The possibility of Ukraine receiving Tomahawk cruise missiles has returned to the agenda. The White House review of this decision was officially confirmed by U.S. Vice President J. D. Vance. This could mark a noticeable shift in Washington's rhetoric toward russia.
Even if a decision is made, the transfer likely would not be delivered as direct U.S. aid; instead the PURL mechanism would probably be used, under which European partners and Canada buy the weapons for Ukraine a process that has proven secretive and rapid.
Read more: Cheap and Deadly, APKWS Became Main Fighter Weapon Against UAVs
Beyond the missiles themselves and the still-sensitive question of permission to use them against targets in russia (where there appear to be some positive shifts), there is the issue of how to launch them. It's worth recalling that Tomahawk is primarily a maritime missile. So transferring missile destroyers or submarines can be put aside immediately. It should also be noted that Tomahawk cannot be air-launched, even from a B‑52.
The only realistic option left is ground launchers but there are complications there too. The best-known land launch system for Tomahawk is Typhon, which has already attracted considerable interest from Germany. In the U.S., however, only two units the so‑called Multi‑Domain Task Forces (MDTFs) have received those launchers so far, and they are focused on the Pacific.
There are proposals that involve providing just a launcher rather than a full system; for example, Lockheed Martin is promoting the Mk 70 in Europe with the option to integrate its own missiles. But that would also require significant time to manufacture and deliver.
Right now, though, the U.S. does have what might be considered surplus Tomahawk launchers. Just a month ago, the U.S. Marine Corps decided to abandon the LRF (Long Range Fires) launcher for Tomahawk.
The reason was poor cross‑country mobility on soft ground critical for Marines who would need to land LRF units on a beach. That limitation is less of an issue for Ukraine. Moreover, it is unlikely Ukraine could receive original LRFs anyway, because the LRF is a remotely operated ground vehicle based on the JLTV. The platform itself could still be useful to the Marines for an NMESIS concept with NSM anti‑ship missiles. But the Tomahawk launch system itself which can be mounted on virtually any wheeled chassis is exactly what Ukraine would need.
As of this summer, the U.S. Marine Corps had 4–8 LRFs in service and a plan for 56 units by 2028. The LRF retirement is scheduled for FY2026, which begins in the U.S. on October 1, 2025 in a few days. So if a decision to send Tomahawks to Ukraine is made, the launcher question currently does not appear to be an insurmountable obstacle.
Read more: Anti-Aircraft Drones from Ukraine May Become One of Solutions for U.S. to Be Protected Against UAVs
