‘Be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric': Russia warns after Trump's submarine move
Speaking to reporters on Monday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, 'Everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.' He added that the US submarines were already on active duty before Trump's comments.
'In this case, it is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process, that's the first thing,' Peskov said, according to Reuters.
'But in general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way,' he added.
Trump made the submarine announcement last Friday in response to comments from former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, who warned about the risk of war between nuclear-armed countries.
The comments comes as Trump's deadline for new sanctions against Russia approaches. Trump has said he will impose sanctions on Russia and countries that buy its oil including India and China if Russian President Vladimir Putin does not agree to end the war in Ukraine by Friday, August 8.
Putin said last week that some progress had been made in peace talks, but also said that Russia had the advantage in the conflict. His comments suggested no change in position.
Trump, who has repeatedly said he could end the war within 24 hours, said he may send his envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow later this week. Witkoff is expected to visit Russia on Wednesday or Thursday, according to Reuters.
Witkoff has met Putin several times in the past, but has not succeeded in securing a ceasefire. The Kremlin did not say whether this week's visit was planned at its request or what it hoped to gain from it.
'We are always happy to see Mr Witkoff in Moscow and we are always happy to have contacts with Mr Witkoff. We consider them important, meaningful and very useful,' Peskov said.
Trump has recently become more critical of Putin, despite having spoken positively about him in the past.
Russia has increased its air strikes on Ukrainian cities in recent weeks, while peace talks in Turkey have brought no major results beyond prisoner and body exchanges.
Some analysts in Russia and Western countries have said Trump's public comments about nuclear submarines could make tensions worse, after his online disagreement with Medvedev. Medvedev is known for making provocative remarks on social media.
When asked if Russia saw Trump's comments as an escalation, Peskov said: 'We do not believe that we are talking about any escalation now.' He said nuclear issues are very sensitive and are viewed emotionally by many people.
Peskov declined to answer when asked whether Putin had advised Medvedev to tone down his online language. 'The main thing, of course, is the position of President Putin,' he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
12 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump says he'd ‘like to run' in 2028 for President—But ‘probably not'
US President Donald Trump on Tuesday (August 5) said he would like to run for President again in 2028, but quickly tempered expectations by adding, 'probably not.' 'No, probably not, probably not. I'd like to … I have the best poll numbers I've ever had,' Trump said in an interview with CNBC, referring to his current popularity among Republican voters and broader national polling. While Trump has not ruled out the possibility of running again after his current term, his comments suggest he may be leaning against seeking a third term. The remark comes as Trump continues to dominate the Republican Party. His brief comment — mixing confidence in his popularity with hesitation about extending his political future beyond 2028 — is likely to spark fresh speculation among supporters and political observers about the future leadership of the Republican Party. Trump's 2028 hint follows a series of recent campaign appearances where he has repeatedly emphasised his record while in office. However, at 82 in 2028, Trump would be older than President Biden is today. Despite the 22nd Amendment clearly limiting US presidents to two terms, Trump has repeatedly hinted at the possibility of seeking a third term—fueling speculation and controversy. Speaking to NBC News in March 2025, Trump said, 'A lot of people want me to do it,' and added he was 'not joking' about a possible third term. He even suggested there were 'methods' to make it happen, without elaborating on what those might be. When asked in the same interview about a scenario in which his Vice President, JD Vance, could run for office and then transfer power to him, Trump did not rule out the idea. He acknowledged the possibility, further stoking debate over how serious his intentions might be. Earlier in May 2025, Trump reaffirmed that he intended to serve only two terms but acknowledged continued pressure from allies. 'It's something that, to the best of my knowledge, you're not allowed to do. I don't know if that's constitutional that they're not allowing you to do it or anything else,' he said, appearing to question the legitimacy or interpretation of the rule. The US Constitution is clear on this matter. Ratified in 1951, the 22nd Amendment states: 'No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.' Changing or abolishing this amendment would be extremely difficult. It would require either: A two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate, or A constitutional convention called by two-thirds of U.S. state legislatures. In either case, the proposed change must then be ratified by three-quarters of the states. As the 2028 election cycle draws closer, Trump's mixed messages are expected to keep both supporters and critics on edge. His repeated teasing of a third term, even in the face of explicit Constitutional limits, ensures that the conversation around his future role in American politics will remain active.
Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Sweden, Norway and Denmark pledge $500 million for NATO arms package for Ukraine
Sweden, Norway and Denmark have promised to give about $500 million to a NATO-run plan to send US-made weapons to Ukraine, including Patriot missiles, to help it defend against Russia. Last month, US President Donald Trump said the United States would supply weapons to Ukraine, with European countries paying for them. However, he did not give details on how the plan would work. Norwegian Defence Minister Tore O. Sandvik said in a statement, 'With this contribution, we want to ensure that Ukraine quickly receives the equipment it needs, while strengthening NATO cooperation on Ukraine's defence and securing peace on Ukrainian terms.' Danish Defence Minister Troels Lund Poulsen said the funds would be available immediately. 'Speed is absolutely critical,' he said, adding that Denmark may provide more money later. Denmark is contributing about $90 million. Norway is giving around 1.5 billion Norwegian crowns, which is roughly $146 million. Sweden is contributing $275 million. The Swedish government said the package includes Patriot air defence systems, anti-tank weapons, and other military equipment. Swedish Deputy Prime Minister Ebba Busch said, according to Reuters, 'Continued supply of this kind of American defence materiel, which Europe can't deliver in sufficient quantity, is decisive for Ukraine's defence capability.' NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte thanked the three countries for their quick decision to support the package. NATO is coordinating the initiative through its Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List (PURL). The programme is funded by European NATO members and Canada and will be split into packages worth around $500 million each. Reuters reported that the Netherlands was the first country to join the effort, announcing a contribution of 500 million euros on Monday. According to Sweden's government website, the country had donated 92.8 billion Swedish crowns to Ukraine by the end of March this year. (With inputs from Reuters)
Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
A reminder for Trump: US wanted India to buy Russian crude to keep oil market stable, prices in check
US President Donald Trump seems frustrated with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin over the war in Ukraine, clearly wanting the over three-and-half-year-old war to end, while Putin appears unyielding. The American president, meanwhile, believes he has a lever the he can use to push Putin's buttons. That lever is India's significant oil imports from Russia. Trump has been berating India over its Russian oil imports and pressuring New Delhi into cutting down on imports from Moscow in the hope that threatening or penalising a key trade partner would force the Kremlin's hand into ending the war in Ukraine. While Trump evidently finds it convenient to go after India on the issue at a time when New Delhi and Washington are locked in tense trade pact negotiations, it is worth noting that the US had a major role to play in India ramping up oil imports from Russia, for which New Delhi is now being vilified by Trump and his administration. Over the course of the war in Ukraine, US officials have publicly stated that India's purchase of Russian oil had Washington's endorsement, at least implicitly. In his latest salvo, Trump on Monday said that threatened that he will 'substantially' raise tariffs on New Delhi for profiting from exporting fuels derived from Russian oil. Trump's latest attack came just days after he announced 25 per cent tariffs and an unspecified 'penalty' on India for its defence and energy imports from Russia. Responding sharply to Trump's remarks, India said that while it has been targeted by the US and the European Union for importing oil from Russia, these imports began as its traditional supplies were diverted to Europe, and the US at that time 'actively encouraged such imports by India for strengthening global energy markets stability'. When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2024, Moscow's share in New Delhi's oil imports was less than 2 per cent. The reasons were obvious: Russia was a far-away geography and already had established markets where a bulk of its crude was exported. India, on the other hand, depended significantly on West Asian suppliers like Iraq and Saudi Arabia, which are located close by. With much of the West shunning Russian crude following the invasion, Russia began offering discounts on its oil to willing buyers. Indian refiners were quick to avail the opportunity, leading to Russia—earlier a peripheral supplier of oil to India—emerging as India's biggest source of crude within a matter of months, displacing the traditional West Asian suppliers. Russia now accounts for 35-40 per cent of India's total oil imports by volume. As Europe decided to stop the import of refined petroleum fuels from Russia, Indian refiners increased fuel exports to the continent. Apart from alleging that India was helping fund the war in Ukraine by buying Russian oil, critics of India's oil and fuel trade argued that the country's refiners were facilitating a backdoor entry into Europe for fuels made from Russian crude. There was, however, nothing illegitimate about this trade as there was no specific ban on fuel imports from countries that were buying Russian oil. That ban has now been announced by the EU, and is slated to take effect from January 2026. Despite the noise from sections of the West against India over the country's hefty purchases of Russian crude, this shift in oil and petroleum product trade had Washington's blessings, as the US wanted energy markets to remain stable and well-supplied. In a recent interaction with CNBC International, global energy expert and Rapidan Energy Group President Bob McNally said that it was the Biden administration that 'begged' India to buy Russian crude to keep global energy prices in check. 