Kremlin-associated analysts downplay risks of Trump's nuclear warning
In a recent development, two U.S. nuclear submarines have been deployed near Russia, a move that has sparked controversy and debate among Russian political leaders and experts.
Former General and Duma member Leonid Ivlev stated that the presence of U.S. weapons is already known to Russia, and it is not a danger to Russia. On the other hand, military expert Yuri Fyodorov, speaking on The Breakfast Show, argues that the deployment is a threat. If these submarines take position near Cyprus, their nuclear missiles could reach central Russia in just ten minutes, Fyodorov states.
Pro-Kremlin political scientist Sergei Markov wrote on Telegram that President Donald Trump is acting "stupidly and irresponsibly." Markov's statement suggests that Trump's actions validate former President Dmitri Medvedev's warnings about an atomic war on social media. Medvedev has been criticized by Trump for his provocative statements.
However, the Russian leadership bodies seem to deliberately withhold reactions to the submarine deployment. No immediate response or reaction was given by the Russian leadership, and the Kremlin and former President Dmitri Medvedev maintained their silence regarding the matter.
Viktor Vodolazki, a Duma member, stated that Russia possesses far more and better-equipped nuclear submarines, with the capability to target the U.S. fleet as well.
The disagreement between pro-Kremlin politicians and Moscow experts, and some military experts, regarding the threat posed by the deployment stems from differing interpretations of the strategic intent and actual risk involved. Pro-Kremlin politicians portray the U.S. submarine deployment as a highly provocative and dangerous escalation threatening Russia’s security, framing it as a direct nuclear threat. By contrast, many military experts view the movement primarily as political signaling and part of routine nuclear deterrence posture aimed at maintaining second-strike capability rather than an immediate step toward nuclear conflict.
Markov's statement implies that Trump may be trying to distract from internal political problems, including his role in the Jeffrey Epstein sex offender case. This view emphasizes the messaging effect and domestic political importance of the deployment within Russia. Meanwhile, military analysts explain that U.S. nuclear submarines operate globally in secretive patrols to maintain deterrence by assuring any nuclear strike against the U.S. would be met with a devastating retaliatory response. The submarines do not actively seek conflict; rather, their presence aims to prevent nuclear war through uncertainty and deterrence.
Thus, the disagreement reflects contrasting perspectives: political leaders tend to frame the submarine deployment as a major escalation and threat, while military experts assess it as a standard, though politically sensitive, element of nuclear deterrence strategy. The U.S. deployment is understood as repositioning within striking distance of Russian targets as a response to provocative Russian statements, but not necessarily indicating immediate offensive intent.
"What are the Russian leaders' thoughts on the potential consequences of the U.S. nuclear submarine deployment near Cyprus, given that these submarines could reach central Russia in just ten minutes, according to military expert Yuri Fyodorov?"
"Amidst the debate about the U.S. submarine deployment and its strategic intent, there seems to be a discord between political leaders who view it as a direct nuclear threat, while military experts consider it a standard element of nuclear deterrence strategy, involving political signaling and maintaining second-strike capability rather than an immediate step toward nuclear conflict."
