Table Stakes - August 4th

Good morning everyone,

I’m Daniel, and welcome to Table Stakes!

Here’s a look at today’s topics:

• Trump Orders Nuclear Submarines Near Russia After Medvedev's Warning

• Countries Under Pressure To Finalize UN Plastic Pollution Treaty As Talks Resume

• Russian & Chinese Navies Carry Out Artillery And Anti-Submarine Drills In Sea Of Japan

Trump Orders Nuclear Submarines Near Russia After Medvedev's Warning

_{By: Daniel Murrah, Staff Writer for Atlas}

Tensions between the U.S. and Russia escalated dramatically as President Donald Trump declared on August 1, 2025 that he was deploying two U.S. nuclear submarines to positions closer to Russia. The unusual public disclosure of nuclear submarine movements came as a direct response to provocative nuclear threats issued by Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian President and current Deputy Chair of Russia's Security Council.

The Situation

The crisis was brought to light when Trump issued a demand to Russia regarding the Ukraine war which caused Medvedev to post an alarming warning on X. Medvedev declared that "Russia isn't Israel or even Iran. Every new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war—not just with Russia and Ukraine, but with his own country." Medvedev stated that the Soviet-era “Dead Hand” system remains active today which enables automatic nuclear retaliation if Russian leadership becomes unable to respond to a nuclear attack.

Trump acted immediately with another aggressive move. President Trump took to his Truth Social platform to call Medvedev a "failed former President" while warning him to exercise caution. President Trump revealed that he moved two nuclear submarines to strategic locations after Former President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev made inflammatory statements through his position as Deputy Chairman of the Security Council. Former President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev issued dangerous declarations which led me to order two nuclear submarines for positioning in strategic regions. The inflammatory declarations by Former President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev who currently serves as Deputy Chairman of the Security Council led me to issue this statement: "I have placed two nuclear submarines in appropriate strategic locations for any eventuality that these threats might prove real. Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences. I hope this will not be one of those instances."

Strategic Signaling

The announcement of submarine relocation by Trump serves as strategic nuclear signaling to build uncertainty that hopes to help restore deterrence. The Pentagon did not verify submarine positions but the disclosure of submarine movements established vital strategic consequences.

Security experts state these vessels belong to the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine fleet because these ships deliver dozens of nuclear warheads from their submerged positions which make them the most secure component of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. The complete secrecy surrounding nuclear submarines protects their exact locations from being known to adversaries. Traditional submarine operations maintained strategic uncertainty through their invisible nature that forced enemies to rethink their nuclear options and strengthened Mutual Assured Destruction principles.

Publicizing submarine positions represents an unusual practice in modern nuclear doctrine which boosts deterrence value at the expense of increased safety risks. Through his announcement Trump wanted Moscow to understand that the U.S. had operational and determined capability to retaliate from any direction including in case the U.S. leadership faced a nuclear attack. Through this action Trump demonstrated to NATO allies bordering Russia that America would defend its partners according to the collective defense principles.

The actual operational importance of these measures remains limited according to military analysts. Standard deterrence operations conducted by U.S. nuclear-powered submarines include operating in regions which could threaten adversaries. The change functions more as a message shift than a fundamental military change since it represents a change in messaging rather than military posture. The higher level of public awareness about the situation introduces fresh security risks. The combination of threatening statements with visible military posturing during ceasefire deadlines creates a heightened risk of standard military actions being mistakenly viewed as preparations for actual conflict.

NATO members reacted by showing both reassurance and concern about the situation. The European leaders welcomed the public display of American determination yet they simultaneously sought urgent meetings to discuss the escalating tensions. The maintenance of appropriate deterrence and provocation levels becomes increasingly difficult because both sides use their nuclear capabilities in growing public displays.

Diplomatic Considerations

The situation reveals the intricate dynamics that control modern great power competition. The Russian government treated Trump's submarine deployment as a theatrical move by lawmakers who declared that Russia possesses superior submarine and nuclear capabilities. The dangerous nuclear one-upmanship game between the two nations has become completely public through this response which attempts to project confidence.

The current situation creates extensive diplomatic effects which transcend the current conflict between the United States and Russia. The practice of exposing nuclear threats to the public domain creates a new international security environment that might motivate other nuclear powers to conduct similar aggressive displays. The practice of using social media platforms for nuclear diplomacy creates significant challenges regarding crisis management and escalation control during the digital era.

The situation shows how weak the current arms control systems and diplomatic standards have become. The existing methods for managing nuclear crises including hotlines and back-channel communications and strategic signaling have proven insufficient for the modern era of immediate nuclear threat declarations on social media platforms.

Security experts describe the current situation as rhetorical escalation yet they acknowledge that the separation between symbolic and actual actions becomes harder to discern when nuclear weapons are involved. The main threat stems from potential errors or unintended escalations because of the tense environment surrounding nuclear threats and ultimatums and deadlines and high-risk nuclear displays. The international community watches with concern,hoping that this latest episode of U.S.-Russia brinkmanship will stay limited to strategic communication instead of developing into escalation..

Subscribe to Table Stakes to read the rest.