Europeans need cruise missiles. Ukraine makes them. It’s a deep-strike problem with an obvious solution. Despite the missile’s immaturity, despite the political costs and despite the prospect of eventual European-made alternatives, Europe should buy Ukraine’s Fire Point FP-5 Flamingo.
In buying FP-5s to meet its own needs, Europe could help meet Ukraine’s needs, too. The crude, 6-ton FP-5 isn’t a perfect weapon (it’s about five times heavier than a Tomahawk, for example). But it’s available, affordable, battle-tested and, most importantly, it’s Ukrainian.
If European countries were to acquire the FP-5, it would contribute to economies of scale that would drive down the missile’s estimated $500,000 unit cost and help Ukraine buy more of the missiles, too. Moreover, European licenses for the FP-5 would empower European developers to contribute to the missile’s development. In particular, its inertial guidance system, the main factor in its accuracy. Or a lack thereof.
European purchases of a cheap Ukrainian missile aren’t a wild notion, despite the fact that it’s loosely modeled on Cold War reconnaissance drones and rushed into service last year despite a lack of refinement by a company mired in more than a few controversies. It’s reportedly already under serious consideration by the German government, which has abruptly found itself without immediate access to long-range, ground-launched missiles.
As recently as this spring, Germany was on track to be one of the first European powers to restore a ground-launched deep strike capability that it gave up during the peace dividend of the 1990s, with the US Army scheduled to deploy a battery of Typhon launchers for 1,600-km (1,000-mile) Tomahawk cruise missiles this year. Instead, the Trump administration abruptly canceled the long-planned deployment, arguing the move would provoke Russia.
The cancellation of the Typhon deployment threw cold water on German expectations for a German Typhon-Tomahawk acquisition. Last summer, the German defense ministry sent the US Defense Department a formal request to purchase the same launchers and missiles to bolster the batteries the US planned to deploy.
While the German request for launchers and missiles remains under review in the US, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius appears skeptical that the Trump administration will approve it. There are several new European cruise and ballistic deep-strike missiles in development, some jointly (as with a planned UK-German 2,000 km missile that should be in service in the 2030s). Others are under bilateral agreements. Several are strictly French.
Most of them need years, if not a decade, of development. That’s a long time to wait while the Russia-Ukraine war grinds on and Russia’s economy shifts to a seemingly permanent wartime footing. Pistorius, for one, is wary of waiting. “We need an instrument — with US help or via other paths — to close the capability gap in that bridging period as quickly as possible,” he said.
Ukraine’s FP-5 could be just the thing. Anticipating German demand for the Ukrainian missile, German arms firm Diehl Defense recently engaged in talks with FP-5-maker Fire Point about possible German co-production. “We are in discussions about how we could work together,” Diehl CEO Helmut Rauch said. The German firm is already working with Fire Point on a long-range surface-to-air missile. Specifically, the Germans are providing that missile’s sensitive infrared seeker.
Navigation and guidance are weaknesses in Fire Point’s portfolio. In the year starting with the FP-5’s combat debut in May 2025, Ukrainian forces fired at least 20 of the 3,000-km missiles at Russian targets in no fewer than eight separate raids. Just four of the missiles inflicted any damage. The others missed.
The FP-5 clearly had an accuracy problem. But Fire Point kept working on the missile’s self-contained, gyro-based inertial navigation system and made progress. On June 10, Ukrainian forces launched five FP-5s at the VNIIR-Progress electronics plant in Cheboksary, in western Russia, some 900 km from the front line in Ukraine. VNIIR-Progress makes antennae for Russian missiles and drones.
Two of the Ukrainian missiles struck the plant with their heavy 1,100-kg (2,400 lb.) warheads, punching right through anti-drone protections and inflicting major blast and fire damage.
It was a signal to Russia that Ukraine can now strike deep and inflict real damage. And it was a signal to Europe that the answer to the continent’s own deep strike problem is staring it in the face. A Tomahawk costs more than $2m, and there could be a production backlog as US forces replenish the thousands of missiles they expended in the war on Iran. An FP-5 costs just $500,000, and Fire Point has always claimed it has the capacity to build hundreds per month, provided there’s demand and financing.
Yes, the Tomahawk is more accurate than the FP-5. But that could change as the war drives Ukrainian developers to innovate quickly or die.
Imagine how much faster they could innovate with European money and German engineering backing them. Imagine Europe rearming with deep strike missiles, not years from now, but tomorrow.
David Axe is a journalist, author, and filmmaker in South Carolina. For 20 years, he has covered war for Forbes, Rolling Stone, The Daily Beast, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Vice, The Village Voice, Voice of America, and others. He has reported from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and elsewhere. His current focus is on covering Russia’s wider war on Ukraine.
Europe’s Edge is CEPA’s online journal covering critical topics on the foreign policy docket across Europe and North America. All opinions expressed on Europe’s Edge are those of the author alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.
