EU’s Scramble for Missile Independence as Trump-Putin Meeting Looms

 

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin prepare to meet in Hungary under Trump's threat to make US's Tomahawk long-range missiles available to Ukraine. Given Trump’s history of protracted negotiations and ambiguous outcomes, there is a real risk that Ukraine could lose access to these critical weapons, prolonging the war and leaving Europe exposed. The EU, long dependent on American missile technology, faces an urgent need to develop its own long-range strike capabilities.

1. WHAT IS SPECIAL with TOMAHAWKS?

A Comparison:

Feature	Tomahawk	Other Missiles (e.g., JASSM(USA), SCALP(France), Kalibr(Russia))
Stealth	Terrain-hugging, low radar cross-section	Some lack advanced stealth features
Warhead	450 Kg	450-500 Kg
Range	Up to 1,600 km	Varies (e.g., JASSM-ER: 1,000 km, Kalibr: 1,500–2,500 km)
Launch Platforms	Ships, submarines, ground launchers	Often limited to aircraft or specific launchers
Guidance	GPS + TERCOM + two-way data link	Typically GPS/inertial, fewer mid-flight updates
Flexibility	Can retarget mid-flight	Most are "fire-and-forget"
Cost	~$1.5–$2 million per unit	Varies (e.g., JASSM: ~$1 million, Kalibr: ~$1–1.5 million)
Combat Proven	Extensively tested in real-world conflicts	Some are newer or less tested

Key Advantages Over Competitors

·        Subsonic Speed: While slower than hypersonic missiles, its subsonic speed allows for greater range and maneuverability, making it harder to intercept than faster, less agile missiles.

·        Network-Centric: The ability to receive in-flight updates makes it uniquely suitable for time-sensitive or dynamic targets.

·        Naval Integration: No other missile is as seamlessly integrated into U.S. and allied naval forces, providing a persistent strike capability from ships and submarines.

Limitations

·        Speed: Subsonic speed (around 880 km/h) makes it vulnerable to advanced air defenses if detected.

·        Cost: More expensive than some alternatives, which can limit mass production and deployment.

·        Dependency: Non-U.S. users (like the UK) rely on American supply chains and approval for use, which can be a political constraint.

2. EU’s Current Dependency

Europe’s reliance on the US for long-range strike capabilities—including Tomahawk cruise missiles—has become a strategic vulnerability. The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the specter of reduced US support have forced the EU to confront its dependency in three key areas: missile manufacturing, magazine depth[a], and kill chain architecture [b][1]. While European countries like Poland, Finland, the Netherlands, Germany, and Sweden have purchased US systems such as the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM-ER) and Tomahawk, these purchases only underscore Europe’s lack of autonomous deep-strike capacity [1].

The Push for Independence

In response, the EU has launched several initiatives to reduce its reliance on American weapons:

1. European Long-Range Strike Approach (ELSA): Spearheaded by France, Germany, Italy, and Poland in 2024, ELSA aims to develop a European-made land-based cruise missile with a range of 1,000–2,000 km, expected by the 2030s. Sweden and the UK have since joined the project, which is a direct response to the gaps exposed by the Ukraine war and the need for a credible European deterrent [2,3,4].
2. European Sky Shield Initiative (ESSI): This German-led project seeks to create an integrated air defense system across 24 European states, including anti-ballistic missile capabilities. The system is designed to counter threats like Russia’s Iskander missiles and is expected to reach full operational capability by 2030 [5].
3. Industrial Ramp-Up: Europe’s top missile maker, MBDA, increased production by 33% in 2024 and plans to invest €2.4 billion through 2029 to meet surging demand. Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin is expanding production of PAC-3, HIMARS, and GMLRS missiles in Europe, aiming for a 40% increase in deliveries by 2025 [6,7].
4. PESCO and EU Defense Projects: Under the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), the EU is advancing multi-layered air and missile defense, electronic warfare, and loitering munitions, with a focus on space-based early warning and interceptor solutions [8].  

3. Challenges Ahead

Despite these efforts, Europe still lags Russia in missile range and production scale. The ELSA and ESSI projects are critical steps, but full independence will require sustained investment, industrial coordination, and political will—especially if the US becomes an unreliable supplier [1,2]. 

4. Conclusion

The upcoming Trump-Putin meeting underscores the risks of Europe’s dependency on US weapons. If Ukraine loses access to Tomahawks, the war could drag on, and Europe’s security architecture will be tested as never before. The EU’s race to develop its own long-range missiles is not just about strategic autonomy; it’s about survival in an era of shifting alliances and unpredictable American foreign policy.

---

References:

[a] "magazine depth": quantity and readiness of a country’s stockpile of missiles, ammunition, and other precision-guided munitions.
[b] "kill chain architecture": integrated system of sensors, command-and-control ("C2") networks, communication links, and weapons platforms required to detect, track, decide, and engage a target in real time.

[1] War on the Rocks, "Europe, Deterrence, and Long-Range Strike," 2025
[2] Modern Diplomacy, "European Long Range Strike Approach (ELSA): future developmental trajectories," 2025
[3] Defense News, "Europe’s long-range strike project nears choice of lead contractors," 2025
[4] Euractiv, "Four EU countries agree to co-develop long-range cruise missiles," 2024
[5] Wikipedia, "European Sky Shield Initiative," 2025
[6] Defense News, "Europe’s top missile maker MBDA boosts output 33% amid record orders," 2025
[7] Fly a Jet Fighter, "Lockheed launches missile production in Europe: a strategic turning point," 2025
[8] GlobalSecurity.org, "Progress report 2025: EU's ambitions take shape through PESCO," 2025