At the battle of Stirling Bridge, 11 September 1297, the movie Braveheart has William Wallace provoking the English to battle, saying "Here are Scotland's terms. Lower your flags, and march straight back to England, stopping at every home to beg forgiveness for 100 years of theft, rape, and murder. Do that and your men shall live. Do it not, and every one of you will die today. ... Before we let you leave, your commander must cross that field, present himself before this army, put his head between his legs, and kiss his own ass."
Putin's Nuclear Crisis - September 2024
Threats about the use of nuclear weapons from the Kremlin have been heard since the beginning of the full-scale war. This is cynically called “protection of Russian interests.”
Russia will change its nuclear doctrine based on its own analysis of the latest "conflicts and actions" of Western countries in connection with the so-called "special military operation" (as the Russian Federation calls the war against Ukraine). Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia Serhiy Ryabkov stated this in a comment to the Russian news agency TASS 01 September 2024. At the same time, the Russian diplomat did not specify what exactly will change in the military doctrine regarding the use of nuclear weapons and when the corresponding changes will be made.
In February 2024 Vladimir Putin, once again told Western countries that they risk provoking a nuclear war if they send troops to Ukraine. At that time, the EU called threats and nuclear blackmail against the West part of Putin's "pre-election" campaign. At the end of May, the Russian Federation began nuclear exercises, which have been held in three stages so far. At the same time, the Belarusian military was also involved in them.
Ryabkov said that Moscow had decided to revise its nuclear doctrine to reach a new balance in line with the escalation course adopted by the West. “The work is at an advanced stage, and there is a clear intent to make corrections”, Ryabkov was cited as saying by TASS. Ryabkov pointed out that Russia's decision on the matter is “connected with the escalation course of our Western adversaries” in connection with their proxy war using Ukrainian forces against Russian troops.
He did not specify what the new changes in mind for Russia's new nuclear doctrine would include. Ryabkov's comments came after in the recent meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's (NATO) members, they reaffirmed their commitment to stepping up their military aid to Ukraine. NATO Chief Jens Stoltenberg emphasized in an official statement from the meeting in Brussels on Wednesday, “We must continue to provide Ukraine with the equipment and munitions it needs to defend itself against Russia’s invasion. This is vital for Ukraine’s ability to stay in the fight.” In response to Kiev's insistence on using warplanes, weapons and ammunition provided to the former Soviet Republic by the West to strike targets deep inside Russia, several NATO member states agreed to lift the restrictions placed on Kiev in using the long-range military hardware supplied by Western allies, especially the missiles.
Russia, which sees the West's full out support for Kiev as a proxy war by the Western countries against the Russian nation, has repeatedly warned of Moscow’s intention to make changes and upgrade its nuclear deterrence forces to balance the new status quo. Ryabkov’s comments were the most categorical statement on Russia's plan to proceed with a new nuclear doctrine to date. Russia's message to the US-led NATO bloc has been clear till now: “Refrain from providing excessive military aid to Ukraine, lest you risk provoking a confrontation with Russia that could rapidly turn into a nuclear conflict.”
Russia and Belarus are to sign a treaty on security guarantees and nuclear weapons in December 2024, according to Belarusian Foreign Minister Maxim Ryzhenkov. "We plan to sign an interstate treaty with Russia on security guarantees for the two countries, which will lay down the principle of using nuclear weapons and conventional weapons, as well as other methods of protecting both countries that are part of the Union State," Ryzhenkov was quoted as saying by Kommersant on 02 September 2024.
Political Scientist Sergei Karaganov told Tatyana Antonova writing for Moscow Komsomolets September 2, 2024 “The current nuclear doctrine has long been outdated. It is a product of our state of mind of the 1980s. Not even being completely aware of this, by adopting it we cleared the way for NATO’s expansion and now for its direct aggression against us. By failing to amend our nuclear doctrine and carry out appropriate military-technical actions, we have exacerbated our strategic position dramatically, which could lead to our failure or necessity for massive use. Tactically, our military are winning on the battlefield, but we have opened the way to a grueling, long and protracted war to be won by the one who is stronger economically....
