(LONDON) — A supply of U.S. Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine could help “push Russia back,” Margus Tsahkna — the foreign minister of NATO ally Estonia — told ABC News, after U.S. President Donald Trump said he had “sort of made a decision” on whether to green-light the long-range weapon for Ukrainian use.

Tsahkna said in an interview Tuesday that Trump approving the supply of the cruise missile to Kyiv would send “a very strong message” to Moscow.

“Whatever we can give — without any restrictions — to Ukraine, it is helping to win the war and push Russia back,” Tsahkna said. “So, if President Trump and the U.S. is deciding to take down restrictions from military support, as well Tomahawks, it’s just helping Ukraine to win and push Russia back.”

“It’s up to the U.S. to decide that,” Tsahkna said.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has confirmed that Kyiv is seeking access to the American-made long-range missile, different variants of which have ranges of up to 1,550 miles, according to the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Russia’s most populous and politically important cities of Moscow, St. Petersburg, and a host of important air, naval, oil refining and drone production facilities would be within range if the longest-range version of the Tomahawk is supplied to Ukraine.

There remain major obstacles to any Ukrainian use of Tomahawks. For one, the main launch platforms for the cruise missile are naval vessels — most commonly submarines — and bomber aircraft, neither of which Ukraine possesses.

Only in recent years has the U.S. developed a small and very limited capability of firing Tomahawks from large launch vehicles, known as the Typhon missile system. Germany and the Philippines have reportedly expressed an interest in obtaining the Typhon, but to date, only the U.S. operates the platform. The small numbers of such launch vehicles in the U.S. military’s inventory makes it likely that they would not be on the battlefield anytime soon if approved by President Trump.

NATO allies have said little on the potential for Ukrainian Tomahawk use, or allied support for their supply.

“I think I want to find out what they’re doing with them,” Trump said of Ukraine’s Tomahawk request on Monday. “I would ask some questions. I’m not looking to escalate that war.”

The Kremlin has warned that a Tomahawk supply to Ukraine would do just that. 

“This will lead to the destruction of our relations, or at least the positive trends that have emerged in these relations,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a video clip released on Sunday by Russian state television.

On Monday, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters that Moscow is “carefully analyzing” related developments.

“The question, as before, is as follows: Who can launch these missiles, even if they are on the territory of the Kyiv regime — can only Ukrainians launch them, or should the U.S. military do so?” he asked.

“Who sets the targets for these missiles — the American side or the Ukrainians themselves?” Peskov added. “Therefore, a very thorough analysis is needed here. We have certainly heard the statements, they are very serious, and we are studying them.”

“Even if this happens, there is no panacea that can now change the situation on the front lines for the Kyiv regime, there is no magic weapon, be it Tomahawks or missiles — they will not be able to change the dynamics,” Peskov said.

Officials in Kyiv said they disagree.

The Tomahawk “is extremely important as a deterrent weapon, because the presence of this weapon for Russia will be a clear signal that we have something to respond with if they continue this terror,” Serhiy Leshchenko, an adviser to the head of Zelenskyy’s office, said in a television appearance.

Andriy Kovalenko — the head of the Counter-Disinformation Center operating as part of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council — said in posts to Telegram that the Tomahawk would represent “not tactical deterrence, but a strategic turning point.”

“As soon as Moscow and St. Petersburg fully and consistently feel the war, it will mean either a search for a replacement for Putin by the elites and an exit from the war, at least temporarily, or Putin himself will do everything to stop the war,” Kovalenko suggested.

But significant practical challenges remain.

Ivan Stupak, a former officer in the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), suggested in an interview with ABC News that the Tomahawk is the latest headline-grabbing “wonder weapon” that would have a limited battlefield effect, even if the White House decided to approve its transfer to Ukrainian arsenals.

It is not clear how many Tomahawks the U.S. military could spare for Ukrainian use. The rate of Tomahawk production has ranged from 55 to 90 annually in recent years, according to Reuters. The Pentagon has already said it plans to purchase just 57 missiles in 2026.

The intensity of the war in Ukraine dwarfs those numbers. Recent months have seen Russia launch between 100 and 200 missiles of all types into Ukraine each month, per Ukrainian air force data analyzed by ABC News. On a nightly basis, Ukraine launches dozens of long-range drones into Russia, according to the Defense Ministry in Moscow.

Stupak, who has advised Ukrainian parliamentarians on security matters during Russia’s full-scale invasion, said he was skeptical that the U.S. would deliver enough Tomahawks to turn the tide of the war.

U.S. control over target selection may limit their effectiveness further, Stupak said, as may American concerns about sensitive technical data falling into Russian hands if any Tomahawks were captured.

Along with the issue of launch platforms, there would be a need for training. Unless American military personnel are on the ground to assist in their usage — and Trump has already publicly ruled out deployed U.S. troops to Ukraine — Ukrainian operators will also need significant training to be able to use the weapon. 

Ukraine is already using shorter-range Western-supplied cruise missiles — the Storm Shadow/SCALP British-French cruise missile, which have a maximum range far shorter than the Tomahawk at around 155 miles.

The extent of allied involvement in their use is unclear, but Germany’s then-Chancellor Olaf Scholz was widely criticized for hinting in 2024 that British and French personnel were involved in “target control.”

Yuriy Boyechko, the CEO of the Hope For Ukraine humanitarian organization, told ABC News he was skeptical of any Tomahawk proposal.

“Ukraine currently does not possess the specialized launch equipment or the trained personnel needed to field the Tomahawk missile system,” he said. “Right now, Ukraine is under daily mass attacks and needs quick, practical solutions to protect civilians and to conduct offensive operations deep into Russian territory.”

The “only solution” for Kyiv, Stupak suggested, is for Ukraine to continue its own cruise missile and ballistic missile production drive.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.