a step that would give Kyiv the ability to hit targets far beyond current ranges. The Pentagon can move quickly if the order comes, but the decision turns on a bigger question: would Tomahawks force Moscow to negotiate or trigger a dangerous escalation? Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky meets Trump at the White House on Friday, pressing for Tomahawks alongside air defences and other munitions, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Why Tomahawks matter

Tomahawks fly more than 1,000 miles with precision and a heavy warhead, letting Ukraine reach fuel depots, air bases, drone plants and logistics nodes deep inside Russia. They are slower than some missiles and would face dense Russian air defences, but used in numbers and with good targeting they could stretch Moscow’s rear and complicate its winter campaign.

The hardware hurdle

Tomahawks are typically launched from ships and submarines. To use them on land, Ukraine would need ground launchers such as the US Army’s Typhon system or adapted Mk-41 launchers. Those systems are limited and also earmarked for Indo-Pacific needs, which means delivery schedules and training windows matter. Even with a green light, months of integration, mission planning and crew training would follow.

Control and escalation

The White House is weighing not just capability but control. Long-range missions rely on US training, mission planning tools and targeting support, which would let Washington shape how the missiles are used. That oversight could limit strikes on ultra-sensitive sites while still giving Kyiv meaningful reach. The Kremlin has warned of “serious consequences” if Tomahawks arrive, and the administration is modelling the likely Russian response against the potential leverage a new strike option could create.

How this differs from ATACMS

The US has already supplied ATACMS, with ranges around 190 miles. They’ve helped Ukraine hit airfields and logistics hubs in occupied territory, but they can’t reach far into Russia. Tomahawks would fill that gap. Allies have given air-launched cruise missiles like Storm Shadow/SCALP; Germany has held back the Taurus so far. Ukraine is developing its own long-range systems, including the “Flamingo,” but mass production is months away.

Industry and allies looped in

Ahead of Friday’s meeting, Ukrainian officials met US counterparts and defence firms involved in Tomahawk production and ground-launch options. Any move on Tomahawks could unlock more allied long-range support, tighten intelligence sharing, and accelerate replenishment orders for U.S. stockpiles—another factor the Pentagon must balance.

The decision point

Trump has framed the question bluntly: will more range bring Putin to the table faster? US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has signalled that absent a path to peace, Washington is ready to increase costs on Russia. If Tomahawks are approved, the roll-out will reflect three constraints—launcher availability, training time, and political guardrails on target sets. If they’re withheld, expect the U.S. to deepen other lines of effort: Patriot interceptors, ATACMS resupply, and intelligence support for Ukraine’s indigenous long-range strikes.

What to watch next

Friday’s readout will show whether Tomahawks made the list and, if so, on what conditions. Watch for timelines on ground launchers, any limits on use inside Russia, and signals to allies about parallel long-range contributions. If Tomahawks stay parked, look for a larger package built around air defence and standoff drones, and for fresh pressure on European capitals to step up with their own cruise missile stocks.