The question must be were her cruise missiles onboard nuclear capable and was she carrying nuclear weapons, in which case, with her being on fire, sinking was probably the best outcome, as fire and nukes do not mix well. It makes you wonder if there was a risk did they scuttle her.
https://dip.org.ua/en/russia/experts...lear-warheads/
The Ukrainian industry portal Defense Express, in turn, reports that the Moskva cruiser may have nuclear warheads. The Moskva cruiser carries 16 R-1000 Vulkan missiles, which can be armed with nuclear warheads with a yield of up to 350 kilotons. However, it is not clear whether nuclear warheads are always present at the installation, or whether they are placed there only by special order.
The cruiser “Moskva” is part of the permanent readiness forces of the Black Sea Fleet, so it must be able to quickly go to the open sea to perform combat missions. Reloading the warheads of the P-500/1000 missile is a time-consuming task and should only be carried out at the base.
The ratio of the number of nuclear warheads to conventional warheads on Russian cruisers is currently unknown. During Soviet times, there could have been several of 16 nuclear warheads.
There are two possible nuclear weapons systems on the ship
In addition, the cruiser can carry other nuclear weapons – missiles for the Fort system, which is a ship-based analogue of the S-300. During Soviet times, several of them were regularly on board 64 missiles of this system.
According to Defense Express, in the short term, there is no risk of a possible explosion of these missiles in the event of a sinking of the cruiser. As the portal emphasizes, there are currently about 10 reactors, about 10 torpedoes and about 20 ballistic missiles at the bottom of the seas and oceans, most of which ended up there as a result of accidents on Soviet ships that took place from the 1960s to the 1980s.