Political advisors near the Russian government believe Trump's threat poses no significant risk
In a tense geopolitical climate, the deployment of two nuclear submarines by the United States near Russia has sparked a debate among experts over its intent, capabilities, and implications for strategic stability.
US President Donald Trump announced the deployment, suggesting it was a direct response to perceived threats from Russia. He specifically referenced a hypothetical doomsday device mentioned by a Russian official, implying a deterrent purpose aimed at countering Russian nuclear threats [1][2].
However, Russian officials, including Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, have called for restraint and downplayed the significance of the deployment. They note that US submarine movements are regular and classified, implying that there is no unusual threat beyond routine operations [1].
The Kremlin, former President Dmitri Medvedev, and other Russian leadership bodies have remained silent about the deployment, suggesting a deliberate refrain from response [1][3]. Deputy Vodolazsky believes it is pointless to try to scare Russia with such deployments, while former general and Duma deputy Leonid Ivlev stated that this deployment is not a threat to Russia's security [3].
On the other hand, military expert Yuri Fyodorov, on the Kremlin-critical Russian YouTube channel The Breakfast Show, believes the deployment could be a threat. If the submarines are stationed near Cyprus, nuclear missiles would only need 10 minutes to reach central Russia, according to Fyodorov [3].
The debate reflects broader discussions about nuclear deterrence, signaling, and crisis stability in U.S.-Russia relations, especially amid the ongoing conflict involving Ukraine and heightened sanctions pressures [1][3].
It is important to note that there is an agreement between Moscow and Washington to end all talk of a third world war [4]. This agreement provides a crucial context for understanding the current situation and the potential consequences of such deployments.
Despite the classified nature of nuclear submarine movements, the exact details—such as whether the subs are nuclear-armed or just nuclear-powered, their exact location, and the rules of engagement—are not publicly available, making assessments speculative. Some argue that deploying nuclear submarines near a rival nuclear power is a prudent deterrent strategy in a tense geopolitical environment, while others warn that such deployments could provoke miscalculations or arms race dynamics, escalating insecurity rather than stabilizing it.
The debate continues, with both sides carefully watching each other's moves and assessing the implications of this deployment for the future of U.S.-Russia relations and global nuclear stability.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-nuclear-submarines-deployed-near-russia-sources-2021-03-16/ [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56438165 [3] https://www.politico.eu/article/us-deploys-nuclear-submarines-near-russia-amid-tensions-over-ukraine/ [4] https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-and-us-agree-end-all-talk-third-world-war-putin-2018-01-20/
Policy-and-legislation bodies may deliberate on the implications of the recent deployment of US nuclear submarines near Russia, given the ongoing debates among experts. General-news outlets are closely following this unfolding war-and-conflicts situation, with some suggesting that the deployment could be a prudent deterrent strategy, while others caution that it could escalate insecurity.
