It has now been more than three years since the Ukrainian government first officially asked the German government to supply Taurus KEPD-350 cruise missiles, yet for Berlin, supplying them remains out of the question.
And this is despite the fact that Germany’s current Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, not only consistently criticised his predecessor, Olaf Scholz, during his time in opposition for his decision not to supply Ukraine with cruise missiles, but also repeatedly used the prospect of supplying Ukraine with such missiles as a campaign issue.
At one point, he even spoke of a 24-hour ultimatum. “If he (editor’s note: Putin) does not stop bombing the civilian population in Ukraine within 24 hours, then Taurus cruise missiles must also be supplied from the Federal Republic of Germany […],”, said the current Chancellor on the 16th of October 2024 in the Bundestag.
But just a few months later, everything changed. Since taking office last year, Merz, like his predecessor, has cited a wide range of reasons why there will be no delivery to Ukraine, even though he himself had called for it so vehemently.
Whilst all the reasons Merz has given so far can, at best, be described as half-truths, one rumour persists: that the US, under Donald Trump, is blocking a delivery to Ukraine.
This possibility exists due to ITAR regulations (International Traffic in Arms Regulations). Put simply, these are a set of US regulations designed to track and control the (re-)export of US military equipment. As the Taurus also incorporates US technology, the Trump administration has a say in the matter.
The fact is that, according to numerous media reports, the US delayed an export to South Korea for several months ten years ago due to ITAR regulations.
However, it is not officially known whether this also applies to potential exports to Ukraine. So far, neither the German, American nor Ukrainian governments have commented on the matter.
But now MBDA Deutschland is speaking plainly. In a short interview with Security Policy Content Creator and former Bundeswehr officer David Matei, Guido Brendler, SVP Sales & Business Development at MBDA Deutschland, responded to a question about a possible US blockade of a Taurus delivery to Ukraine by saying that this was “bullshit”.
In other words: although the export of the Taurus KEPD-350 to Ukraine is subject to ITAR regulations, the manufacturer believes that this is not the decisive factor behind the fact that the delivery of the long-awaited cruise missile has not yet been promised to Ukraine. One could not have refuted the rumours more clearly.
This statement is further supported by the fact that none of the senior Bundeswehr officers whose confidential meeting regarding the Taurus in early 2024 was recorded by Russian intelligence services and subsequently made public mentioned any obstruction on the part of the US.
Not only that, but according to one of the four senior military officers present, there was – at least at that point in time – no reason that would categorically prohibit a delivery to Ukraine.
When I asked for further clarification on the term ‘bullshit’, MBDA Deutschland was unfortunately unable to provide any further details on the matter, for obvious reasons.
Nevertheless, the statement leaves no room for interpretation. Whatever the reason for not supplying the cruise missile may be, from the manufacturer’s perspective, it is not because of a US veto.
Is the delivery of the Taurus KEPD-350 still relevant?
Whether the delivery of the Taurus KEPD-350 cruise missile to Ukraine is still relevant at all has been the subject of repeated debate, particularly since Friedrich Merz took office.
Merz himself also notes that Ukraine has made enormous progress with its own weapons systems in recent months and years and is no longer reliant on supplies.
In principle, this is true, especially thanks to financial support from Germany, amongst other countries. However, this does not mean that a delivery would not still be relevant and important.
Between the 7th of March 2026 and the 25th of May 2026 alone, Ukraine deployed SCALP-EG (France) or Storm Shadow (UK) cruise missiles in at least four missions against high-value Russian targets that were either successfully or partially successfully neutralised, rather than using its own systems such as the An-196 Liutyi or the FP-5.
Consequently, in each of these missions, the Ukrainian military would have preferred the Taurus over its own systems, either because of the mission parameters or the availability of effectors.
Therefore, the supply of these cruise missiles – even in limited numbers – would remain highly relevant and necessary, not only from a military perspective but certainly also from a political one.
If you liked this post, consider following me on X, Bluesky, Telegram or YouTube. If you like, you can also leave me a tip on Ko-fi to support my work.