“Our indecision is becoming dangerous and bordering on recklessness, to say the least. It is dangerous for us and for the whole world. Not only have we opened the way for the aggressor, but we are also clearing it for more aggressions around the world. It is high time to stop doing this and amend the nuclear doctrine to make it clear that any attack on our territory must get a nuclear response,” the expert said. Sergei Karaganov foresaw two scenarios: “either we condemn ourselves to a long and bloody war, or we will have to allow the massive use of nuclear weapons as a gesture of despair.”
The Kremlin confirmed on 04 September 2024 that Moscow is working on an updated nuclear doctrine, taking into account the actions of the collective West. Veteran military analyst and retired Russian Army Colonel Viktor Litovkin breaks down the details of Russia’s current nuclear doctrine, and comments on what the updated document may entail. “Against the backdrop of challenges and threats provoked by the countries of the so-called Collective West, the Russian Federation is currently working to develop new approaches in the context of the upcoming renewal of the nuclear doctrine,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters Wednesday on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok.
“This update is required by the current agenda and state affairs which arose as a consequence of the actions of the collective West,” Peskov said. “What kinds of actions are we talking about? They include the rejection of dialogue with the Russian Federation, the continued policy of attacking the interests and security of the Russian Federation, and provoking the protraction of the hot war in Ukraine. This cannot but have consequences. All of this has been taken account of by Moscow, is being analyzed, and will form the basis for the proposals that will be formulated.”
Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova clarified that the update to the nuclear doctrine is connected to the “strategic risks” resulting from Western countries’ policy in general, and to “global and regional challenges to international security which are multiplying thanks to the absolutely irresponsible position of the West.”
“The United States and NATO are becoming increasingly aggressive toward Russia, and we need to make clarifications to some fundamental documents” regarding Russia’s nuclear doctrine, veteran military analyst Viktor Litovkin told Sputnik 04 September 2024.
“The war in Ukraine is not a war between Ukraine and Russia. It is a war between the West and Russia using the territory of Ukraine, and the lives of Ukrainian servicemen. It is an attempt to weaken Russia, to bring Russia to ruin and to deprive Russia of its competitive advantage in the international arena,” Litovkin explained.
Russia “is not going to seek hegemony, as the US is doing, but we are also not going to lose our independence, sovereignty and right to independent action,” Litovkin added.
NATO has tested Moscow’s red lines repeatedly over the course of the proxy conflict in Ukraine, gradually ramping up the deadliness of offensive strike systems sent to Kiev, providing the Zelensky regime with intelligence and other battlefield support, looking the other way on the flow of mercenaries to the battlefield (which some Russian commanders suspect include active duty NATO servicemen), sabotaging peace talks, boasting openly about the alliance’s intention to use the crisis to try to “weaken Russia” and fight Russia 'to the last Ukrainian', and feigning ignorance of Ukraine’s attempts to target the assets of Russia’s nuclear triad.
Russia’s current nuclear doctrine consists of four key points divided among two documents, according to Litovkin – one being Russia’s general Military Doctrine, and the other a June 2020 presidential decree ‘On the Fundamentals of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence’.
The former provides for the use of nuclear weapons in two cases:
- if Russia or its allies are attacked by a country or coalition of countries using nuclear weapons,
- if Russia is attacked by an aggressor or coalition of aggressors using conventional means so severe the very existence of the state is threatened.
The latter allows Russia to fire its nuclear weapons:
- if it becomes aware that a ballistic missile has been launched toward it, or
- if a strike is launched at government and military command and control centers.
Litovkin believes the ultimate goal of the updated Russian nuclear doctrine will be “to combine these two documents into one,” and “clarify the role of nuclear weapons in ensuring Russia’s security and ensuring deterrence against a possible aggressor.” Litovkin said “I believe these two documents will form the basis of the new military doctrine. There may also be some additional clarifications in connection with the fact that the international situation is changing”.
Russia’s nuclear doctrine urgently needs to be revised to allow a nuclear response to any major military aggression against the country, former Kremlin adviser Sergey Karaganov stated on 11 Septembe 2024. The former foreign policy adviser to the deputy head of the Russian presidential administration told the Kommersant daily that the existing document is “woefully outdated” and no longer serves as an effective deterrent.
