Ukraine Tomahawk - Russian Reaction
Historically, Russian and Soviet opposition to Ground-Launched Cruise Missile (GLCM) deployments centered on eliminating intermediate-range nuclear forces (INF), which they viewed as a major threat to their security. This opposition was a key factor in reaching the 1987 INF Treaty. Following the treaty's collapse in 2019, modern Russian opposition to potential new GLCM deployments by the US and NATO is framed as a response to perceived Western aggression and a looming arms race.
In the late 1970s, the Soviet Union's deployment of mobile, nuclear-capable SS-20 missiles upset the balance of power in Europe. NATO responded in 1979 by agreeing to deploy new U.S. GLCMs and Pershing II ballistic missiles in Europe. The prospect of U.S. INF missile deployment deeply concerned Moscow. The Soviet Union saw these weapons as a significant threat, which ultimately gave the U.S. leverage to push for a treaty banning all INF missiles. The deployment of U.S. GLCMs and Pershing IIs helped motivate the Soviet Union to agree to the landmark 1987 INF Treaty. The accord eliminated all ground-launched missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers.
Moscow has repeatedly warned that Western arms supplies to Kiev would not change the situation on the frontline and only risk further escalation, potentially leading to a direct conflict between Russia and NATO. The United States understands the consequences of transferring Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine; it risks derailing relations between the two countries, State Duma Deputy from Sevastopol and member of the International Affairs Committee Dmitry Belik told RIA Novosti.
"I'm confident the US understands the consequences of such a move. Without a doubt, Tomahawk cruise missiles are a formidable weapon, and their transfer would be perceived not just as a demarche, but as a downgrade of our relations with the US to the bare minimum," Belik said. In his opinion, today's statements about missiles for Ukraine should be viewed as a game for a Western audience and encouragement for the Kyiv regime. "This is raising the stakes in terms of pressure on Russia , with the goal of gauging our reaction. The Americans have never transferred Tomahawk missiles to third countries, including Ukraine. They used these missiles to deal with undesirables, but Russia does not fall into that category," the deputy added.
In November 2024, President Vladimir Putin warned that “the regional conflict in Ukraine provoked by the West has assumed elements of a global nature,” and warned of a backlash if tensions escalate further. His words came after Kiev launched several strikes using US-made ATACMS and HIMARS systems, as well as British-made Storm Shadow missiles, deep inside Russian territory after receiving a green light from its Western backers. The Kremlin then also warned that “reckless decisions” of Western nations supplying Ukraine with long-range missiles cannot be left unanswered.
Russian presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov called allegations about the possible transfer of American Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine very serious. "The question, as before, is: 'Who can launch these missiles, even if they end up on Kyiv regime territory?' 'Can only Ukrainians launch them, or should the American military do so?' 'Who is assigning targets to these missiles?' 'Is it the American side or the Ukrainians themselves?' And so on. Of course, we've heard the allegations, and they are very serious. We are studying them," he said.
First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee Alexei Zhuravlev assessed the prospects of using US cruise missiles against Russia, The deputy recalled that the US had already granted such permission to Ukraine under the Biden administration. The event was presented as a sensation, but technically, the Ukrainian Armed Forces had previously used HIMARS systems and Storm Shadow missiles to strike targets in Russia, Zhuravlev noted.
"These statements are apparently aimed at a public with no memory," he said sarcastically. "Now, apparently, they're using these words to cover up the US's supply of American Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, and not everyone in the NATO club has access to them—the UK, the Netherlands—and even there they're only used under Pentagon control."
Zhuravlev stated that if the Ukrainian Armed Forces do receive Tomahawks, it will be possible to speak of a new stage of the war, in which the United States becomes a direct participant. Then, Russia will find a way to use the Oreshnik missiles against American targets, the deputy assured. "Then our 'Oreshnik' should also be moved somewhere closer to the American border. Incidentally, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has strongly requested that it be brought here. And how it's used, for what purposes, is none of our concern — two can certainly play that game," he concluded.
The United States will never, under any circumstances, send Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, according to retired U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer and military analyst Scott Ritter, speaking on the YouTube channel Judging Freedom. "The US will never supply Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine . We know this. Russia knows this. Ukraine knows this," he said. The expert also said that US Special Presidential Envoy Keith Kellogg is simply playing a "silly game" when he talks about strikes deep into Russia that the US allegedly approved against Ukraine. He believes this is "being played to create the illusion that Ukraine is capable of continuing the fight against Russia."
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
