Putin 'moves four nuke bombers closer to Europe' after Trump sent nuclear subs to Russia as Kremlin warns against 'escalation'
The strategic aircraft are often used to bomb Ukraine, and the report from Insider UA says they have been loaded with missiles, leading to a 'high probability' of an imminent major attack.
But, if confirmed, the move comes after Donald Trump ordered two nuclear submarines 'closer to Russia ' after a threat of atomic war from the Kremlin dictator's close ally, Dmitry Medvedev.
The US submarines are now 'where they have to be', Trump said late on Sunday.
Putin rebased his Tu-95MS planes from Olenya air base in Arctic Murmansk region after an audacious June 1 drone strike by Ukraine.
They were also moved from Engels-2 in Saratov region amid fears of Ukrainian attacks.
They were sent to Russia's Ukrainka air base in Amur region, 3,650 miles east of Moscow, where they were considered safe from attack, but evidently some of the planes are returning.
The report: said: 'Russia has transferred bombers from the Far East closer to Ukraine. At least 4 Tu-95MS aircraft were redeployed from Ukrainka [air base] to Olenya/Engels-2. Some of the aircraft are already equipped with cruise missiles.'
The planes are part of Russia's nuclear strike arsenal but are also used for hitting Ukraine with conventional bombs.
Meanwhile on Monday, Ukraine's domestic security service said it had demolished a Russian jet fighter and damaged four other military aircrafts in a strike on Crimea, held by Russia.
In a statement, it was claimed that a Su-30 had been 'completely' destroyed with another damaged. Three Su-24 jet bombers had also been hit, according to the report.
It comes in a week when Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff is due to travel to Russia on Wednesday ahead of the imposition of sanctions on the Kremlin by the US if there is no move to a ceasefire and talks about ending the war.
The initiative to meet Witkoff comes from the Putin regime, said Trump. The US president has given Putin s deadline of Friday for Russia to and end to the war.
Russia today sought to downplay Medvedev's comment when he accused Trump of bringing war closer between Russia and the US.
'Every new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war. Not between Russia and Ukraine, but with his own country,' said Medvedev, which Trump said was 'highly provocative'.
But Putin's spokesman said today that it was Putin's words that mattered - not those of Medvedev, an ex-president who is now deputy head of the Russian security council.
He said: 'Listen, in every country, members of the country's leadership have different points of view on current events, have different attitudes. There are people with a hardline attitude in the US and in European countries, this is always the case.
'But the main thing, of course, is the position of President Putin. You know that in our country, foreign policy is formulated by the head of state, that is, President Putin.'
On the Trump submarine move, he said: 'It is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process. That is the first thing.
'But in general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such polemics in any way, we would not want to comment on this in any way.
'We are very careful about any statements related to nuclear issues. You know that Russia takes a responsible position. President Putin's position is well known. Russia is very attentive to the topic of nuclear non-proliferation.
'And, of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.'
He warned: 'There can be no winner in a nuclear war. We do not believe that we are talking about some kind of escalation.
'It is clear that very complex and sensitive situations are being discussed, which, of course, are perceived by many very emotionally.'
Meanwhile, Russia has ramped up its attacks on Ukraine in recent days. Russia killed seven people and injured 13 including a four month old girl.
'Russia is hunting civilians along the entire front line. Killing people. Killing children,' said Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky.
'Deliberate FPV strikes on rescuers and medics who come to help after attacks – all of this is typical for every city or community reached by Russian drones.
'The Russian army is simply killing all living things. The world has enough power to stop this and protect people.
'We rely on strong decisions from the US, Europe, and the world regarding secondary sanctions on trade in Russian energy resources, on Moscow's banking sector.