Adopted in 2020, Russia’s nuclear doctrine does not provide for pre-emptive nuclear strikes and envisages the use of nuclear weapons only in “exceptional cases” in the face of a “threat to the sovereignty and territorial integrity” of the country. According to Karaganov, this approach has rendered it nearly useless and has effectively “excluded” the nuclear deterrence factor from Russia’s military and foreign policy arsenal. “We have allowed the situation to deteriorate to a point when our adversaries believe we will not use nuclear weapons under any circumstances,” the political scientist said. “Having nuclear weapons without being able to convince your enemies that you are ready to use them is suicide.”
A failure to have an effective nuclear deterrent policy “would plunge the world into a series of wars that would inevitably turn nuclear and end up with the World War III,” Karaganov believes, adding that this could happen “within the span of several years.”
“The main goal of a doctrine should be in convincing all current and future enemies that Russia is ready to use nuclear weapons.” His words came amid the continued Ukrainian incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region and Kiev’s attempts to receive permission for the use of Western long-range missiles to strike deep inside the country. “It’s high time we stated that any massive strikes against our territory give us a right to respond with a nuclear strike,” Karaganov insists. He also called on Moscow to clearly define the “nuclear escalation” steps in the next doctrine to leave Russia’s adversaries no room for doubt about whether it is ready to use its nuclear arsenal and when.
President Vladimir Putin had repeatedly demonstrated a more reserved position on the issue. Talking to Karaganov at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in June, the president said that Russia was “not brandishing” nuclear weapons and expressed hope that “it will never come” to a nuclear exchange between Moscow and the West. Moscow “has no reasons to even think about” using nuclear weapons, he said at the time, calling on Russian officials to not even “touch upon” the subject of nuclear weapons unless absolutely necessary. Later in June, Putin also said that Russia did not “need a preventive strike yet, because the enemy is guaranteed to be destroyed in a retaliatory strike.” He did not rule out changes to the doctrine, though.
Removing restrictions on Ukraine’s use of Western weapons would directly involve the US and its allies in the conflict with Russia and would be met with an appropriate response, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned 12 September 2024. EU East StratCom Task Force noted "Putin gave a doorstep interview on a street near the Palace Square in St. Petersburg to state TV channel Russia 1. In an unusual setting, he was uneasy, speaking in drawn-out complex sentences. The image was far from the macho posture that the Kremlin usually constructs for Putin’s public appearances.... at grand parades, in military factories, out visiting veterans, or giving instructions to ministers. The setting and presentation are key to deciphering implicit messages since usually everything is carefully choreographed by state-controlled outlets and the Kremlin itself. "
The West has sent Ukraine long-range missiles such as Storm Shadows and ATACMS, which Kiev has so far used against Crimea and Donbass. In the past several days, however, the US and UK had suggested they might allow these weapons to be used to strike targets deeper into internationally recognized Russian territory. “We are not talking about allowing or prohibiting the Kiev regime from striking Russian territory,” Putin said. “It is doing so already, with unmanned aerial vehicles and other means.” Ukraine lacks the capability to use Western long-range systems, Putin added, noting that targeting for such strikes requires intelligence from NATO satellites, while firing solutions can “only be entered by NATO military personnel.”
“If this decision is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the US and European countries, in the conflict in Ukraine,” the Russian president said. “Their direct participation, of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature of the conflict.” With that in mind, Putin added, Russia will “make the appropriate decisions based on the threats facing us.”
"I believe that NATO countries skeptical to the use of long range weapons deep inside Russian territory don't want to be involved in giving permission for their use," Mikael Valtersson, former officer of Swedish Armed Forces and former defense politician and chief of staff with Sweden Democrats, told Sputnik 12 September 2024. The nationalistic Sweden Democrats is a party which all Swedish parliamentary parties view as undemocratic and xenophobic. While the pundit did not expect Russia to retaliate with tactical nuclear weapons – unless NATO attacks it with nukes – he did not rule out that Moscow would provide long-range missiles to countries deemed adversaries by the West. "NATO has made small steps all the time, mostly to avoid a large step that Russia must answer to. This will probably be so this time too, but slowly the western countries are getting closer to a harsh Russian response, when enough is enough," Valtersson said.
