Fact Check: How Bad Was Trump’s Dishing About Nuclear Subs to Duterte?

According to the transcript of Trump’s call with Duterte, what Trump said was:

Tuesday night’s stories, which highlighted Trump’s characterization of Kim as “a madman with nuclear weapons,” gave way to Wednesday’s headlines. Business Insider: “Trump told Philippines’ Duterte the US Navy has two ‘nuclear submarines’ near North Korea.” The Huffington Post: “Trump Revealed Location Of U.S. Nuclear Subs In Call With Duterte.”

Wednesday afternoon the Washington Examiner linked the allegedly dangerous disclosure to a Navy press release that predated the phone call by four days, and another that preceded it by two. The presence of the USS Michigan in the Korean Peninsula—along with its port-of-call in Busan—was announced April 25, four days before the call, via Navy press release. Three days later on May 2, the Navy issued another press release announcing the presence of another submarine in the region, the USS Cheyenne.

Around the same time on Wednesday afternoon, Buzzfeed’s Nancy Yousef quoted three Pentagon officials who were aghast at what Trump had said. “We never talk about subs!” they told Buzzfeed. (The headline: “The Pentagon Can’t Believe Trump Told Another President About Nuclear Subs Near North Korea.”) Yousef’s story made the following points:

• Revealing how many submarines there are and their general location diminishes their capacity for stealth operations.

• China and other enemies in the region can test anti-submarine weapons on them now, knowing they are there.

• Although their deployment was publicly known, revealing their number and presence in the area of North Korea puts the subs at greater risk.

These concerns—however sensible they seem—would appear to be much less dire, however, in light of the fact that the presence of two submarines near North Korea was publicly disclosed in those two naval press releases.

The takeaways:

• What Trump told Duterte does not appear to qualify as a new revelation.

• It was therefore not a particularly dangerous or damaging disclosure.

Indeed, a Navy press officer confirmed for TWS Fact Check that if President Trump were referring to the two submarines whose whereabouts the Navy had made public, he was not disclosing any protected information or endangering U.S. operations.

And Bryan Clark, a naval team analyst at the defense policy think tank CSBA, told TWS via email that “It is reasonable to assume he was referring to the submarines already reported to be operating in the area: USS Michigan and USS Cheyenne.”

Clark added that the revelation was “not particularly troubling” because so little was actually conveyed in Trump’s comments: “It would not be unusual for two submarines to be operating in the East China Sea at any given time, and POTUS was not specific enough to help another country gain intelligence by trying to find or track the submarines,” he said.

Bryan McGrath, a retired navy commander and defense consultant, told TWS that while the movement of submarines is typically highly classified, “You can go on the internet and see that we had a submarine make a port call in late April in South Korea.” This particular disclosure was not damaging, he said, and “not all that important.”

But, McGrath added, it does fit a pattern of indiscretion and showing off on the president’s part. “What I’ve seen thus far is that he seems to have less respect for classified material than I would like,” he says. Putting out a press release about a port call makes it appear that the Navy Pacific Command was strategically signalling their defense presence, McGrath explained. “I would like to think that President Trump in his communication with the Philippine president was simply carrying out a well conceived strategic communications effort. My instinct tells me that’s not that case.”

If you have questions about this fact check, or would like to submit a request for another fact check, email Alice Lloyd at [email protected] or The Weekly Standard at [email protected].