President Trump warned aboard Air Force One that he may supply Ukraine with long‑range Tomahawk missiles if Russian President Vladimir Putin does not end the war. He said, “I might say, ‘if this war is not going to get settled, I’m going to send them Tomahawks,’” and added that “We may not, but we may do it.” Trump characterized the Tomahawk as “an incredible weapon” and implied its deployment could change the strategic pressure on Moscow.
Russian reaction was sharp. Kremlin spokespersons described the possibility as an extreme escalation. Dmitry Medvedev — a former Russian president and prominent hawk — warned that deploying Tomahawks could provoke serious consequences, especially since it becomes difficult to distinguish whether such missiles carry conventional or nuclear payloads once launched.
Analysts note that Trump has not committed to a full decision but is considering setting the threat as leverage in diplomatic pressure on Putin. There is also practical concern about U.S. missile inventories and command control: some Russian officials argue that such weapons might require U.S. operational involvement, thus raising direct confrontation risks.
This shift marks a more aggressive posture compared to Trump’s earlier approach of seeking negotiated settlement and de‑escalation. For conservative and Christian observers, supplying longer‑range weaponry aligns with robust support for Ukraine’s defense. But it also tests the boundaries of escalation, alliance handling, and the risk of drawing the U.S. deeper into conflict dynamics.