Nothing prevents Ukrainian military personnel from entering coordinates to hit targets with Storm Shadow or ATACMS missiles in Crimea and the "new territories" right now - this does not require the direct participation of NATO soldiers . Why they might be needed when entering coordinates of the "old territories" is unclear. But the meaning of this statement is clear - the Russian leadership is trying at the last moment to convince NATO not to make a decision on such strikes, threatening to perceive such actions as strikes by the alliance countries on their territory . The main question is what conclusions follow from this statement and what decisions will be made.
If in the future the statement remains just a statement, like many others before, then Western countries will continue to ignore any threats coming from Russia without any problems. Either Russia will begin to take real steps that will lead to serious costs for the enemy in the event of new steps taken by it to escalate the conflict, or it will be forced to continue to bear more and more costs from the expanding geography of strikes.
The statement of Russian President Vladimir Putin on the consequences of Western weapons strikes deep into Russia is extremely clear and unambiguous, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on 13 September 2024. "The statement that Putin made yesterday is very important. It is extremely clear, unambiguous and does not allow for any misinterpretations. And we have no doubt that this statement has reached its addressees," Peskov said, answering a question about whether the Kremlin sees the reaction of Western countries to Putin's words about the consequences of long-range weapons strikes on Russia.
The West was discussing lifting the ban on the Ukraine's use of Western long-range weapons for strikes deep inside Russia. The issue was supposed to be discussed at a meeting 13 September 2024 between US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, but in the end there were no announcements on the subject. Putin, commenting on these discussions, noted that NATO is discussing not just the possibility of the Ukrainain army using Western long-range weapons, but its direct participation in the conflict.
Mark Toth and Jonathan Sweet wroted in the Kyiv Post, 14 September 2024 : "The timing of Putin’s threat is notable. It followed the Trump-Harris debate Tuesday night on ABC News – and after former President Donald Trump twice could not bring himself to say he wanted Ukraine to outright win the war. Biden, Harris, and their combined national security teams, led by Jake Sullivan, have all been too afraid of the Russian President and his nuclear posturing – threats, nuclear exercises, images of aides with nuclear footballs, and threatening space weapons. Putin, predictably, is able to play on their ever-present escalation fears which habitually result in the slow-walking and subsequent denial of NATO weapons and munitions capabilities to Ukraine – and, needlessly, the bloody lengthening of the timeline of the war.... Patriot Missile Systems, HIMARS, M1A1 Abrams and Leopard main battle tanks, F-16s fighter jets, and ATACMS have all been slow-walked onto the battlefields of Ukraine by NATO out of self-imposed fears of Putin’s so-called “red lines.” ... Putin fears NATO escalation more than anything else.... Ukraine has already crossed Putin’s number one red line by invading the Kursk Oblast in Russia. Putin’s response? Nothing to see here.... Then the Trump-Harris debate changed everything. Putin saw his opening. Trump, foolishly, was not willing to commit to Ukraine winning. And Harris foreshadowed she would largely stay the course with Biden’s self-defeating incremental risk-averse approach to arming and equipping the AFU. ... Putin bluffed – and once again Biden wavered.... Escalation paralysis is alive and well at the White House and it is crippling NATO and Ukraine."
Throughout the Ukraine conflict, Russia has had ample reason to use nuclear weapons, but has so far exercised restraint, the deputy chair of Russia’s Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, said 14 September 2024. He warned, however, that Moscow’s patience is not limitless, suggesting that Russia could respond harshly if Western nations allow Kiev to use the missiles they have provided to strike targets deep inside Russian territory. Kiev had been demanding that these limitations be lifted since at least May. Several media outlets have recently alleged that Washington and London will soon do so, or secretly have already.
In a post on his Telegram channel, Medvedev wrote that Western leaders have lulled themselves into a false sense of security, thinking that Moscow is bluffing when it warns of dire consequences for allowing long-range missile strikes. The official, who was also the Russian president from 2008 to 2012, said Russia is fully aware that conducting a nuclear strike would be a momentous decision. “It is precisely because of this that a decision to use nuclear weapons… has not been made so far,” Medvedev stressed. He added that the “formal prerequisites for this, which are understandable to the entire global community and that are stipulated by our nuclear containment doctrine, are in place.” He cited the Ukrainian offensive in Kursk Region as one example.
