Why it matters:
The debate over supplying Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine underscores the growing risks of escalation between NATO and Russia. While Ukraine seeks advanced weaponry to shift the battlefield balance, Moscow views such moves as existential threats. Rhetoric from both sides— particularly involving nuclear implications— highlights the fragile state of global security as the war drags on.
What they're saying:
Medvedev warned that once launched, Tomahawk missiles armed with nuclear warheads cannot be distinguished from those carrying conventional payloads—a point echoed by President Vladimir Putin’s spokesperson. “How should Russia respond? Exactly!” Medvedev wrote on Telegram, implying a potential nuclear response.
He dismissed Trump’s recent comments as possibly “another empty threat,” referencing the president’s August claim that he had ordered two U.S. nuclear submarines closer to Russia in response to Medvedev’s earlier provocative statements.
Speaking on Sunday, Trump said he might authorize the transfer of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine if Putin refuses to end the war: “We may not, but we may do it… Do they want to have Tomahawks going in their direction? I don’t think so.”
The context:
According to Axios, Zelensky made a direct request for Tomahawk missiles during the 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly. With a range of up to 2,500 kilometers (1,550 miles) and a 450-kilogram (992-pound) warhead, the missiles would significantly expand Ukraine’s strike capabilities, far surpassing any long-range systems previously supplied by Western allies.
Keith Kellogg, the U.S. Special Representative for Russia and Ukraine, later stated that Washington has not yet decided whether to send Tomahawk missiles to NATO countries for potential transfer to Kyiv. “The final decision rests with the President,” he said.
Go deeper:
Israeli Regime Supplies Ukraine With Two Patriot Missile Systems
Hossein Amiri - ahmad shirzadian
