Trump Says He Deployed Nuclear Submarines Near Russia; Putin Still Hasn't Blinked – Why?
Russia has not reacted so far. There is statement from the Kremlin, nothing from the foreign ministry and no mention from the military.
The silence from Moscow is not without meaning. Either Moscow sees no point in reacting, or it is still figuring out how.
Russian Media Downplays It
There was no breaking banner and no war-room urgency. Moscow's largest circulating newspapers did not give it prime-time panic. A military analyst, quoted in Moskovsky Komsomolets, brushed it off. Trump, he said, was putting on a show only theatrics.
Kommersant, a nationally distributed newspaper, cited a retired lieutenant general calling Trump's remarks 'nonsense'. 'That is how he enjoys himself,' he told the daily.
Speaking to the same publication, a national security expert did not even believe Trump gave any real submarine order. 'I am convinced there was no such instruction,' he said.
The newspaper reminded readers of another Trump moment. Back in 2017, he claimed he had sent nuclear submarines to the Korean Peninsula. It never led to conflict. In fact, he later posed for photos with Kim Jong-un.
Could this be the same playbook? Raise the stakes, then offer a handshake? It is still not clear.
Moscow Watches, But Stays Quiet
Russia has not announced any naval buildup. No submarines have moved closer to American shores.
Moscow may be observing, assessing and waiting, or it may believe this is not serious enough to warrant a response.
Russian media's tone suggests indifference.
What Triggered This Showdown?
The spark came from a few lines on social media. Trump had recently tightened his deadline for Russia to end its war in Ukraine. He first said 50 days and then less than two weeks.
Medvedev did not like it. He said in a post that Trump was playing 'games of ultimatum' with Russia. Each ultimatum, he wrote, was a step toward war.
Trump hit back. 'Tell Medvedev to be careful with his words. He is a failed president who still thinks he has power. He is stepping into dangerous territory,' he wrote.
Then Medvedev posted again. This time, he mentioned 'Dead Hand', a Cold War-era Soviet system designed to automatically trigger nuclear retaliation if Russian leadership was wiped out.
That set Trump off.
A New Era of Nuclear Talk
From 2008 to 2012, Medvedev, the longest serving president of Russia and a Putin loyalist, was seen as a moderate. He once said, 'Freedom is better than non-freedom.'
That version of Medvedev is long gone.
Since Russia launched its full invasion of Ukraine, his tone has shifted. His posts have grown darker, fiercer and far more hostile to the West.
Until now, most global leaders ignored them. Medvedev had no official role in diplomacy and no real authority to speak for Russia.
But Trump paid attention. And he did not watch like a mute spectator. He responded with threats of submarines and nuclear might.
Why Trump Took It Personally
In an interview with Newsmax, Trump explained, 'Medvedev said awful things about nuclear weapons. Anytime someone mentions 'nuclear', I get alert. That is the final threat.'
Medvedev has long thrown around the nuclear card online. This was not new. But Trump seemed to take it personally.
Was it only an outburst or part of a strategy?
Those close to Trump often say he likes disruption in business, politics (sometimes in diplomacy), unexpected moves and calculated chaos.
Maybe this submarine talk is part of that. Maybe it is a way to rattle Russia before any real negotiation begins.
For now, two men with no love for filters exchanged words online. One had once held the nuclear codes, while the other is close to someone who still does.
There are two submarines somewhere in the ocean, and there is a silence stretching from Moscow to Washington.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 minutes ago
- Business Standard
India's GDP growth may dip to 6% in FY26 if 50% tariffs imposed: Moody's
Moody's Ratings on Friday said India's GDP growth is likely to slow down by about 30 basis points to 6 per cent in the current fiscal if the US implements 50 per cent tariffs from August 27. However, resilient domestic demand and the strength of the services sector will mitigate the strain on India, Moody's said, adding that India's response to high US tariffs will ultimately determine the effect on its growth, inflation and external position. On August 6, the US announced an additional 25 per cent tariff on all Indian imports, in addition to an existing 25 per cent duty, taking the total duty to 50 per cent effective August 27. The White House said the measure responds to India's continued purchase of Russian oil. "Should India continue to procure Russian oil at the expense of the headline 50 per cent tariff rate on goods it ships to the US, which is currently its largest export destination, we project that real GDP growth may slow by around 0.3 percentage points compared with our current forecast of 6.3 per cent growth for fiscal 2025-26 (ending March 2026)," Moody's said. The 50 per cent tariff on India compares with the 15-20 per cent duty for other Asia-Pacific countries. India and the US have been negotiating a bilateral trade agreement (BTA) since March, with an aim to more than double the bilateral trade in goods and services to USD 500 billion by 2030 from the current USD 191 billion. So far, five rounds of talks have been completed. For the sixth round, the US team is visiting India from August 25. They are aiming to conclude the first phase of the agreement by fall (October-November) this year. The two sides are also looking at an interim trade deal before the BTA. Moody's said countries in Asia-Pacific are vying for a greater share of trade and investment flows amid a restructuring of supply chains triggered by US policy shifts. "Beyond 2025, the much wider tariff gap compared with other Asia-Pacific countries would severely curtail India's ambitions to develop its manufacturing sector, particularly in higher value-added sectors, such as electronics, and may even reverse some of the gains made in recent years in attracting related investments," Moody's said. Since 2022, India has increasingly ramped up its crude oil imports from Russia as demand from the latter's traditional offtakers dried up amid sanctions tied to its invasion of Ukraine. "India has been able to procure at least some of its purchases of Russian oil at below global prices, which has helped insulate India's inflation from the pass-through of global commodity price movements, while preempting pressures on its current account deficit," Moody's said. India's imports of Russian crude rose to USD 56.8 billion in 2024 from USD 2.8 billion in 2021. Moody's said India retains sufficient foreign-reserve currency buffers to weather external volatility. "The magnitude of the drag on growth from tariff obstacles will influence the government's decision to pursue a fiscal policy response, although we anticipate the government will adhere to its focus on gradual fiscal and debt consolidation," said the US-based rating agency.