“Russia is showing patience,” he said, while warning that “there is always a limit to patience.” Medvedev went on to suggest that Russia could also respond to Western escalation with some sort of new weaponry – not necessarily nuclear, but still devastating.
Washington will be unable to hide from a nuclear conflict if it starts across the ocean, Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov said 14 September 2024 . Fears of a potential escalation between Russia and NATO over Ukraine have been intensifying in recent days, as Western powers reportedly mull the possibility of allowing Kiev to conduct missile strikes deep in Russian territory. Speaking with Rossiya 24 channel on Friday, Ambassador Antonov said that he is surprised at the “illusion” that “if there is a conflict, it will not spread to the territory of the United States of America.”
“I am constantly trying to convey to them one thesis that the Americans will not be able to sit it out behind the waters of this ocean. This war will affect everyone, so we constantly say – do not play with this rhetoric,” Antonov stated. He also mentioned that while Western countries accuse Russia of “sabre-rattling,” the US wants to investigate the consequences a nuclear strike would have for Eastern Europe. Antonov was apparently referring to a study ordered by the US Defense Department to simulate the impact of a nuclear conflict on global agriculture. According to a solicitation notice posted on a government procurement platform, the study will focus on regions “beyond Eastern Europe and Western Russia,” which in the simulation is the epicenter of the hypothetical nuclear attack.
Members of the French government are concerned about the Ukraine conflict spiraling out of control and are now exercising “great discretion,” Le Monde reported on 14 September 2024, citing diplomatic sources. Fears of the confrontation escalating into a direct collision between Moscow and the NATO bloc have skyrocketed over the past few days, as the US and its allies reportedly consider authorizing Kiev to strike targets deep inside Russian territory using Western weaponry.
While France has announced “no official position” on the matter, unnamed diplomats in private conversations admitted to the French daily that Paris has been concerned about potential escalation and has been trying to avoid it. “We must do everything possible to avoid World War Three,” an unnamed official told the newspaper. “One cannot simply dismiss the hypothesis that the Russians could expand the scale of their military operations,” the official added, referring to the warnings voiced by top Russian officials, including Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The United States should be exploring ways to end the Ukraine conflict instead of strengthening Kiev’s strikes against Russia, Donald Trump Jr. said in an opinion piece jointly authored 17 September 2024 with former independent candidate for president, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. "At a time when American leaders should be focused on finding a diplomatic off-ramp to a war that should never have been allowed to take place, the Biden-Harris administration is instead pursuing a policy that Russia says it will interpret as an act of war," the authors said in the opinion published by The Hill.
The Biden administration was reported last week to be considering allowing Ukraine to use NATO-provided long-range precision weapons against targets deep inside Russia. Trump Jr., the oldest son of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, and Kennedy Jr, who endorsed Trump last month after suspending his own campaign, warned that provoking Russia could be gravely dangerous.
"Such a decision would put the world at greater risk of nuclear conflagration than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis," the authors said. "The hawks in the Biden administration seem to have forgotten that Russia is a nuclear power." For context, the authors cited the wisdom of former US President John F. Kennedy, who said in 1963, "Nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war."
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg denied in an interview out on 17 September 2024 that allowing Ukraine to use long-range Western weapons to strike deep into Russia would cross country's "red line" despite warnings from Russian President Vladimir Putin. "There have been many red lines declared by him [Putin] before, and he has not escalated, meaning also involving Nato allies directly in the conflict," Stoltenberg told The Times newspaper. Stoltenberg said that he supported the United Kingdom and France in their decision to lift restrictions on Kiev's use of long-range weapons against Russia. He argued that their use by Ukraine would not draw the alliance into conflict with Russia.
Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated on 18 September 2024 that dismissing Russian President Vladimir Putin's warnings about the dangers of Ukraine using Western weapons to attack Russian territory is both provocative and perilous. "Such a ostentatious desire not to take seriously the statements of the Russian president is an absolutely short-sighted and unprofessional step," Peskov told reporters.
