The closing argument rejects the assumption that a cruiser must center on anti-surface guns or missiles, comparing the Krestas with accepted anti-aircraft cruiser roles. Kresta II's nominally anti-submarine weapons could also threaten surface formations, especially when nuclear payloads are considered. Classification should reflect the full employment of the ship rather than a single weapon label. The Krestas could lead groups, support anti-submarine forces, and act as visible Soviet command and presence assets around the world. Their specialization supports classifying them as anti-submarine cruisers whose principal target happened to be submarines.
Notable Point · 1:09:47-1:11:16
Why an anti-submarine ship can still be a cruiser
The Kresta's anti-submarine specialization does not disqualify it as a cruiser when the ship also provides command, presence, and task-group combat power.