Economic Times
2 minutes ago
- Economic Times
India explores partners beyond US to build fighter jet engines
Synopsis India seeks collaboration with UK, France, and Japan for fighter jet engine production. Offers from Rolls-Royce, Safran SA, and a Japanese firm are under consideration. This initiative aims to modernize the air force and reduce reliance on imports. It also addresses supply chain concerns highlighted by global events. The goal is to boost domestic defense production and create jobs. ANI File: F-35 fighter jet India is engaging with manufacturers from at least three other countries for jointly making fighter jet engines, expanding its defense partnerships beyond the US as it seeks to close capability gaps amid rising regional tensions, according to people familiar with the matter. The engines being considered are from the UK, France and Japan and India wants to start the project quickly, senior officials said, asking not to be named as discussions are private. The offers will be evaluated by the Defense Research and Development Organisation — India's military research body —they added. The London-based defense manufacturing giant Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC offered to jointly produce and transfer technology to India during a visit by senior defense ministry officials to the UK in April, according to one of the officials. Talks with Safran SA also gathered momentum as the Paris-based aerospace company is open to transferring technology and sharing intellectual property rights, the people said. Japan made a similar offer in May, they said, without indicating a possible partner. India's Defence Minister Rajnath Singh held a bilateral meeting with his Japanese counterpart in New Delhi earlier this month, outlining potential areas of collaboration, including tank and aero engine Ministry of External Affairs, along with the defense ministries of both India and Japan, did not respond to requests for comment. The companies mentioned in the story also did not reply to engines will power India's twin-engine fighters that are under development, the people said, adding the Ministry of Defence will move to get government clearance has been seeking to modernize its air force through the purchase of jet fighters from overseas and bringing production to within its borders through joint projects with leading weapons makers from abroad. Earlier this week, India for the first time allowed domestic private firms to design and develop advanced warplanes to replace its aging, mostly Russian-made South Asian nation has also been in talks with Boston-based General Electric since 2023 to jointly make GE F414 engines but the talks are taking longer than expected. India had imposed penalties on GE last year for severe delays in the delivery of engines that power the country's locally-made single-jet fighters. India's Air Force Chief AP Singh warned at an industry event Thursday that delays in procuring critical weapons pose a serious challenge to national defense readiness. 'Not for a single project that I can think of that been completed on time,' he said, emphasizing the need for India to design, develop, and produce weapons domestically in sufficient push to manufacture jet engines reflects its broader effort to secure the supply chain for critical defense equipment— a major take away of the military from the war in Ukraine which is on its third year. Joint manufacturing of jet engines with the US is part of a wider effort to deepen bilateral defense cooperation. India's decision to look beyond Washington for critical technologies should not be seen as a sign of strained ties with the US, but rather as evidence of its focus on securing reliable supply Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been trying to ramp up domestic defense production to reduce the costs of imports and generate jobs at is the world's largest importer of arms, according to data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, adding it has looked increasingly to purchase weapons from makers in the US and France.
