티스토리 뷰
“Let’s Build a Russia–U.S. Undersea Tunnel Together” — Putin Aide Proposes Joint Project to Elon Musk… Trump: “An Interesting Idea”
AI Prompt 2025. 10. 19. 21:57“Let’s Build a Russia–U.S. Undersea Tunnel Together” — Putin Aide Proposes Joint Project to Elon Musk… Trump: “An Interesting Idea”
※ Kirill Dmitriev, head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund RDIF and a presidential special envoy, publicly proposed to Elon Musk (Tesla CEO) a Russia–United States undersea tunnel jointly built.
He claims a traditional approach would cost over $65B, but leveraging The Boring Company (TBC) could reduce it to under $8B.
Musk has not responded publicly. President Trump called it “an interesting idea” and said it requires consideration.
Like past notions such as a “World Peace Bridge” in the Kennedy–Khrushchev era, the symbolism is strong, but sanctions, security, environmental, and financing hurdles are formidable. 😅
On the 17th (local time), Kirill Dmitriev, who runs the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and serves as presidential envoy for foreign investment and economic cooperation, posted on social media a proposal to connect the Americas and Afro-Eurasia by an undersea tunnel linking Russia and the United States—the so-called “Putin–Trump Tunnel.” He framed the concept as a symbol of integration and invited Elon Musk to collaborate. Musk owns The Boring Company (TBC), known for lower-cost urban tunneling.
Dmitriev argued that conventional tunneling would exceed $65 billion, but that employing TBC technology could bring the cost below $8 billion. He closed with, “Let’s create the future together.” Since its 2011 launch, RDIF has pursued international co-investments, and Dmitriev was appointed presidential envoy this February.
Musk has not issued any public comment. When White House reporters asked President Donald Trump about the idea, he said it was “interesting” and that he would “have to think about it.”
Interestingly, declassified congressional materials indicate that in the early 1960s, during the John F. Kennedy–Nikita Khrushchev period, a “World Peace Bridge” concept was floated. Mega-infrastructure as a means to temper rivalry is a recurring theme—making this proposal a continuation of symbolic politics.
🛠️ Feasibility Check: Technology, Policy, Finance
1) Engineering & Environment
- Route geology & depth: A Bering Strait alignment would face seismic zones, currents, and extreme conditions. Long undersea tunnels require advanced ventilation, drainage, and safety design.
- Excavation tech: TBC’s smaller TBMs, continuous lining, and automation excel in urban, shorter tunnels. For ultra-long undersea segments, large-diameter TBMs, immersed tubes, and twin-bore configurations would likely be needed.
- Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Marine ecosystems, fishing rights, and Indigenous land issues mean multi-year baseline studies and international consultations.
2) Geopolitics & Law
- Sanctions on Russia: Financial/technology sanctions and export controls challenge consortium formation, payments, and equipment imports.
- Border & security: Immigration, customs, quarantine, and military considerations—such a tunnel could be deemed critical national security infrastructure.
- International law: Maritime boundaries/EEZ, approvals, and liability frameworks must be negotiated multilaterally.
3) Business Case & Financing
- CAPEX/OPEX uncertainty: Ultra-long subsea projects often face cost/time overruns.
- Demand forecasting: Freight and passenger projections drive CBA (cost–benefit analysis); political risk can push risk premiums higher.
- PPP viability: Sanctions and geopolitical risks may limit participation by global lenders and ECAs.
Bottom line: High on symbolism, low on near-term realizability. Still, depending on elections and summitry, the theme could reappear in news cycles as a speculative narrative.
📊 Market Impact Analysis
🇺🇸 U.S. Equities
Potential beneficiaries
- Infrastructure/heavy equipment: If the megatunnel narrative spreads, sentiment could lift TBM makers, concrete/steel suppliers, sensors, and ventilation players.
- Materials/industrials ETFs: Rotations into construction/materials on infra expectations.
Watch-outs
- Tesla (TSLA) sentiment: High-profile side projects can dilute focus on core auto/energy/FSD, adding near-term volatility.
- Policy uncertainty: Sanctions/security dynamics argue the story may lack durability, leading to headline-only pops.
🇰🇷 Korea Equities
Potential beneficiaries
- Construction/engineering with subsea/long-span tech: Global megaproject chatter can improve sentiment for overseas order books (actual revenue lags).
- Steel, cement, cables (HV power/communications): Themed inflows possible if subsea infra narratives revive.
Watch-outs
- Russia exposure risk: Under sanctions, actual contract execution is limited; beware gap between headlines and earnings.
- Commodity volatility: Infra headlines can nudge raw-material price swings.
🧭 Investor Checklist (Summary)
- Musk/TBC official stance & roadmap: Is this just social chatter or moving toward a pre-feasibility study (PFS)?
- Sanctions/diplomacy calendar: U.S.–Russia channels, sanction shifts, and summit remarks will make or break the theme.
- Infra/Construction ETF flows: Track U.S. industrials/materials and Korea construction/steel fund flows.
- TSLA fundamentals: Production, margins, FSD, energy storage—core metrics must improve to sustain sentiment.
- Headline–execution gap: Expect volatility if prices jump on news and fade at the reality-check stage; scale positions gradually.
❓ FAQ
Q1. Is a Russia–U.S. undersea tunnel actually feasible?
A. Technically not impossible, but sanctions, security, environmental, and financing barriers are steep; near-term realization is unlikely.
Q2. Why does TBC claim much lower costs?
A. Miniaturized, continuous, automated tunneling cuts unit costs in urban settings. For ultra-long subsea, large-bore and immersed-tube methods likely reduce the savings.
Q3. Is this bullish or bearish for Tesla stock?
A. It creates short-term buzz, but if it distracts from core execution, it can add volatility. Ultimately, earnings and guidance matter most.
Q4. Do Korean construction/steel names benefit?
A. Thematic flows may appear, but sanctions/politics make real contracts uncertain. Consider the lag between news and fundamentals.
Q5. How is this different from the old “World Peace Bridge” idea?
A. Both are highly symbolic. Today’s sanctions regime, security posture, and environmental rules are stricter—making execution harder.