25 September 2024

PEACE IN THE END >> RUSSIAN PRESIDENT PUTIN BOADENS NUCLEAR DOCTRINE TO COUNTER WESTERN AGGRESSION | Bloomberg

The fundamental purpose of Russia’s nuclear behavior, . . is not to aimlessly bluster and hope for deterrent effects but to generate uncertainty and increase the risk that a range of Western actions might trigger nuclear escalation, whether intentionally or inadvertently. . .

THE WORLD REMEMBERS THAT AMERICA WAS THE FIRST THE USE NUCLEAR BOMBS TO END JAPANESE AGGRESSION IN WORLD WAR 2

Russia is forcing its Western adversaries to choose whether such risks are worth taking in support of Ukraine. . .

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Russian nuclear policy is not built on a series of bluffs.

Rather, it captures a fundamental pillar of deterrence theory dating back to the heyday of the Cold War: Threats that leave something to chance and force the adversary to face potentially uncontrollable risks that entail unacceptable costs.

Contrary to the perspective that Russian nuclear threats are empty and ineffective, nuclear weapons have played an essential role in enabling Russia’s war against Ukraine. To the extent that such threats have deterred or slowed Western support—an effect acknowledged by US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan—Russia has successfully leveraged its nuclear arsenal to conduct its conventional invasion of Ukraine.

Why the West should take Russia’s nuclear threats more seriously

By Giles David Arceneaux | June 12, 2024

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Why the West should take Russia's nuclear threats more seriously

Russian President Vladimir Putin built upon the narrative of potential NATO expansion to issue overt nuclear threats.
In a news conference, Putin warned that NATO countries would face a greater risk of being drawn into a conflict with Russia “against [their] will” if Ukraine joined NATO.
Putin acknowledged that the combined might of NATO’s conventional forces and Russia’s conventional forces are “incomparable,” but then proceeded to note that
“Russia is one of the world’s leading nuclear powers” and there would be “no winners” in a NATO-Russia conflict.
These comments, which came only two weeks before Russia launched its full-scale conventional invasion, had the clear goal of deterring external involvement in Russia’s forthcoming war.
Financial Times
Military briefing: Which nuclear weapons could Putin use against Ukraine?
Zapad-2021—the military exercise Russia used to disguise its military buildup before attacking Ukraine—also provided a chance for Russia to strengthen the credibility of its threats with military actions, rather than just words. . .

Leveraging its nuclear posture
The second effect of Russia’s nuclear threats has been the prevention of decisive Western support for Ukraine. Although Ukraine’s partners have provided significant assistance since 2022, concerns of nuclear escalation have resulted in a cautious, incremental approach to Western support.

Even to this day, nuclear weapons continue to slow down the Western response to the Russian aggression in Ukraine.

Financial Times

Leaked Russian military files reveal criteria for nuclear strike

Since 2022, Russia’s declaratory threats have become increasingly paired with changes in operational military behavior on the battlefield. In practice, Russia has slowly but steadily altered its nuclear posture to create greater risks for Western powers in considering a greater involvement in the war in Ukraine.

The recent drills involving Russia and Belarus exercising their roles in a nuclear mission capitalize on their new nuclear sharing agreement.
They mark a notable step up the escalatory ladder to serve as a renewed deterrent signal to Western countries. Through these exercises, Russia is showing a greater commitment to taking risks in the nuclear arena and challenging its adversaries to accept such risks if they plan to oppose Russia in Ukraine more directly.

Western countries should not be immobilized by fear of Russian threats, but they should nevertheless take the risks of conflict seriously. Despite an emerging narrative that Russian nuclear threats are not credible, these threats continue to pose tangible risks for crisis stability. As Putin recently stated, the West would be wrong to completely ignore Russia’s doctrine and threats to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict.

Before Russia invaded Ukraine, many Western states were skeptical of US warnings regarding an imminent Russian attack. This skepticism was clearly misplaced, however, and Western leaders should avoid repeating such complacency in response to Russia’s nuclear threats. The outright rejection of Russian threats could lead the West to stumble into a nuclear crisis and force decisions in the face of massive risk and significant uncertainty.

Russia can be opposed, but Western policymakers must be prudent in their actions to manage the potentially low—yet very real—risks of nuclear escalation.

Editor’s note: The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Air Force, the US Defense Department, or the US government.

War in Ukraine
Why Russia Invaded
Ukraine
How War Might End
Seized Russian Assets