'Ukraine expects the implementation of every agreement on strengthening protection, agreed with partners. Every day of delay leads to the loss of our people.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump's planned 100% computer chip tariff sparks confusion among businesses and trading partners
President Donald Trump 's plans for 100% tariffs on computer chips that aren't made in the U.S. are stoking confusion among businesses and trading partners — boosting stocks for leading semiconductor companies while leaving smaller producers scrambling to understand the implications. The U.S. imports a relatively small number of chips because most of the foreign-made chips in a device — from an iPhone to a car — were already assembled into a product, or part of a product, before it landed in the country. "The real question everybody in the industry is asking is whether there will be a component tariff, where the chips in a device would require some sort of separate tariff calculation,' said Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Trump said Wednesday that companies that "made a commitment to build" in the U.S. would be spared the import tax, even if they are not yet producing those chips in American factories. 'We'll be putting a tariff of approximately 100% on chips and semiconductors,' Trump said in the Oval Office while meeting with Apple CEO Tim Cook. 'But if you're building in the United States of America, there's no charge.' Wall Street investors interpreted that as good news not just for U.S. companies like AMD, Intel and Nvidia, but also for the biggest Asian chipmakers like Samsung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company that have been working to build U.S. factories. But it left greater uncertainty for smaller chipmakers in Europe and Asia that have little exposure to the AI boom but still make semiconductors inserted into essential products like cars or washing machines. These producers "probably aren't large enough to get on the map for an exemption and quite probably wouldn't have the kind of excess capital and margins to be able to add investment at a large scale into the United States,' Chorzempa said. The announcement came more than three months after Trump temporarily exempted most electronics from his administration's most onerous tariffs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of computer chips increased the price of autos and contributed to higher inflation. Chorzempa said chip tariffs could again raise prices by hundreds of dollars per vehicle if the semiconductors inside a car are not exempt. 'There's a chip that allows you to open and close the window," Chorzempa said. "There's a chip that is running the entertainment system. There is a chip that's kind of running all the electronics. There are chips, especially in EVs, that are doing power management, all that kind of stuff.' Much of the investment into building U.S. chip factories began with the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act that President Joe Biden signed into law in 2022, providing more than $50 billion to support new computer chip plants, fund research and train workers for the industry. Trump has vocally opposed those financial incentives and taken a different approach, betting that the threat of dramatically higher chip costs would force most companies to open factories domestically, despite the risk that tariffs could squeeze corporate profits and push up prices for electronics.
New Statesman
29 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Starmer is now less popular than Trump
New polling has found that Keir Starmer is now less popular amongst British voters than Donald Trump. Today, we're talking about Keir Starmer's first year in government and the rapid decline in his personal popularity. From a triumphant election victory to sliding approval ratings, where has it gone wrong for the Labour leader? Anoosh Chakelian is joined by the New Statesman's senior data journalist, Ben Walker. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Related
Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reeves could unlock £30bn with defence loophole in fiscal rules
Rachel Reeves could give herself an extra £30bn headroom next year if she follows Gordon Brown's advice to take increased defence spending outside the fiscal rules. The former prime minister said the Chancellor should follow Germany and declare that 'exceptional' increases in defence spending can be paid for by borrowing more. This is currently banned under Ms Reeves's fiscal rules, which say borrowing should never pay for day-to-day spending, and that debt should fall as a share of the economy by 2030. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) says the defence spending change could give the Government another £30bn next year. However, the economic think tank warned it would increase borrowing costs for households with mortgages. It comes as Ms Reeves comes under huge pressure to figure out how to fill a £50bn hole in the public finances, with tax rises seemingly increasingly likely. Mr Brown told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme that he would like the Chancellor to scrap the two-child benefit cap, raising the money to do so by increasing taxes on the gambling industry. He said another option was to treat a commitment to ramping up defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP by the 2030s as 'exceptional' and as 'outside the fiscal rules'. 'When you come to the fiscal position, there is one thing that has happened over the last few months which has been quite unprecedented: to spend 5 per cent on defence expenditure as we want to spend by 2030,' said the former prime minister. 'But this is a Nato initiative, this is a European initiative, we should be doing this jointly, we should have either jointly issued bonds or a Nato defence fund and we should be sharing the cost across the Continent. 'That should be regarded as something extraordinary and exceptional, outside the fiscal rules and that would create the kind of headroom that Rachel Reeves needs.' Ben Zaranko, associate director of the IFS, said that if defence spending increased from 2.5 per cent of GDP to 3.5 per cent, this would be equivalent to around £30bn. He said: 'If the UK needs to spend a lot more on defence, and it needs to do so quickly, there could be a case for borrowing more in the short term to make that happen, and to smooth the path towards the new higher spending equilibrium. 'Some sort of one-off joint bond issuance with Europe or Nato could be part of that. 'But that extra borrowing wouldn't be free: we would expect it to push up borrowing costs for the Government and households with mortgages. 'And, importantly, more borrowing cannot be a permanent solution. Ultimately, if we need to spend more on defence on a recurring, permanent basis, we will need to either raise more in tax or spend less on something else.'
