Washington, D.C. – October 27, 2025 – U.S. President Donald Trump sharply rebuked Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday for conducting a successful test of the nuclear-powered Burevestnik cruise missile, asserting that Moscow’s leader should prioritize concluding the nearly four-year war in Ukraine rather than escalating nuclear posturing. Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One en route from Joint Base Andrews to a campaign event in Michigan, Trump underscored American military superiority by revealing that a U.S. nuclear submarine—described as “the greatest in the world”—is currently positioned just off Russia’s coastline.
The presidential remarks were prompted by Putin’s televised announcement on Sunday from the Kremlin, where he confirmed that the Burevestnik, known to NATO as the SSC-X-9 Skyfall, had completed a 14,000-kilometer (8,700-mile) flight during its latest trial. Russian state media hailed the test as proof of the weapon’s unlimited range, made possible by its nuclear propulsion system, and claimed it could evade any existing or prospective missile defense network.
“They know we have a nuclear submarine, the greatest in the world, right off their shores, so I mean, it doesn’t have to go 8,000 miles,” Trump said, dismissing the strategic necessity of Russia’s long-range demonstration. “We don’t need something that flies 14,000 kilometers when we’ve got assets that can deliver overwhelming firepower from a few hundred miles away.”
The Burevestnik, first unveiled by Putin in a March 2018 address to Russia’s Federal Assembly, was presented as a direct counter to U.S. withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty under President George W. Bush in 2002 and NATO’s eastward expansion. Moscow has repeatedly framed the missile as a deterrent against perceived American encirclement. Yet Trump’s retort suggested that Russia’s technological flexing was both redundant and provocative at a time when diplomatic channels to end the Ukraine conflict remain stalled.
Turning his attention to the war itself, Trump issued a blunt directive to the Russian president. “I don’t think it’s an appropriate thing for Putin to be saying, either, by the way: You ought to get the war ended,” he declared. “The war that should have taken one week is now in… its fourth year. That’s what you ought to do instead of testing missiles.” The conflict, which began with Russia’s full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022, has become Europe’s bloodiest since World War II, claiming hundreds Disputes over casualty figures persist, but the United Nations verified over 11,000 civilian deaths by mid-2025, with independent estimates placing military losses on both sides above 500,000 combined.
Trump has made ending the Ukraine war a centerpiece of his 2024 campaign and second-term agenda, repeatedly claiming he could broker a ceasefire “within 24 hours” of returning to office. While details of his proposed framework remain vague, administration officials have indicated it would involve territorial concessions by Kyiv, direct U.S.-Russia talks excluding European intermediaries, and a freeze on Ukraine’s NATO membership aspirations for at least a decade—terms Kyiv has rejected outright.
The timing of Putin’s missile announcement appears calculated. Coming just ten days before the U.S. midterm elections—where control of Congress remains in flux—and amid reports of renewed Russian offensives in Donetsk and Kharkiv oblasts, the test serves as both a domestic propaganda victory and an international signal of resolve. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu described the Burevestnik as “invulnerable,” asserting that its low-altitude flight profile and nuclear reactor enable it to loiter indefinitely before striking targets anywhere on Earth.
Western analysts, however, express skepticism. A 2024 report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) noted that prior Burevestnik tests—including a fatal 2019 explosion at the Nyonoksa test site that killed five Russian nuclear scientists and released radioactive isotopes—exposed significant engineering hurdles. Radiation spikes detected by Norwegian and Finnish monitors following Sunday’s launch suggest the propulsion system remains unstable, though Moscow insists the incident was “controlled.”
Trump’s reference to the U.S. submarine deployment marks a rare public acknowledgment of forward naval positioning in the Arctic or Barents Sea, areas Russia considers its strategic backyard. The Pentagon neither confirmed nor denied the president’s statement, with a spokesperson saying only that “U.S. strategic forces maintain persistent global presence to deter aggression.” The Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine in question is believed to carry up to 20 Trident II D5LE missiles, each capable of delivering multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs) with yields up to 475 kilotons—roughly 30 times the power of the Hiroshima bomb.
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, briefing reporters at the White House Monday afternoon, said the administration views Russia’s test as “consistent with a pattern of coercive signaling” but not an immediate escalation trigger. “We’ve been tracking Burevestnik development for years,” Sullivan stated. “It poses no new threat to the homeland that our layered missile defense architecture—Ground-based Midcourse Defense, Aegis Ashore, THAAD—cannot address.”
Behind the rhetoric, diplomatic machinery is stirring. Sources within the State Department confirm that a package of “Tier-3” sanctions targeting Russia’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, Arctic drilling partnerships, and remaining Western banking linkages has been drafted and awaits presidential signature. If imposed, the measures would effectively sever Novatek—Russia’s second-largest gas producer—from international finance, a step the Biden administration deferred in 2023 to avoid winter energy spikes in Europe.
European allies, meanwhile, reacted with alarm. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg convened an emergency North Atlantic Council session in Brussels, where ambassadors reiterated calls for Russia to return to compliance with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty framework, despite its formal collapse in 2019. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, speaking in Berlin, warned that “nuclear saber-rattling undermines the last vestiges of strategic stability,” while pledging an additional €3 billion in military aid to Ukraine before year’s end.
In Kyiv, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy seized on Trump’s comments to renew appeals for accelerated Western arms deliveries. “Every day Russia tests weapons instead of withdrawing troops is a day Ukraine bleeds,” Zelenskyy posted on X. “We need ATACMS, F-16s, and Storm Shadow now—not after another missile flies over the North Pole.”
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova dismissed Trump’s submarine remark as “typical American bravado,” claiming the U.S. vessel had been shadowed by Russian anti-submarine warfare assets for weeks. “Our oceans are large, but our vigilance is larger,” she quipped during a Moscow press conference.
As night fell over the Atlantic, satellite imagery analyzed by the Middlebury Institute of International Studies showed increased activity at Severodvinsk shipyards, where additional Burevestnik components are reportedly stored. Whether Sunday’s test heralds serial production or remains a costly prototype remains unclear. What is certain is that Trump’s public juxtaposition of American undersea might against Russian over-the-horizon ambition has thrust nuclear deterrence back into the foreground of U.S.-Russia relations—at a moment when battlefield momentum in Ukraine hangs in delicate balance.
The president closed his airborne press availability with a characteristic blend of bravado and negotiation tease: “They’re not playing games with us and we’re not playing games with them either. We test missiles all the time—better ones, faster ones, smarter ones. But I’d rather make a deal. Tell Vladimir to pick up the phone.”
Whether that call comes—or whether the next launch belongs to a Burevestnik or a Trident—may determine whether 2025 marks the beginning of the end for Europe’s deadliest war, or merely another chapter in a lengthening chronicle of brinkmanship.