Time of India
2 minutes ago
- Time of India
Mr Trump – The Mr tariff (Part 2)
Continuing his tirade against India on the tariff issue, Mr Trump stated that the Indian economy was dead. In India, the Leader of Opposition (LOP), Mr Rahul Gandhi, was quick to latch onto this statement and target the government. Unfortunately, they have forgotten what has transpired in the last five years since the COVID pandemic. Both habitually avoid doing their homework before pronouncing their viewpoints. Shoot and scoot, and firing from the hip is what they do best. Is it any wonder that when a reporter asked him about US imports from Russia in a press conference in the White House, the American President went blank and said, 'I don't know anything about it. I have to check it out.' He possibly had no idea about European Union imports from Russia either. Yet, he had no hesitation in blaming India for fuelling the Ukraine war by buying Russian oil. On the issue of tariffs, one can safely say 'Double standards, thy name is Donald Trump.' Is the Indian economy dead? First, if it indeed was dead, then India would have succumbed to US pressure on tariffs and signed an agreement at the first opportunity. Second, the US government's mounting external debt is close to USD 26 thousand billion. Servicing this debt is a major issue for the country. By levying additional duties and finding new markets in India, it hopes to generate additional revenues. Logically, this will not be possible if the Indian economy is dead. Third, data published by the Indian government, foreign think tanks, and organisations, including the World Bank, finds India a bright spot in the world economy today. Its growth rate of 6.3-6.5% is superior to all other large economies. The Governor of India's Reserve Bank reaffirmed this when he stated that India is contributing about 18% to the world's growth, while the USA's share is only 11%. If all these signify a dead Indian economy, then the understanding of economics of President Trump and Mr. Gandhi is perhaps derived from a different planet. It was the USA that had encouraged India to buy oil from Russia two years ago to keep the international oil prices in check. If anything, they should be commending India as the objective has been achieved. Today, when the USA targets only India but looks the other way when it comes to the European Union and China, who incidentally buy more oil and gas from Russia than India, then India is bound to react. Mr Trump will do well to remember that when he talks of India, he is talking of managing the energy needs of 18% of the world's population, which in itself is a herculean task. Therefore, India will always seek the best options to meet this humongous challenge. No nation or its leader, including the United States, has any right to dictate either to India or any other country on such issues. This flexibility and decision-making rest solely with individual nations, where historical linkages and cooperation with a particular nation will always play a significant role. The Indian opposition, while condemning the revised tariffs imposed by the USA, terms the whole exercise a failure of the government's foreign policy. If, for a moment, one were to agree, would the same logic not apply to nearly every nation across the world since Trump tariffs have hardly spared any nation, including European nations? Does this mean that the foreign policy of all countries has failed? Therefore, this has very little to do with foreign policy. For the US, it is about raising more revenues to manage its rising external debt. It is doing so by leveraging its economic power and ignoring the compulsions of other countries under the garb of making America great again. Unfortunately, in the changing geopolitical context, this approach lacks mutual respect and equality, and many countries are not ready to accept that. India is undoubtedly one of them. The next pertinent question is what India should be doing in this situation. Is a confrontational approach the answer? Should India give in under pressure, as many smaller nations across the world have done? Or, should India adopt a middle path and try to broker a deal? In international dealings, negotiations are part of all deals. Each nation focuses on deriving the best from the deal for its short-term and long-term goals. All such deals are finalised based on 'give & take'. The agreement with the USA on trade will be no different. But if either side adopts the 'my way or the highway' approach, then a deal will always be elusive. While Mr. Trump appears quite adamant, discussions are with a team of more informed and experienced individuals who understand the impact and implications of the issue at hand. Therefore, the possibility of a deal always exists. India will have its boundaries marked where it can give in a bit and where it will not budge at all in the overall interest of the nation. While most sectors will fall under the former, dairy and agriculture will be under the latter and rightly so. It is also well known that Mr Trump is primarily pushing for India to accept American agricultural and dairy products in a big way. Therefore, the current stalemate is understandable. One cannot rule out the possibility of Mr Trump's ire at India being the result of Mr Modi and his government stealing the thunder from his claims of having brokered a ceasefire between India and Pakistan during Operation Sindoor. This, coupled with his failures in brokering peace in Ukraine and the Middle East, has certainly dented his stature. Perhaps the much-publicized personal equation with Mr. Modi prompted him to make such preposterous claims unilaterally. However, India exposed him. It is well known that he has scant regard for diplomatic niceties, apart from a compulsive 'I' syndrome that would drive him towards a vendetta. Perhaps better sense needs to prevail, and the USA must understand that it is dealing with the world's largest democracy, not just any nation. The question is what happens if this stalemate cannot be breached. In that case, while India will have concerns, there will also be new opportunities. India will need to focus on new markets and fresh partnerships with other nations. BRICS will be an important platform to build new bridges and create new norms for trade and commerce that are beneficial not only to BRICS nations but also across the world. India must also sort out its own house for a more conducive business environment, rationalise and reduce taxes, develop new industrial complexes, encourage entrepreneurship, and tap hitherto unaddressed markets. As far as the USA is concerned, India has a few aces up its sleeve. The imposition of a digital tax on companies like Google, Meta, Amazon, among others, could be a game-changer. So far, India has stood its ground. While it is ready to negotiate, it will not sign on the dotted line and compromise its national assets. The Indian government's official response to the USA on the new tariffs was clear and firm. In this context, LOP's statement that 'PM Modi better not let his weakness override the interests of Indian people' seems totally out of place and malicious. As things stand, no sane Indian will see any weakness on the part of either the Prime Minister or his government. On the contrary, it is all about India and Indian interests that have been the hallmark of the BJP-led government in the last eleven years. In the end, a mutually agreed-upon agreement would mean business as usual. If not, it won't be the end of the world. India is resilient enough to overcome challenges and continue its growth trajectory despite the current crisis. Also read: Mr Trump – The Mr tariff Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
