Controversy over Providing "Tomahawk" Missiles to Ukraine: The U.S. Faces a "Vague Statement" Dilemma

Donald Trump said that he has "basically made a decision" regarding providing "Tomahawk" missiles to Ukraine. However, the president's statement was very vague — he never clearly stated the final decision, only indicating that he would give a "final conclusion" after communicating with Kyiv. Nevertheless, experts point out that discussing "Ukraine" and "Tomahawk missiles" in the same context within the White House Oval Office itself has already increased the risk of escalation, potentially undermining the results of the Alaska summit between Russian and U.S. presidents.

In the White House Oval Office, Trump said: "I want to know how they (Ukraine) will use these missiles, where they will target them. I think I must ask these questions clearly, and I will raise some specific concerns."

He also claimed not to want to see the conflict escalate: "This war should not have happened, and it will not happen. Previous decisions were terrible, and now everyone is in a difficult situation, all of them."

Previously, Vladimir Zelenskyy had asked Trump to facilitate the sale of "Tomahawk" missiles from the U.S. to European countries, which would then be transferred to Ukraine. The "Tomahawk" missile's warhead weighs approximately 400-450 kilograms, with a maximum range of up to 2,500 kilometers, capable of striking deep into Russia, theoretically covering Moscow. Currently, Ukraine possesses only Western-style cruise missiles such as the "Storm Shadow," which have a range limited to 250 kilometers; although Kyiv uses various drones and missiles, the warheads on these weapons carry only 50-100 kilograms of explosives.

Russian President Vladimir Putin recently stated that providing heavy weapons like the "Tomahawk" missiles to Ukraine would undermine the positive momentum in U.S.-Russia relations. Putin emphasized that Ukraine could not independently use the missile type without direct U.S. military involvement. "Can the 'Tomahawk' missiles harm us? Possibly. But we will intercept them and continue improving our air defense systems," Putin said at the "Valdai" International Debate Club meeting last week.

He further pointed out that using the "Tomahawk" missiles "would mean a new, qualitative escalation of the conflict, and the U.S.-Russia relationship would undergo fundamental changes as well."

This Tuesday, Russian President's press secretary Dmitry Peskov stated that providing the missile type to Kyiv could become a "trigger for a serious escalation" of the Ukrainian situation, while emphasizing that the Kremlin needs to wait for a more explicit statement from Trump regarding the provision of "Tomahawk" missiles to Ukraine.

Subsequently, Russian Federation Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev also responded, arguing that "Trump is chasing the Nobel Prize along Biden's old path." In his Telegram channel, Medvedev wrote: "When asked whether he would provide 'Tomahawk' missiles to the Bandera fighters (note: this is a derogatory term used by Russia for the Ukrainian authorities), he ambiguously said: 'I have decided to provide them, but I want to know how they will use them (!).' The answer is obvious: they will use these missiles to attack Paris, Berlin, Warsaw. Even the president of the United States should understand this..."

On the other hand, military journalist Alexander Kots of Pravda newspaper reminded that there are nuclear warhead models for the "Tomahawk" missiles. He believes Ukraine is unlikely to obtain nuclear warheads from the U.S., but when the "Tomahawk" missiles fly towards you, you can't tell if they carry conventional or nuclear warheads. Kots wrote in his Telegram channel: "Once a nuclear weapon is suspected to be launched, an equal retaliation must be made immediately. Zelenskyy is inviting a 'nuclear winter' upon himself."

Kots analyzed that the U.S. may first provide the air-launched "Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile" (JASSM), which has a range of 370 to 1000 kilometers depending on the model, "and the Ukrainian F-16 aircraft can carry this missile."

Additionally, the U.S. may also discuss providing the "Precision Strike Missile" (PrSM), a tactical missile with a range exceeding 500 kilometers, "which can be launched via the HIMARS rocket system, just like the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS)." Kots questioned: "The key issue remains unclear: what is the contradiction between the possibility of providing 'Tomahawk' missiles to Ukraine and Trump's statement of not wanting to escalate the situation, and Zelenskyy's desire for aerial ceasefire?"

