Would Tomahawks be a game-changer for Ukraine?

Since September, talk has been growing about whether the U.S. might finally supply Ukraine with the long-requested Tomahawk cruise missiles — and on Oct. 6, Donald Trump said he had “kind of made the decision.”

“I think I want to find out what they’re doing with them, where they’re sending them, I guess. I have to ask that question,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office.

The Tomahawk is a subsonic, long-range cruise missile designed for precision strikes against land targets. It has an operational range between 1,600 and 2,500 kilometers, though experts believe any version Ukraine receives could be limited to 1,700 kilometers.

Experts say these long-range weapons, if approved, would allow Ukraine to strike military targets deep inside Russia and increase pressure on Vladimir Putin, giving Kyiv stronger leverage in future peace negotiations.

“They would be a powerful addition to Ukraine’s arsenal — something the country largely lacks at the moment,” Emil Kastehelmi, an analyst at the Finland-based Black Bird Group monitoring the war closely through open sources, told the Kyiv Independent.

For now, Ukraine relies mostly on domestically produced long-range drones to hit targets deep inside Russia — weapons that carry tens, not hundreds, of kilograms of explosives.

“If Ukraine gets a large number of these missiles, it would be a difficult thing for Russia because the Tomahawks would cover a great area of land where there is a huge number of high-value targets, which Ukraine could then strike with greater damage,” Kastehelmi said.

“So, of course, it’s in the Kremlin’s interest not to allow Ukraine to actually have Tomahawks, at least not in great numbers,” he added.

This is what Ukraine could hit in Russia with US Tomahawk missiles

The weapons for Ukraine rumor mill went into overdrive earlier this week when it was reported that U.S. President Donald Trump was considering supplying Kyiv with Tomahawk cruise missiles. A day later, things reached fever pitch with reports Trump had asked President Volodymyr Zelensky if Ukraine could strike key Russian cities if provided with long-range U.S. weapons. The White House, while not denying the conversation took place, swiftly moved to shut down speculations, with Press Secretary

The very discussion has already drawn sharp reactions from Moscow. On Oct. 5, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that any supply of Tomahawks would “destroy the emerging positive trends” in U.S.-Russian relations.

“The supply of long-range missile systems, including Tomahawks, to Ukraine will lead to the destruction of the emerging positive trends in relations between Russia and the United States,” Putin said.

'A real headache for Russia'

“If supplied without major targeting caveats, Tomahawks could significantly increase pressure on Russia’s air defense system,” Justin Bronk, senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), told the Kyiv Independent.

He said that Russia would have to spread out its air defense coverage to protect command centers, air bases, and logistical sites deep inside the country, a task already pushed by Ukraine’s long-range drone attacks.

“Tomahawk offers far larger and more capable warhead effects than Ukraine’s long-range UAVs, far greater terminal accuracy than its indigenously developed Flamingo cruise missiles, and far greater range than the Anglo-French Storm Shadow or SCALP,” Bronk said.

Emil Kastehelmi added that large-scale Tomahawk strikes could force Moscow to “prioritize and decentralize some of their assets and operations,” especially those linked to oil refineries, logistics, and training facilities.

“The missiles could accelerate Ukraine’s campaign against oil infrastructure. They could do very significant damage — we’re talking hundreds of kilograms of explosives, not just tens like in drones,” Kastehelmi said.

The scale of such strikes would challenge Russia’s defenses in ways that drone attacks never could.

“That would be a real headache for the Russians,” he added. “Machine guns used for anti-air purposes don’t work against missiles — you actually need anti-air missiles to repel the kind of threat that Tomahawks would bring.”

Could they be a game-changer?

The question remains whether the U.S. will actually send them. And while even the prospect has already had an impact, their delivery alone would not change its course overnight.

“Any one weapon system isn’t usually really a game-changer. It’s more about the larger dynamics at play,” said Emil Kastehelmi.

He noted that one of the key questions is how many missiles Ukraine would actually receive and whether it could replenish them if supplies run out.

“In the case of Tomahawks, one of the most significant questions is in what numbers Ukraine would get them. And if Ukraine runs out of Tomahawk missiles, would they be able to acquire them relatively easily?” Kastehelmi said.

Justin Bronk agreed that while Tomahawks could intensify pressure on Russia, they are no “magic bullet.”

“They can be intercepted like any other cruise missile, and it’s unlikely they would suddenly make a strategic difference to the dynamics of the war in its fourth year,” he said.

Still, their impact may not be limited to the battlefield. Some analysts believe the very discussion around Tomahawks could shape the broader course of the conflict, influencing both military planning and political calculations in Moscow and Washington.

“It’s possible the U.S. wants to show Russia that there’s real damage to be done if they don’t act accordingly — and the Tomahawk is one of the best political statements to make that point,” Kastehelmi said.

“It could be used as a bargaining tool when the United States tries to persuade Russia into some kind of ceasefire agreement — and later, perhaps, a peace deal.”

Investigation: Top Russian defense industry boss tries to lift sanctions, spills own secrets instead

Key findings: * Two years ago, lawyers representing an offshore company went to court to unblock a superyacht that had been detained in a Spanish port due to its links to Sergei Chemezov, an associate of Vladimir Putin. Chemezov is believed to secretly own a number of luxury assets outside of Russia. * Court filings studied by the Kyiv Independent revealed that the yacht changed hands several times. * All three owners are believed to have served as proxies for Chemezov, part of a strategy to