In late June 2025, tensions escalated sharply as Russia responded angrily to comments by Estonian officials about hosting new UK F‑35A fighter jets—aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons. These jets are part of the UK’s newly unveiled defence review, under which Britain intends to acquire twelve F‑35As by 2030 for NATO nuclear missions.
When Estonia’s Defence Minister publicly indicated readiness to host F‑35s, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov described the plan as a “direct danger” to Russia, warning that such deployment would provoke serious repercussions. He dismissed Baltic leaders’ positions as “absurd ideas,” suggesting their proposals could inflame regional instability and risk confrontation.
Russian state-aligned voices amplified the threat further. A blogger warned that NATO’s military presence near Russia—especially in the Baltics—could compel Moscow to launch military operations. In stark terms, pro-Kremlin commentators claimed such provocations might escalate into war, citing proximity to sensitive Russian regions.
Central to these concerns is Moscow’s new missile capability. After President Putin announced the successful test of a medium‑range ballistic missile, he asserted it could target not only Ukraine but also nations supplying Ukraine with weapons, including the UK.
Meanwhile, in the UK, Prime Minister Keir Starmer and others reaffirmed the nation’s commitment to NATO and clarified that the F‑35 jets would be deployed only on rotational missions—not permanently based in Estonia. Existing F‑35 units have conducted temporary operations in Estonia under NATO’s enhanced vigilance measures.
Key Developments:
Baltic Reaction: Estonia confirmed it was “naturally” willing to host dual-capable F‑35s, drawing sharp condemnation from Moscow.
Russian Response: Kremlin officials framed possible deployment as an existential threat and implied that NATO expansion in the Baltics could trigger military retaliation.
Missile Escalation: Putin announced the deployment of a new ballistic missile—with purported range sufficient to strike the UK—amid rising rhetoric over Western support for Ukraine.
UK Position: While expanding its nuclear posture, the UK government stressed that no permanent basing of nuclear-capable jets in Estonia was planned. Rotational deployments had precedent under NATO operations.
Context & Implications
Russia has consistently elevated its nuclear rhetoric in response to Western support for Ukraine, placing its nuclear forces on heightened alert and revising doctrine to lower thresholds for weapons use. These threats coincide with NATO’s strategic reforms and the UK’s defence modernization, including increases in defence spending and investment in deterrence capabilities.
Some analysts believe Russia’s warnings amount to what’s known in strategic studies as nuclear blackmail—using the threat of nuclear force to deter actions by adversaries. However, the risk of actual nuclear use remains widely considered unlikely due to geopolitical, military, and retaliatory deterrents.