"Today, the European Parliament called on the EU countries to lift restrictions on Kiev's long-range weapons strikes on our country's territory, to increase military support for Ukraine, and to announce a collection of funds from the population of Europe for the needs of the Ukrainian Armed Forces," State Duma Chairman Vyacheslav Volodin wrote on his Telegram channel on 19 September 2024. "I repeat again: if something like this happens, Russia will give a tough response using more powerful weapons. No one should have any illusions about this. The State Duma insists on this," the Chairman of the State Duma emphasized.
According to him, "what the European Parliament is calling for leads to a world war using nuclear weapons." In addition, Vyacheslav Volodin addressed two questions to members of the European Parliament, asking them whether they consulted with their voters before making this decision, and whether citizens of European countries want war to come to their home. "Before making such a decision, we should have remembered the lessons of World War II. Then, 27 million Soviet citizens died in the fight against fascism. It was our country that liberated you and all of Europe. Remember this. Do not forget. Judging by the statement of the European Parliament, it seems that you have forgotten," the Chairman of the State Duma noted.
"The citizens of our country know what war is, it has passed through every family. The victory over Nazism came at a high price. The USA and England, who call themselves the victors today, lost less than 800 thousand people in World War II. Our losses in the Battle of Stalingrad alone were 1,130 thousand people," he also recalled. “The only thing the European Parliament should do after such a statement is to dissolve itself,” said Vyacheslav Volodin and added: “For your information: the flight time of the Sarmat missile to Strasbourg is 3 minutes 20 seconds.”
The policies of US President Joe Biden, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and French President Emmanuel Macron are leading to a global nuclear war, State Duma Chairman Vyacheslav Volodin said in an interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda radio station. According to the State Duma speaker, the discussion of permission for Kiev to use high-precision long-range Western weapons to strike at Russian territory is leading to disaster. He did not rule out that such statements will ultimately end in a large-scale nuclear conflict.
"Biden, Macron, Scholz are discussing issues that could lead to a tragic situation. And they will simply unleash a world war, a nuclear one. This cannot be done. They do not understand what could happen," Volodin said. At the same time, he assured that in any case, Russian President Vladimir Putin will take all possible measures to ensure the security of the state and Russian citizens.
Russia has no wish to start a nuclear war and considers it “inappropriate” that its warnings of an escalation in the Ukraine conflict are being portrayed as an intention to use atomic weapons, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said 22 September 2024. Fears of an escalation between Russia and NATO have been intensifying in recent weeks, as Western states have stepped up discussions about allowing Ukraine to conduct missile strikes deep in Russian territory. Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier this month warned that such permission would be taken as the West’s direct involvement in the conflict and would be met with an appropriate response. His words were taken by some to mean Moscow was ready to deploy nuclear weapons.
In an interview with Sky News Arabia, Lavrov was asked whether this was the case. The minister responded that while Russia indeed has “weapons that would have serious consequences for the handlers of the Ukrainian regime” – meaning the US and its Western allies – it has no wish to use them. “We talk about red lines, counting on the fact that our assessments and statements will be heard by smart, decision-making people. To claim that if tomorrow someone doesn’t do what we ask, we will press the ‘red button,’ is inappropriate,” the minister stated, adding that he believes Western decision makers understand this, because “nobody wants a nuclear war.”
Lavrov stressed that Moscow also does not want an escalation of the Ukraine conflict that would drag the West in as a direct participant, but reiterated that this would inevitably be the case if Kiev is allowed to use long-range weapons deep inside Russia. “It would be a direct war of NATO against Russia… NATO is already waging a war against Russia, but it is a hybrid war through the hands of Ukrainians. If we are talking about long-range missile weapons, it is clear to everyone that the Ukrainians themselves will not be able to use them,” he stated, explaining that tasks such as target guidance, data collection from satellites and forming flight assignments can only be carried out by specialists from countries that produce a particular weapon.
Lavrov went on to accuse Western officials who are seriously considering allowing Ukraine to make indiscriminate attacks on Russia of having the “mindset of a child” playing with matches.
Vladimir Putin said 25 September 2024 that some "clarifications" had been proposed regarding Moscow's nuclear doctrine, saying that his country could use nuclear weapons if attacked by a state and that even an attack with conventional weapons by a nuclear-backed country force, it could be considered a joint attack of the two. Opening the Security Council meeting, attended by several top officials, Putin said that proposals had been made to change the nuclear doctrine and that he wanted to highlight one of the proposed key changes.
