The Potential to Even the Odds for Ukraine

"As you understand, without software and launchers, the missiles themselves are just blanks."

"Accordingly, as has also been stated at a high level by the Russian side, the hypothetical use of such systems is only possible with the direct involvement of American personnel."

"Naturally, we urge the U.S. leadership and the U.S. military to take a sober, reasonable, responsible approach to this situation.

"Sadly, I have to say that the powerful impetus of the Anchorage meeting in favour of agreements has turned out to be exhausted to a significant extent by adversaries' efforts [European leaders] destructive actions."

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov 

"Our response will be tough, ambiguous, measured, and asymmetrical," a senior Russian official said.

 

"I think I want to find out what they're doing with them [ATACM missiles sent to Ukraine, to determine what might be done with Tomahawks]."

"Where are they sending them? I guess I'd have to ask that question."

U.S. President Donald Trump

President Trump's administration has been forewarned. DO NOT give Ukraine access to long-range Tomahawk missiles with the potential to strike targets deep within Russia. Should Ukraine receive such armaments and use them as payback to Moscow for its strikes everywhere within Ukraine in defiance to international rules of conflict aiming directly at civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, apartment blocks, energy providers and shopping centers, claiming that the Russian military targets only military installations, this would be an act of terrorism on Ukraine's part. Quite unlike Russia's examples.

 

Moves the Trump administration has taken repeatedly toward resolving the Ukraine conflict -- occasioned by Vladimir Putin's overarching plan to annex Ukrainian territory for absorption into Greater Russia, when Russia's full-scale military invasion saw the Ukrainian military fighting back measure for measure in reacting to save its geography from Mr. Putin's fixation on territorial expansion and subjugation of Ukraine -- when Russian President Vladimir Putin met in August with U.S. President Trump, have been "largely exhausted" stated Mr.  Ryabkov in exasperation.

 

U.S. President Donald Trump shakes hand with Russian President Vladimir Putin, as they meet to negotiate for an end to the war in Ukraine, at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, U.S., August 15, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo

 

The fact that President Trump has been considering sale of new weapons over the past few weeks, to Ukraine while criticizing Russia as a "paper tiger", has not sat well with the Moscow contingent. A concerted Russian effort at deterring the Trump administration's musing about providing the more powerful missiles to Ukraine has been rather unnerving in Moscow for its potential. Obviously providing advanced military technology to Ukraine would see a direct conflict ensue between Russia and its NATO-linked neighbours.

 

It is European leaders who are the war-mongers, certainly not Russia is the prevailing message out of the Kremlin. It seems that Mr. Trump's evident weak spot for his Russian counterpart has groomed Russian authorities to consider him collegial in nature, whereas the open hostility evinced by Russia's East European neighbours mark them as  preparing for conflict with unassuming Russia which harbours no intention whatever of launching new invasions as soon as Ukraine falls.  

"[Ryabkov has] drawn a firm line [with his comment that the momentum for resolving the Ukraine conflict had dissipated after the Alaska summit]."

"[With Trump considering the Tomahawk question], Moscow sees the situation as critical."

"Moscow warns Trump about a more acute confrontation and expects him to make what it considers the 'right' choice."

Tatiana Stanovaya, senior fellow, Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center  

President Trump's casual remark that he had "sort of" made a decision, but had yet to discern how Kyiv would use the weapons beforehand, reflected the reality that the administration had not decided to sell the Tomahawks to Ukraine. The Tomahawk technology with its range of close to 2,500 kilometres depending on the variant involved, in comparison to around 300 kilometres for ATACM missiles previously provided to Kyiv, is serious business, placing Russia on alert. 

 

Despite that Putin had asserted that the missiles "won't change the balance of power on the battlefield", while at a Russian foreign policy conference, the potential of the Ukraine military using them definitely has the Kremlin on edge. The weapons, warned Mr. Putin on another occasion, would represent a "qualitatively new stage of escalation" since they could not be fired without involvement of U.S. personnel.  Supplying Tomahawks to Ukraine would create an aura with "severity of the consequences", he warned.

A dummy Tomahawk land attack missile is seen onboard HMS Artful, a British submarine, at a shipyard in Barrow-in-Furness, U.K.   Phil Noble/Reuters

 

A former Russian deputy defence minister, Andrei Karetapolov, now head of the parliament's defence committee warned darkly that Russia knew how to shoot down these missiles and would in turn target any launchers detected on Ukrainian soil.  

"Our response will be tough, ambiguous, measured, and asymmetrical."

"We will find ways to hurt those who cause us trouble."

"The only problems will be for those who supply them and those who use them."

