So what explains the fuss over supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks (and other long-range weapons)?In my view, the main reason is that the Americans have convincing evidence — likely from satellite surveillance — of the success of Ukraine’s missile and drone program. Despite what official and unofficial “defeatists” write, I have long argued and continue to argue: serious weapons will be supplied only when it becomes clear that Ukraine can produce weapons on its own.It’s not about “good feelings,” but about the desire to control the war and prevent Ukraine from independently determining the pace and scale of so-called “escalation.” Russia has always been a priority for the West, and this has influenced all decisions. That is why Ukraine was repeatedly pressured to destroy its remaining missiles, such as SCUDs, and why there was hysteria over attempts to resume domestic production after 2014.The first strikes on oil refineries last year caused hysteria in the U.S. because Ukraine demonstrated agency: it began deciding for itself where and when to strike, rather than waiting for sporadic small arms deliveries.This cynical but pragmatic logic was succinctly outlined by Kissinger in 2023 when, stepping back from his previous stance, he said that Ukraine’s accession to NATO should be considered in terms of control and stability in Europe — to avoid the complete defeat of Russia. That shift in rhetoric coincided with the first noticeable successes — notably the Kharkiv operation — and may have been prompted by the realization that further weakening of Russia could produce unpredictable consequences.To date, Ukraine has significantly extended the range of its strikes into Russia — further than Kissinger imagined. He did not account for the possibility of creating weapons not only of Western design; this makes Ukraine a serious military force in the Eurasian space that the U.S. must reckon with. It is better to try to control this, because a second attempt to disarm Ukraine under the guise of fine-sounding statements will not work.Another aspect of the Americans’ “fuss,” in my view, is that scaling up missile production in Ukraine, together with the EU, increases Europe’s defense autonomy from the U.S. Americans are reluctant to sell such equipment to the EU; there is a possibility of building an independent European system, under the control of the EU or Ukraine. That is what is truly worth worrying about.SourceAbout the author. Taras Zahorodniy, Managing Partner of the National Anti-Crisis Group.The editorial team does not always share the opinions expressed by blog or column authors.