'The Indians must be having some confusion (due to Trump's stance) because Joe Biden went to India after the invasion of Russia and begged them to take Russian oil…they begged India, 'Please take the oil', so that crude prices would remain low, and they did. Now we're flipping around, saying, 'What are you doing taking all this Russian oil?' The point is Trump is serious…he is frustrated with Putin,' said McNally, who served as the Special Assistant to the President on the White House National Economic Council and Senior Director for International Energy on the National Security Council during George W Bush's first term as US President. India's actions in line with US policy: Biden era officials Various US government officials during the Biden presidency also publicly acknowledged that India's actions helped balance the international oil market, and were in line with what the US wanted in order to keep the global market well-supplied. Had most of the Russian oil gone off the market—as happened with Iran and Venezuela—international oil prices would have shot up, which would have hit the global economy that was still fragile coming out of the pandemic. At an event in May 2024, the then US Ambassador to India Eric Garcetti said, 'Actually, they (India) bought Russian oil because we wanted somebody to buy Russian oil at a price cap. That was not a violation or anything. It was actually the design of the policy because as a commodity we didn't want oil prices going up, and they fulfilled that.' Garcetti was correct, as Rusian oil was and continues to be sanction-free, and only a price cap of $60 per barrel was introduced in December 2022 on seaborne Russian crude by the US and its allies. The cap prohibits export of Russian seaborne crude at over $60 per barrel if the trade involves Western shipping or insurance services. Oil importers like India, which are not part of the price cap coalition comprising G7 countries and their allies, are not bound by the price cap as long as their purchase of Russian oil does not involve any shipping or insurance service from providers in the coalition countries. In April last year, senior US officials had said at a New Delhi event that the US neither expected India to reduce its oil imports from Russia and had not even requested it to do so. The then US Treasury Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy Eric Van Nostrand had said that the objective of the sanctions and G7 price cap regime was not to push Russian crude out of the market, but to keep it flowing while limiting Kremlin's revenue from oil exports, which in turn impaired Russia's ability to fund the war in Ukraine. 'The price cap is designed to leave Russia with only bad options…We want him (Putin) to choose between three bad things: selling with coalition services under the price cap, selling outside the price cap, or shutting his oil in and not putting it to market. With a strong and robust price cap regime, Putin is going to prefer to sell as much as he can outside the price cap. But in order to maximise his sales outside the price cap, when a large part of the global coalition is already involved in the price cap, he is going to have to offer it cheaper,' Nostrand said. Anna Morris, the then US Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing and Financial Crime, said at the same event that from a technical standpoint, Russian oil once refined into petroleum fuels and products could no longer be considered of Russian origin, dismissing the argument that India refiners were facilitating Russian petroleum's entry into Europe. 'I also want to specify that once Russian oil is refined, from a technical perspective it is no longer Russian oil…If it is refined in a country and then sent forward, from a sanctions perspective that is an import from the country of purchase, it is not an import from Russia,' Morris said. While the Biden administration seemed satisfied with the price cap, while letting Russian oil flow, Trump has taken a much more aggressive stance, threatening financial costs on importers of Russian energy. Sukalp Sharma is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express and writes on a host of subjects and sectors, notably energy and aviation. He has over 13 years of experience in journalism with a body of work spanning areas like politics, development, equity markets, corporates, trade, and economic policy. He considers himself an above-average photographer, which goes well with his love for travel. ... Read More