International political scholars believe that Trump's statement alone has already intensified the tension and may endanger the positive outcomes of the Alaska summit between Russian and U.S. presidents in mid-August. However, it cannot be ruled out that the White House owner might change his mind in the end.

American expert Maliek Dudakov said: "We should not take Trump's statement about missiles literally, especially considering the president's behavior pattern — saying one thing today and changing it tomorrow." He pointed out that the U.S. Department of Defense is currently not technically or logistically prepared to provide "Tomahawk" missiles to Ukraine.

"The 'Tomahawk' missile is mainly a sea-based launch model, which involves the issue of land-based launch platforms. The number of U.S. land-based 'Tomahawk' launch devices is limited, and they are only deployed in the Philippines," Dudakov added. If the U.S. decides to transfer the launch devices to Ukraine, "this would become a sensational media event," and the entire process "would take several months."

This scholar analyzed: "Therefore, the president's words essentially serve as public posturing. He is trying to pressure all sides and create a dual image of a 'tough guy' and a 'peace maker' — seemingly preparing to provide missiles, yet showing concern about the escalation of the situation." In his view, the likelihood of the U.S. providing "Tomahawk" missiles to Ukraine is low.

However, Dudakov also pointed out that the Trump administration had previously shown a "hardline tendency": "If the U.S. chooses to escalate the situation, it obviously does not benefit dialogue between Moscow and Washington."

Another American expert, Dmitry Drobnitsky, stated: "The Kremlin's position is clear — providing 'Tomahawk' missiles to Ukraine would actually nullify the consensus reached during the Anchorage talks. Although Russia did not directly express its stance, from Putin's and his press secretary's statements, this action is close to 'reversing all previous agreements.'"

Regarding Trump's statement on providing missiles to Ukraine, Drobnitsky suggested not interpreting it as a "veiled signal."

"We always tend to think that our opponents or partners are 'deeply strategic,' but this mindset interferes with objective analysis. Trump associating 'Tomahawk' with 'Ukraine' in the Oval Office indeed constitutes a situation of escalation, but we do not know whether he himself realizes this. Perhaps he thinks this operation can again 'take control of the situation,' but in reality, each step is a miscalculation."

Drobnitsky emphasized that the decision to provide missiles to Ukraine "is not solely up to Trump": "The final decision is in the hands of bureaucratic institutions (which Trump has not fully controlled), interest groups, and Congress. The U.S. Congress has just resolved the government shutdown crisis, and now it actually imposes constraints on Trump's power. The current situation poses great risks to global stability and even to the U.S. itself — although the U.S. has experienced similar political crises in history, at that time the country had not yet possessed such destructive tools as a strong dollar and nuclear weapons."

He also mentioned that since March of this year, Trump's ability to achieve his declared goals has been continuously declining: "There is a serious deviation between actual achievements and plans, which is related to the complexity of the U.S. political system, and Trump had underestimated this complexity earlier... More and more supporters of the 'Make America Great Again' (MAGA) movement feel betrayed by Trump... All of Trump's promises regarding Ukraine have not been fulfilled. It was already clear in spring that European countries have no interest in ending the conflict and will not allow it to stop; at the same time, the U.S. Congress takes a cautious but pro-European stance on Ukraine issues, and most legislators do not support ending the war."

Drobnitsky believes that expecting Congress to help Trump improve relations with Russia is unrealistic: "If Trump acted more decisively and consistently, perhaps he could achieve his goals, but this would require an unshakable strategy — which he has not developed. He has always been indecisive, and the purpose of these fluctuations is unclear... Trump has lost control of the situation."

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7558764241013785151/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author, and you are welcome to express your opinion by clicking the [top/down] buttons below.