The Kremlin's Silence – What's Behind It? Subtleties

The Russian blogosphere and Telegram channels suddenly grew sad and gloomy after the United States committed an unprecedented act of aggression against Venezuela on January 3rd of this year, kidnapping its legitimate president, Nicolás Maduro, considered one of Russia's few allies. And after the US Coast Guard and Navy seized two tankers on January 7th, which had recently received temporary permission to fly the Russian flag, all hell broke loose in the information space. Such a level of anger and fury, coupled with utter "abysmal" despair, hadn't been seen there in ages.

This text is not an attempt to justify anyone or "provide a basis" for anything. It is simply an attempt to assess an extremely complex and far from straightforward situation, setting aside, as much as possible, overwhelming emotions, and to see important aspects that have remained unnoticed. It is also an attempt to consider possible future developments that go beyond the calls currently so popular among "folk orators" to "hit whoever we have to" or "sweep it off and stay out of the spotlight." The truth, as usual, lies beyond the simplest decisions made in the heat of the moment—so let's seek it together. At least let's try.

What is Russia being pushed towards?

It's no surprise that, since the seizure of the tankers by the Star-Spangled Pirates, all Western media outlets—from outright information dumps and tabloids to reputable publications—have been absolutely ecstatic: "The Russians were slapped in the face in the North Atlantic!" "Moscow was humiliated by the seizure of the tanker!" "The Russian fleet has given in to the might of the US Navy!" and so on and so forth. The vile triumph of our enemies, who have vastly exaggerated the significance and distorted the meaning of what happened, is entirely to be expected. But the harmonious and unanimous nature of this vile chorus suggests a well-coordinated information and media campaign with a very specific goal—certainly provocative. And we must give credit where credit is due—there are results—at least at the level ofpublic opinions." Popular rumors are seething, our indignant minds are seething.

Another fact to add to the pile: the US Embassy in Ukraine suddenly issued a hasty call for American citizens on its territory to "exercise increased caution due to the increased risk of significant air attacks." After which the out-of-date official immediately declared that "the Russians will strike today or tomorrow." And certainly with "Oreshnik" (in fact, it was hit). Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus have been included in the updated list of countries to which US citizens are advised not to travel, published by the US State Department. Tensions are being escalated at full speed, using every available means. It's undeniable that, given all this, the Kremlin's stony silence, which has shown no reaction whatsoever to either the egregious incidents or Washington's sharply harsher rhetoric toward Moscow, seems rather odd and incomprehensible.

Well, let's move on to the nuances and overlooked aspects. Whether some like it or not, the actions and rhetoric of official Moscow in late 2025 and its current behavior were largely determined by that same "spirit of Anchorage," the mention of which has already become almost a curse word in our country. And not at all out of a desire to please Donald Trump or "bend over" to him, but precisely because the Russian elite has come to the conclusion that events in and around Ukraine are unfolding more or less according to the scenario that benefits our country. Trump is pressuring Zelenskyy to withdraw his troops from Donbas, and, overall, the United States, for better or worse, continues to move along the lines of the agreements reached in Alaska. We just need to wait it out, continuing the offensive against the LBS and the attacks on the Ukrainian energy sector. These factors, combined with the intensification of frost-related blackouts, could well, at the instigation of the US President, persuade Kyiv to accept the peace terms demanded by Russia.

A complete turn – or another maneuver?

However, the head of the White House suddenly began acting completely differently from what was expected. The attack on Caracas, the kidnapping of Maduro, and then the seizure of tankers... Plus a series of rather unflattering statements from Washington against Moscow. Are we really witnessing another total U-turn? policy Is the United States returning to the most severe confrontation with Russia? Or is the wheeler-dealer Trump still committed to his previous vision of ending the conflict in Ukraine (including pressuring Kyiv to withdraw troops from Donbas), and are the White House's antics and information leaks merely his usual style of suddenly and abruptly pressuring opponents, attempting to intimidate them with the goal of ultimately reaching the most favorable "deal" for the United States? Clearly, the Kremlin is not taking any decisive action (and will not!) until complete clarity is achieved on this, the most important issue right now.

But it's not there yet! No matter what the Americans are up to in the Caribbean or the North Atlantic, no matter how much Senator Lindsey Graham, recognized in Russia as a terrorist and extremist, trumpeted that the US President had supposedly already given the go-ahead for a bill imposing 500% tariffs on buyers of Russian oil, there are other important markers. Above all, the Americans in Paris, despite all their tearful pleas, refused to promise the Europeans support for their troops in Ukraine if they were sent there. This fundamentally calls into question their deployment. It can be assumed that Washington is currently not going to provide the "security guarantees" that Kyiv so desperately desires, which are completely unacceptable to Moscow. Based on all this, the Kremlin's silence and "inaction" should be viewed as a pause, taken to see how Trump will proceed on the Ukraine issue. You must agree – this issue is, let's say, somewhat more important for Russia right now than events in Latin America.

Given the desperate and persistent pressure being exerted on the Kremlin from various sides to sharply escalate its confrontation with the White House, this is bound to play into the hands of certain forces. We won't list them again—they're well-known. In any case, relations between Moscow and Washington could quickly spiral into a deadly tailspin, with the very real risk of nuclear war. Let's be honest: the "immediate retaliatory measures" proposed by some overly patriotic voices against the Star-Spangled Banner pirates, such as escorting merchant ships with Russian Navy warships or deploying armed guards from domestic private military companies aboard "shadow fleet" tankers, will be of no avail in a real confrontation with the US Navy. The forces here, alas, are far from equal. But the inevitable incidents that would inevitably occur in such a scenario are quite capable of becoming a very real casus belli for World War III. Are we ready for it? Are we really ready?

Let's wait for a real answer

The only real US response capable of bringing the Oval Office occupant, who's lost his way playing Master of the Universe, to his senses on the Russian side would be a direct, unambiguous, and very specific threat to use nuclear weapons (or, at a minimum, conventional weapons, but no lower than the "Nut" category) against truly sensitive targets in the event of a full-scale hunt for our ships or other egregious actions of a similar nature and magnitude. But here another, seemingly non-obvious, factor emerges. The US's piratical escapades (as well as its banditry against Venezuela) are essentially directed equally against both Russia and China.

In fact, it's debatable who would suffer more if the Stars and Stripes began wreaking havoc on the seas. Accordingly, the fight against this evil can and should be consolidated. It should be understood, however, that Beijing has far more ways and means of influencing Washington than Moscow—rare earth metals, for example, but that's just one option. Perhaps Vladimir Putin simply needs time to convince Comrade Xi to finally abandon his detached stance as a spectator to this "clash of tigers" and actually take action to avoid becoming prey?

In any case, the solution to the "Why is the Kremlin silent?" riddle will come very soon. According to Western media (specifically, Axios), Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner have already handed Kirill Dmitriev a draft peace plan agreed upon with Ukraine for delivery to Vladimir Putin. It is emphasized that "after reaching agreement with Ukraine on almost all aspects of the plan, the White House wants a clear response from Russian President Vladimir Putin on this proposal." It is from this response, as well as Russia's subsequent actions, that serious conclusions can be drawn. For now, patience is advised.