Andrei Karaetapolov 

Not to be outdone, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned as well against the "new escalation" represented by allowing Kyiv access to Tomahawks. To round out the concerns expressed by the Russians, Keith Kellogg, the US. envoy to Ukraine, informed Fox News that President Trump had authorized Ukraine to carry out long-range strikes with U.S.-made weapons, with the warning that "there are no such things as sanctuaries".  

"After the summit in Alaska, there was hope that Trump was ready to continue dialogue with Russia and take our interests into account."

"Donald has now thoroughly disappointed us with his trademark inconsistency."

 Andrei Baranov, pro-Kremlin newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda

Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna delivers a statement at a United Nations Security Council meeting on Sept. 22, 2025 in New York City.

Spencer Platt/Getty Images

 

Laudable Support of Ukraine Fending off Russia -- Israel Can Look After Itself

"Canada fully supports Ukraine using long-range weaponry to prevent and interdict Russia's continued ability to degrade Ukrainian civilians [and] infrastructure, and mostly to kill innocent civilians in their unjust war."

"[Canada] fully supports Ukraine using long-range weaponry] in prevention of Russian strikes on hospitals and daycares across the country]."

"[Putin] is trying to deeply destabilize the international rules-based order that protects us all, not just in every democracy around the world, but in all countries around the world."

Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau

"[Putin said that allowing long-range strikes] would mean that NATO countries, the United States and European countries are at war with Russia."

"Ukraine has the right to self-defence, and we've obviously been absolutely fully supportive of Ukraine's right to self-defence."

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's team said Britain’s “shameful decision will not change Israel's determination to defeat Hamas. | Pool photo by Ohad Zwigenberg/AFP via Getty Images

The stance of these two countries, both led by Liberal-left, politically 'correct', DEI-infused heads, is very similar in content and their context. Both countries have experienced an exponential rise in the presence of new citizens joining those already present, from Muslim-majority countries, with a  significant presence of Arabs and Palestinians among them.  Numbers count. As for example, the almost one-and-a-half million Ukrainian Canadians who represent a large voting bloc. Ukraine's valiant battle to secure its sovereignty and fight off Russia's territorial ambitions is laudatory.

 

Apart from the fact that in both countries Muslims have achieved a notable presence in government; Britain's capital city has its very own Muslim mayor who is on record as promoting the presence of even greater numbers of Muslims living in Britain as he sets about making London, once one of the most civilized and cosmopolitan cities in the world, 'a better place to live'. On its way to becoming a better place to live, London Police have been extraordinarily busy taming the wildly violent pro-Hamas street celebrations.

 

Britain's new Labour government, developed as a kinder, more citizen-representative party than of old, has stated through its new Foreign Secretary David Lammy, that the UK would be suspending 30 of 350 arms export licences to Israel during its conflict with Hamas. The equipment affected would be 'non-essentials' such as parts for fighter jets, helicopters and drones. Presumably to give Palestinian terrorist groups a better fighting opportunity to achieve their aspirational goal of exterminating the Jewish state; a goal that would mightily please Britain's growing Muslim population.

 

Additionally of help to the war effort, Britain has decided to drop its opposition to the International Criminal Court's arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while calling for an immediate ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hamas, the release of all hostages and an increase in the amount of aid to civilians in Gaza whom Hamas has deliberately, as is its wont, negotiated into a position of vulnerability by positioning its rocket launchers, command posts and weapons depots within or beside crowded civilian enclaves, hospitals, schools and apartment blocks.

"[Britain’s] shameful decision will not change Israel's determination to defeat Hamas, a genocidal terrorist organization that savagely murdered 1200 people on October 7, including 14 British citizens."

"Instead of standing with Israel, a fellow democracy defending itself against barbarism, Britain’s misguided decision will only embolden Hamas."

Response from PM Benjamin Netanyahu's office

Coincidentally, Canada's own minister of foreign affairs in a government that is fast sinking in public opinion, and certain to be ousted sooner rather than later, has made it clear that her Liberal government will brook no arms exports to Israel in its battle against the sadistic savagery of Palestinian terrorism. Canada has had ample share of pro-Palestinian, pro-Hamas, anti-Israel demonstrations marching through the streets of its cities. That Muslims now represent 5% of the Canadian population with almost two million of the faithful, make them a powerful voting bloc the Liberal government not only promotes in Parliament but courts at the ballot box.

 

Israeli soldiers operate in the Gaza Strip on February 8, 2024. (Dylan Martinez/Reuters)

 

"Our policy has been clear. Since Jan. 8, we have not accepted any form of arms export permits to be sent to Israel."

"We are asking questions to these [Canadian companies with existing permits] companies. Following that, I asked my department to look into any existing permits of arms or parts of arms that could have been sent to Israel."

"Following that, I suspended this summer around 30 existing permits of Canadian companies and we are asking questions to these companies."

Minister of Foreign Affairs Melanie Joly