In a week marked by tense diplomatic exchanges and unexpected overtures, Russia has taken center stage in two of the world’s most pressing security crises: the simmering conflict in Gaza and the escalating nuclear standoff with the United States. As the international community grapples with mounting civilian casualties in the Middle East and the unraveling of decades-old arms control agreements, Moscow’s words and actions have become a focal point for both hope and concern.
On October 9, 2025, Russia’s response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan caught many observers off guard. While the proposal has been met with skepticism and outright rejection from several quarters, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called it "a positive step toward ending the conflict," according to coverage by Watch. Lavrov went so far as to describe the plan as "the best option currently available to stop bloodshed and save lives in Gaza." This endorsement comes as the humanitarian toll in Gaza continues to rise, with tens of thousands of civilians affected by ongoing violence.
The Russian government’s praise of Trump’s initiative stands in contrast to its more familiar posture—often critical of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Lavrov’s remarks suggest a pragmatic, if cautious, willingness to support any viable path to peace, regardless of its origin. For a region desperate for respite, even a tentative nod from Moscow could signal new diplomatic possibilities. Still, the endorsement is not without caveats. As Lavrov emphasized, the plan’s merit lies in its potential to halt the immediate bloodshed, not necessarily in resolving the deep-seated issues that have fueled decades of conflict.
Meanwhile, in a separate but equally consequential arena, Russia ratcheted up its nuclear rhetoric with a blunt warning aimed squarely at Washington. On October 8, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov declared that Moscow would "retaliate immediately" if any country—particularly the United States—resumed nuclear testing. Speaking to reporters and the State Duma, Ryabkov accused the U.S. of keeping its nuclear test infrastructure in a state of readiness, a posture he claimed Russia has monitored since its decision regarding the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or New START.
Ryabkov’s words were unequivocal: "If a country with the capability makes the erroneous decision to conduct nuclear tests, and Washington is clearly in our focus, then we will retaliate immediately." According to Newsweek, Ryabkov further stated, "I'd like to emphasize that the U.S. has long been keeping its infrastructure ready for such purposes. Some time ago, we took note of this stance. This occurred when the Russian side made a decision on the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START)."
These statements come on the heels of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s own remarks at the Valdai International Discussion Club, where he suggested that preparations for nuclear tests were underway elsewhere and warned that any such move would provoke a Russian response. The timing is hardly coincidental. With the New START treaty—the last major arms control agreement between the two nuclear superpowers—set to expire in February 2026, the stakes could hardly be higher.
Signed in 2010 by then-U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, New START limits each country to 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads and 700 deployed delivery systems, including missiles and bombers. A key provision of the treaty, on-site inspections to ensure compliance, was suspended in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and has yet to resume. Although the treaty was extended for five years in 2021, its future now hangs in the balance.
Ryabkov attempted to clarify Russia’s position regarding the treaty’s expiration. "There is no discussion, and I emphasize this, about the proposal to renew the treaty. The idea is to maintain the key quantitative limits outlined in that agreement for a year after the treaty officially expires, that is, starting on February 6 of next year, strictly provided that the United States does not, for its part, take actions that may disrupt the existing parity and balance in strategic stability." In other words, Moscow is open to an informal extension of the agreement’s limits—provided Washington refrains from what Russia sees as destabilizing moves, such as developing new offensive strategic weapons or expanding missile defenses.
The collapse of arms control frameworks is not limited to New START. On October 8, Ryabkov also announced Russia’s intent to formally terminate its obligations under the 2000 plutonium management and disposition agreement with the U.S. This pact, ratified in 2011, required both countries to dispose of 34 tons of weapons-grade plutonium—a gesture meant to symbolize a commitment to nuclear disarmament. However, Russia suspended its participation in 2016, citing U.S. sanctions, NATO expansion, and increased American military presence in Eastern Europe. Ryabkov reiterated that unacceptable changes proposed by Washington and a lack of consent from Moscow regarding disposal methods had left Russia with no choice but to withdraw.
"The thing is, we put forward the proposal, and we extended our hand, but we can do without it, if they are not interested," Ryabkov told lawmakers, as reported by Newsweek. He also assured the State Duma that the formal termination of the agreement would not require new federal budget expenditures and that all necessary approvals had been secured.
For many analysts, the breakdown of these agreements signals a dangerous erosion of the arms control architecture that has helped maintain strategic stability since the end of the Cold War. Without mutual verification and dialogue, the risk of miscalculation grows. The absence of trust and transparency could lead to a new arms race, with both sides modernizing their arsenals and preparing for the unthinkable.
Yet, amid this backdrop of heightened tensions, Russia’s endorsement of the Gaza peace plan serves as a reminder that diplomacy remains possible, even when relations are strained elsewhere. Lavrov’s willingness to call the U.S. proposal "the best option currently available" suggests that Moscow is not entirely closed off to cooperation—at least when it comes to preventing further humanitarian catastrophe.
Of course, the road ahead is fraught with uncertainty. The Gaza conflict continues to exact a devastating toll, and the prospect of renewed nuclear testing—however remote—casts a long shadow over global security. With the expiration of New START looming and the plutonium agreement now all but dead, the world faces a precarious moment. Whether the major powers can find a way to restore dialogue and rebuild trust remains an open question, one with consequences that extend far beyond the halls of power in Moscow and Washington.
As the dust settles on a week of dramatic developments, one thing is clear: Russia’s actions and rhetoric are shaping the contours of both war and peace in a world beset by old dangers and new uncertainties.