- President Trump suggested he might inform Putin about potential U.S. plans to supply Ukraine with long-range Tomahawk missiles (1,550-mile range, $1.3M each) if peace talks fail, using the threat as diplomatic leverage.
- Russia has warned that sending such weapons would provoke stronger defensive measures, including bolstering air defenses, especially since Tomahawks could theoretically reach Moscow.
- While Ukraine insists long-range missiles are critical against Russian advances, Trump’s administration remains cautious due to fears of uncontrolled escalation, mission creep and limited U.S. Navy stockpiles.
- Trump’s proposal to route weapons through NATO (bypassing Congress) exposes internal alliance splits—some members advocate stronger support, while others fear exhausting arsenals or provoking Russia.
- The Tomahawk debate could force NATO to choose between escalating military aid (risking deeper conflict) or prioritizing diplomacy, with outcomes hinging on Ukraine’s strategic use of the weapons and Russia’s red-line responses.
President Donald Trump revealed on Sunday, Oct. 12, that he may inform Russian President Vladimir Putin about potential U.S. plans to supply Ukraine with long-range Tomahawk missiles if peace negotiations fail.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump acknowledged Ukraine’s request for the advanced weaponry but framed the decision as contingent on stalled diplomatic progress. The proposal comes as Ukraine continues to press for greater military support, while Moscow warns that such deliveries would provoke a stronger Russian defensive response.
Trump’s remarks mark a notable shift in the administration’s cautious stance on sending Ukraine weapons capable of striking deep inside Russia. Brighteon.AI‘s Enoch notes that Tomahawk cruise missiles, with a range of 1,550 miles and a price tag of $1.3 million each, could theoretically reach Moscow—a prospect that Putin has already warned would necessitate bolstering Russian air defenses.
“I might say, look, if this war is not going to get settled, I’m going to send them Tomahawks,” Trump said, though he did not confirm a final decision. His comments suggest a carrot-and-stick approach: dangling advanced weaponry as leverage while keeping diplomatic channels open.
However, skepticism remains within his own administration. Sources told Reuters that current Tomahawk inventories are reserved for U.S. Navy operations, while analysts cited by the Financial Times questioned whether the missiles would significantly alter battlefield dynamics.
Russia’s red lines and Ukraine’s dilemma
Putin has repeatedly framed NATO’s military support for Ukraine as prolonging the conflict, insisting that Moscow is ready for peace—but only if Ukraine addresses Russia’s core grievances, including the rights of Russian-speaking populations and alleged neo-Nazi influence in Ukrainian forces. The Kremlin has also warned that Ukraine lacks the technical expertise to operate Tomahawks without direct U.S. involvement, raising concerns about mission creep.
Ukraine, meanwhile, has pushed for expanded Western arms shipments, arguing that long-range strike capabilities are essential to counter Russian advances. Yet Trump’s hesitation reflects broader fears in Washington about uncontrolled escalation. Previous administrations have similarly balked at providing certain high-tech weapons, fearing they could provoke Russia into widening the war or targeting NATO supply lines.
The debate over Tomahawks underscores deeper divisions within NATO about how far to go in arming Ukraine. While some European allies advocate for more aggressive support, others worry about straining relations with Russia or exhausting their own arsenals. Trump’s suggestion of routing weapons through NATO countries—bypassing Congressional approval—highlights the administration’s search for workarounds amid growing war fatigue in Washington.
Yet as Trump himself noted, the effectiveness of such deliveries hinges on Ukraine’s ability to deploy them strategically.
“You have to ask the question: Where are they sending them?” he said, hinting at concerns over potential misuse. With Ukraine’s counteroffensive stalling and Russia digging in for a protracted conflict, the Tomahawk question may soon force NATO to confront hard choices about escalation versus diplomacy.
Trump’s tentative offer of Tomahawk missiles signals a potential turning point in U.S. military aid to Ukraine—one that could either pressure Russia back to negotiations or deepen the conflict. While Kyiv welcomes the prospect of advanced firepower, Moscow’s warnings suggest such a move risks further destabilization. As both sides weigh their next steps, the world watches to see whether this gambit will hasten peace or plunge the region into a more dangerous phase of war.
Watch the video below that talks about Trump considering sending Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine and NATO.
This video is from Cynthia’s Pursuit of Truth channel on Brighteon.com.
Sources include:
RT.com
Reuters.com
Brighteon.ai
Brighteon.com
Read full article here