Russia Matters: Putin Insists There’s No Plan to Attack NATO, Warns of Escalation Over Tomahawks for Kyiv

Russia Matters, 10/3/25

Donald Trump recently signed off on allowing intelligence agencies and the Pentagon to aid Ukraine with long-range missile strikes on Russia’s energy infrastructure, and U.S. officials are now asking NATO allies to provide similar support, The Wall Street Journal reports. “It is the first time, officials say, that the Trump administration will aid Ukrainian strikes with long-range missiles against energy targets deep inside Russian territory,”1 according to this newspaper. In addition, the Trump administration is considering Kyiv’s request for Tomahawk cruise missiles, one of the most precise U.S. weapons, which have a range of around 1,500 miles, WSJ reported.  JD Vance disclosed that the U.S. was considering Ukraine’s request this past weekend, prompting Vladimir Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov to ask, “The question remains: Who can launch these missiles, even if they end up on Kyiv regime territory? Can only Ukrainians launch them, or will the American military do so?” Peskov’s boss also warned the U.S. against supplying Tomahawks in his remarks on Oct. 2.  Putin  said that deliveries of U.S. Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine would mark a “qualitatively new stage of escalation,” triggering a fresh crisis in U.S.-Russian relations.2  In his reaction to these developments, Harvard University Professor Graham Allison warned that the “dangers [may] move up the escalation ladder.” “Now we will see whether the U.S. actually does it. And if so, how Russia responds,” he wrote in a short commentary for RM. NATO must step up its response to Russia’s hybrid war, which is “only the beginning” and is aimed at dividing Europe, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said, following recent drone incursions that shut down Denmark’s main airport and which Copenhagen suspects may have been staged on Moscow’s orders. Following the incursions, which Financial Times reported to have also shut down multiple military locations, Denmark announced it would acquire long-range precision-guided weapons to deter Russian aggression and align Danish capabilities with larger NATO allies. Frederiksen claimed this move will represent a “paradigm shift in Danish defense policy.” “I hope that everybody recognizes now that there is a hybrid war… there is only one country… willing to threaten us, and it is Russia, and therefore, we need a very strong answer back,” Frederiksen was quoted by WSJ as saying. In his turn, Russia’s ambassador Vladimir Barbin called Denmark’s reaction “pure madness” and a threat against Russian targets. “No one, anywhere in the world, has ever considered publicly threatening a nuclear power,” Barbin warned. “From now on, we will have to assume that Denmark not only considers the possibility of a direct military confrontation with Russia, but is preparing for such a scenario,” the Russian diplomat said.  In his reaction to these developments, Harvard University Professor Graham Allison wondered whether and which NATO members would be prepared to do anything that would increase the risk of Russia striking back. In his reaction, Allison focused on Denmark. “Denmark is clearly waking up. The question is what are they prepared to do? And my bet is that it will mostly be talk,” he wrote in a short commentary for RM. In his annual address to the Valdai Discussion Club on Oct. 2,  Putin  dismissed Western warnings of a Russian attack on NATO as either incompetence or dishonesty, urging European leaders to “calm down.” He claimed the Russian armed forces are confidently advancing along multiple axes in Ukraine and dismissed Trump’s descriptions of Russia as a “paper tiger,” asserting that Moscow is managing to fight not just Kyiv in Ukraine, but the whole NATO bloc. As stated above, in his remarks, Putin also warned that deliveries of U.S. Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine would mark a “qualitatively new stage of escalation,” triggering a fresh crisis in the U.S.-Russian relations. Putin also asserted that Russia remains confident in its nuclear deterrent, but has again reiterated Moscow’s recent proposal for Russia and the U.S. to jointly extend the central limits of the New START treaty before it expires in February 2026. He also warned Russia would resume nuclear tests if another nuclear power does so and repeated Russia’s long-standing position that U.S. calls for trilateral U.S.-Russia-China nuclear arms control negotiations will fall flat unless, among other things, the arsenals of Britain and France are factored in.3 That  Putin  and his foreign minister  Sergei Lavrov  have both urged the U.S. to consider Russia’s recent proposal to extend New START limits thrice in the past week and a half indicates that the Kremlin is now keen to preserve some semblance of nuclear arms control with Washington even as Russian leaders  have not heard from  Trump on the issue so far.Russian missiles have increasingly evaded Ukraine’s U.S.-made Patriot air defenses, with officials saying upgrades allow Iskander-M and Kinzhal missiles to alter trajectory and perform end-phase maneuvers that “confuse and avoid” interceptors, Financial Times reported.Shipments of Russian nuclear fuel to the U.S in monetary terms amounted to slightly less than $800 million in 2024, and they are expected to reach around $1.2 billion in 2025, according to  Putin.  Russia remained the top supplier of nuclear reactor fuel to the U.S. last year, data from the U.S. Department of Energy shows. Russia provided 20% of the enriched uranium used in America’s fleet of commercial reactors, down from nearly 27% in 2023, according a Sept. 30 report by the EIA cited by Bloomberg.