Zelensky reportedly pressed Trump for Tomahawk missiles in private meeting, report says

A New York Post opinion column reports that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky pressed President Donald Trump for Tomahawk cruise missiles during a Tuesday, closed-door meeting, arguing the move could pressure Moscow to end the war. The column frames the request as part of a broader strategy to deter or reverse Russia's advances and to raise the cost of Moscow's aggression. It reflects a heated, ongoing debate in Washington about whether long-range missiles could alter the course of the war and how such a transfer might be managed within allied circles.

Tomahawks would give Kyiv a long-range strike capability with a range well over 1,500 miles and a 900-pound warhead, enabling targeting of land-based systems from surface ships or submarines. The missiles are already deployed by the U.S. Navy and the British Royal Navy, and Washington has sold or discussed sales to Australia, Japan and the Netherlands. Experts familiar with the piece say allied mechanisms could potentially arrange deliveries to Ukraine through European partners or third-party buyers, if policymakers decided to proceed. Proponents argue that the missiles could force Russian air bases farther behind the front lines, diminishing Moscow's ability to conduct sustained bombardments and increasing pressure on its leadership. Additionally, they contend Tomahawks could enable Ukrainian offensives designed to reclaim towns and cities under Russian control by targeting command-and-control networks deep inside Russia.

The op-ed quotes a senior congressional aide who says that even a single Tomahawk handed to Ukraine would alarm the Kremlin more than almost any other move, potentially shifting Moscow's calculations about the costs of continuing the war. The piece argues that such a step could force Russia to the bargaining table, or, if Moscow refuses, leave it facing decisive military setbacks and domestic consequences.

Observers note that the call to arm Ukraine with Tomahawks echoes a broader push to deploy longer-range precision weapons as part of Western support for Kyiv. Supporters frame long-range missiles as a deterrent that could shorten the war by undermining Russia's strategic options, while opponents warn of the risk of escalation and wider conflict if such weapons were to proliferate. The discussion is set against a backdrop of national and international scrutiny over how best to balance military assistance with diplomacy, sanctions, and the risks of broader confrontation.

The column also takes aim at past administration choices, arguing that the United States could have altered the conflict's trajectory had Kyiv been armed with longer-range capabilities earlier. It contrasts what it describes as a history of reticent postures from former and current administrations with a call for more assertive deterrence. The piece suggests that a robust, credible threat of long-range strikes could limit Moscow's battlefield options and alter the calculus for Russian leadership.

Officials have not publicly confirmed any transfer of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, and White House and Pentagon spokespeople did not provide remarks in connection with the column. The account remains part of an opinion debate about arms policy and wartime strategy, not an official policy announcement. As the war continues, Western experts and policymakers will no doubt weigh the strategic consequences of any move that would significantly broaden Ukraine's long-range strike capabilities.

As the debate continues, observers stress that any decision to arm Kyiv with Tomahawks would involve consultation with allies, treaty partners and potential regional suppliers, as well as careful consideration of command-and-control, access, security, and escalation risks. The broader question remains whether long-range missiles, deployed in a coordinated fashion with sanctions and diplomatic pressure, could meaningfully shorten the conflict while preserving regional stability and minimizing civilian harm. The world will be watching how policymakers translate discussion and analysis into concrete actions amid a war that has already drawn in multiple states and drawn sharp lines of alliance and opposition across the globe.