Tomahawk Missiles Are A Drawback For Each Trump And Putin – JP
Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble,Truth Social, Gettr, X , Youtube
President Donald Trump warned Russia that he may send Ukraine long-range Tomahawk missiles if Moscow doesn’t settle its war there soon — suggesting that he could be ready to increase the pressure on Vladimir Putin’s government using a key weapons system.
“I might say, ’Look: if this war is not going to get settled, I’m going to send them Tomahawks,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One as he flew to Israel. “The Tomahawk is an incredible weapon, very offensive weapon. And honestly, Russia does not need that.”
Trump also said, “I might tell them that if the war is not settled — that we may very well.” He added, “We may not, but we may do it. I think it’s appropriate to bring up.”(1)
And former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev said on Monday that supplying U.S. Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine could end badly for everyone, especially U.S. President Donald Trump.
Medvedev said it is impossible to distinguish between Tomahawk missiles carrying nuclear warheads and conventional ones after they are launched – a point that President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman has also made. “How should Russia respond? Exactly!” Medvedev said on Telegram, appearing to hint that Moscow’s response would be nuclear.(2)
However, Medvedev is known for his harsh statements that are not always in line with the Kremlin’s decisions. That is why the reaction to the mentioned topic from a serious Russian politician and geopolitical analyst, often present in the state media and close to the Kremlin – Senator Aleksey Pushkov is important as he reflected on the importance of this topic for Russia, Ukraine, Europe and the USA.
“Today, the decision to supply Kiev with Tomahawk missiles looks like a path towards an unlimited missile war against Russia, which will be even more difficult to avoid,” Pushkov said.
“The issue is being discussed in the US, Europe and, of course, Russia. However, in the West, the public debate is mainly focused on the political decision itself – whether to deliver or not – and not on the issues that should actually be discussed, nor on the consequences of such deliveries (if they occur). And that’s a shame, since there are very serious, I would say critical, questions about the Tomahawk.” — writes Pushkov on his Telegram channel.
First, it is not clear from where these missiles will be launched – from American or European warships and naval platforms. Ukraine does not have the necessary ships or platforms. Second, it is not clear who will guide and control the missiles. Since the Ukrainian Armed Forces cannot do it, it will be the Pentagon.
There are also a number of other questions — what targets will this 2,500 kilometer range missile be able to hit? How many Tomahawks does the USA want to sell to Europe for Kiev? And what exactly does US President Donald Trump want to achieve if he decides to move the Tomahawks?
The Telegraph in Britain also referred to this topic in an author’s text by Rob Crilly under the title “Ukraine prepares for delivery of Tomahawk missiles it can’t fire”
Deliveries of American Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine could take months and may never leave their launchers, but that does not mean that they will not have an impact on Moscow – the author believes.
Even if the Ukrainian armed forces acquire those missiles, the Americans may not allow Kiev to use them. He notes that Washington could transfer these missiles to Kiev without permission to use them, in order to influence Moscow in the negotiations on Ukraine.
He also says that Trump’s latest statements regarding the possibility of handing over Tomahawk missiles to Kiev were made in the characteristic “opaque” manner of the American leader, and the spokesman of the White House, in response to the Telegraph’s inquiry, said that the administration had nothing to add to the president’s statements.
From the text of the British media, it appears that Putin is actually getting additional months to continue achieving his war goals before Kiev gets American missiles, unless Washington really wants to escalate relations with Moscow.
I remind you that in his recent speech at the Valdai International Debate Club, Vladimir Putin stated that the use of Tomahawk missiles by the Ukrainian armed forces is impossible without the participation of American troops, and that the decision to deliver them would destroy the positive trends in Russian-American relations.
All this indicates that the establishment of good relations between Washington and Moscow is again pending. Russian President Vladimir Putin says that he sees positive trends in the renewal of the partnership between the two superpowers. However, the two sides have not yet agreed on anything; secondary topics would be the return of seized diplomatic property, facilitation of mutual visa regimes, establishment of air traffic, etc. Those topics are not crucial; their resolution, which diplomatic teams of the two countries have been working on for months (obviously unsuccessfully), would be an indicator of a positive direction in the attempt to normalize relations between the two nuclear superpowers, and reach an agreement on geopolitical problems that go beyond their relations, that is, of global impact.
Putin starts from the assumption that not taking advantage of the opportunity of Donald Trump taking the White House would be extremely irresponsible of Moscow, which is looking for a way out of the Ukrainian war, but not at the cost of surrendering Russian national interests.
However, Putin is facing resentment from the Russian public due to the rather mild reaction to the crossing of Russian “red lines” since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, which irritates the Russian public but also a significant part of the analytical community. In circles close to the Kremlin this is especially visible now with the Tomahawk story where they expect a decisive warning (harsh, threatening) tone from the Russian government about what will follow if the deliveries take place.
Putin knows and understands all this very well. For him, the most important thing now is that this irritation currently stems from the desire of a large part of the public to see that Russia ultimately emerges victorious from the war. However, it would be a big problem for him if that irritation became the result of Russians being fed up with the war, and formed a desire for it to end on the lines of separation reached on the front lines. Ending the war now would be a big failure for Putin.
This is precisely what is important to be understood in the West, because it clearly indicates how Putin will go to the end for Russian strategic goals — the minimally set conditions for the end of the Ukrainian war (withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from parts of the annexed regions that are not yet under the control of Russian, and a guarantee that Ukraine will not become a member of NATO).
That they will not give up on this is evidenced by the intensification of Russian airstrikes in the west of Ukraine targeting energy and military-industrial infrastructure and the places where the Ukrainian army and foreign mercenaries are stationed.
How Trump will proceed with the issue of Ukraine is very difficult to say. He has huge problems within the American polarized society and his voting base is completely against new wars. The Middle East is also a priority for him to solve because he wants to avoid the USA being drawn militarily into the exhausting conflicts there.
That’s why I think Trump doesn’t want an escalation with Russia over Ukraine; but, I’m not sure how much he actually understands the consequences of moves he certainly doesn’t make alone, but under the influence of his close associates (and there are some openly pro-Ukraine and those who are inclined to an agreement with Moscow), like the move on Tomahawk deliveries.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-tomahawk-missiles-russia-ukraine-war-522fb8bb8fe8ce87107e1eb320abae0e
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-medvedev-says-supplying-us-tomahawks-ukraine-could-end-badly-all-2025-10-13