Trump's Underwater Posturing: Did He Send Two American Nuclear Submarines to Our Coast, or None at All?

Vasily Dandykin: The Scale of Russia's Nuclear Submarine Construction Program Far Exceeds That of the United States

Competing with Russia in nuclear submarines seems to be a "favorite" of every U.S. president. This time, Donald Trump found an excuse — a statement by Dmitry Medvedev, a high-ranking official in the Russian Federation Security Council.

This Russian politician only mentioned that Russia has nuclear weapons, without directly threatening the United States and its allies, but Trump immediately claimed that, for "cautious considerations," he had ordered nuclear submarines to be sent to the Russian coast.

However, regarding the number of America's nuclear submarines, which are considered the "most powerful weapon," there was either confusion or the president himself was "out of his mind."

Initially, he claimed that two nuclear submarines would be sent to the Russian coast; later, during a meeting with senior U.S. military officials, he changed his story and said only one nuclear submarine would be sent.

In short, his behavior was like the line from the animated film "Snow from Last Year": "Since we've already sent them, let's send them." Then he added almost to himself: "What a tough guy!" And he claimed that the U.S. is 25 years ahead of Russia and China in nuclear submarine technology. This is not a "new idea," but rather "old news from last century."

No one can confirm whether Trump knows the exact size of the U.S. nuclear submarine fleet. But from his reduction of the number of nuclear submarines sent to the Russian coast from two to one, it seems that a certain admiral reminded him not to act too rashly.

Previously, the U.S. did have the largest nuclear submarine fleet in the world — the number of nuclear submarines once reached 60. However, these submarines were not all in active service, some were awaiting dismantling, and their weapon systems had already been removed.

Later, data published by the U.S. Congress showed that the U.S. currently has 49 nuclear submarines, 18 of which are long-term in shipyards for major repairs. In fact, the number of U.S. nuclear submarines currently capable of carrying out missions in the world's major oceans is about 20.

Logically, this number is sufficient, but to claim that the U.S. nuclear submarine force has an absolute advantage over Russia and China globally is somewhat arrogant.

"The advantages of the U.S. nuclear submarine force have long been questioned," said Vasily Dandykin, a military expert and captain first class of the Free Press, "In other words, the Russian Navy and the U.S. Navy are roughly on par in terms of the number of nuclear submarines, but in the development of such naval weapons, the U.S. is gradually being overtaken by us."

This does not mean that the U.S. has stopped building new nuclear submarines. Currently, six "Los Angeles"-class multi-purpose nuclear submarines are at different stages of construction. However, Russia's planning scale is even larger.

The Free Press: Does the U.S. have a priority direction in nuclear submarine development? After all, they won't stop advancing.

Dandykin: First of all, it should be noted that the U.S. Department of Defense plans to increase the number of U.S. nuclear submarines from 50 to 66, and the U.S. Navy has allocated a budget of $20 billion for this. Considering that the cost of a new nuclear submarine exceeds $7.2 billion, this plan is expected to last five years.

This budget not only covers the cost of building three to four nuclear submarines per year, but also includes the cost of purchasing related equipment and weapon systems.

The reason for the U.S. "concentrated" construction of nuclear submarines lies in the aging of the current fleet. The U.S. is worried that it is beginning to fall behind Russia and China in the maritime advantage field.

For example, the most common "Los Angeles"-class nuclear submarines, the last one was built in 1996; the last "Ohio"-class nuclear submarine was delivered to the navy in 1997; and the youngest "Seawolf"-class nuclear submarine was discontinued in 2005.

The U.S. Navy places its hopes on the "Virginia"-class nuclear submarines, which began construction in 2004. So far, 19 "Virginia"-class nuclear submarines have been commissioned, 8 are under construction, and 2 have been ordered. The latest "Virginia"-class submarine, "Vermont," arrived at the U.S. Groton Naval Base in April 2020.

The Free Press: Are not all U.S. nuclear submarines new models?

Dandykin: While continuing to equip and build "Virginia"-class nuclear submarines, the U.S. Navy will focus on the newest "Columbia"-class nuclear submarines. In July 2022, the U.S. held a keel-laying ceremony for a new "Columbia"-class missile nuclear submarine.

The U.S. plans to commission 12 "Columbia"-class nuclear submarines between 2031 and 2042, allocating $20 billion for this — an amount that accounts for 60% of the U.S. shipbuilding budget over the next decade. Due to its high cost, this class of nuclear submarines is called "gilded submarines" within the United States.

The Free Press: What measures has Russia taken against the U.S. plan?

Dandykin: Our focus is on developing various types of nuclear submarines, first of all the "Yasen-M" class nuclear attack submarines, part of which are already in service, while the rest are at different stages of construction.

These submarines are technologically ahead of their time and will remain highly effective for decades to come. Our current and future nuclear submarine forces also include the "Borei-M" class, the "Akula" class, the new "Kalina" class, and the "Lada" class diesel-electric submarines — some of which are still under construction and upgrading. This means that the Russian nuclear submarine force is capable of facing any opponent.

The Free Press: Does Trump sending nuclear submarines near the Russian coast constitute a deterrent to Russia?

Dandykin: Absolutely not! He probably didn't send any nuclear submarines at all. The so-called "deployment" may just be a routine operation of the U.S. nuclear submarine force deployed in the world's oceans for combat duty, just like our strategic ballistic missile submarines.

To urgently deploy nuclear submarines to fulfill Trump's threat is unrealistic — it requires a whole set of preparation procedures, including weapon loading, and it's not something that can be decided on a whim. To put it simply, this president is just posturing.

For the latest news, in-depth analysis, and core information on weapons and military conflicts, please follow the author to learn more.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7556268389841306146/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author and welcomes your opinion below with the 【top/down】 buttons.