"It is proposed that an attack against Russia by a non-nuclear power, but with the participation or support of a nuclear power, be considered a joint attack against the Russian Federation," he said. Russia would consider using nuclear weapons if it received credible information that it was launching a massive cross-border air strike, with a mass launch of missiles, drones or hypersonic weapons, he added.
"We reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in the event of aggression against Russia and Belarus, as a member of the Union State. All these issues have been agreed upon with the Belarusian side, with the President of Belarus, including if the enemy, using conventional weapons, creates a critical threat to our sovereignty," Putin said at the meeting. Clarifications of the foundations of Russia's state policy in the field of nuclear deterrence have been agreed with Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko as a member of the Union State, President Putin noted. Moscow, Putin continued, also reserves the right to use nuclear weapons if it or Belarus is attacked, even with conventional weapons. Putin said the changes are carefully calibrated and commensurate with the modern military threats his country faces.
President Putin outlined plans to update Russia's nuclear doctrine, the Fundamentals of State Policy on Nuclear Deterrence. The core principle of nuclear weapon use remains the same - they are a last resort to protect sovereignty. However, the changing geopolitical landscape and emerging military threats have required adjustments. “At the same time, we see that the current military and political situation is changing dynamically, and we are obliged to take this into account, including the emergence of new sources of military threats and risks for Russia and our allies,” he emphasized.
Putin's announcement came on the same day Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy addressed the UN General Assembly in New York, with Kyiv reiterating its demand for permission to use Western weapons to strike deep into Russia.
The Center for Countering Disinformation, a working body of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, explained that such updates in Russia are "fear of Ukrainian weapons, which deprive the Russian Federation of strategic weapons depots and harm Putin's ability to continue terror. " It explained "Russia’s use of threats involving “the latest nuclear weapons, which have no equal,” is a key part of its foreign policy during the war in Ukraine. The kremlin’s most hyped weapon is the RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile, which russian propagandists claim could “drown Britain” and “destroy Washington”. However, reality shows that russia’s nuclear power is largely a myth. Since its development, there has been only one successful test of the Sarmat. After the most recent failed launch at Plesetsk, further testing could be delayed for a long time. If reports about an explosion in the underground launch silo are confirmed, it would mean the destruction of infrastructure, and russia doesn’t have other test sites. As a result, the Sarmat is only nominally in combat service."
Meanwhile, a New York Times report on 26 September 2024 said that US spy agencies had warned the administration that lifting the restrictions could trigger a direct backlash from Moscow, including “sabotage targeting facilities in Europe” and “potentially lethal attacks on US and European military bases.” Despite the fears of escalation, Politico reported that the issue “remains under consideration” at the White House.
Dmitry Trenin is a research professor at the Higher School of Economics and a lead research fellow at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations. From 2008 to 2022, he was the director of the Carnegie Moscow Center.
"Vladimir Putin’s decision to update Moscow’s nuclear doctrine isn’t a knee-jerk reaction to current events. Unlike, for example, the threat to attack deeper inside Russia with long-range missiles. The changes were flagged by the Russian president several months ago, and from yesterday’s speech we learned that the Strategic Deterrence Commission meets twice a year, which means that the document itself is constantly being re-read and re-thought.
"The merits of strengthening nuclear deterrence became clear more than two years ago, when the US declared that its goal – in the Ukraine conflict – is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia. The West then began its game of escalation. Moscow’s old nuclear doctrine was aimed at other wars and scenarios and proved ineffective at deterring the enemy in the new circumstances.
"We will now see the reaction in the West, where unfortunately there are many people in high places who have convinced themselves that Putin is ‘bluffing’, that Russia is ‘afraid to respond’, and that it is therefore possible to behave with impunity toward it. The doctrinal correction is thus essentially a signal to the sober minds that remain in the halls of power in Washington: this is the last warning.
"At the same time, there is great anxiety in countries friendly to us – and other simply neutral ones – about the possibility of nuclear war. China may already be thinking about it. Beijing – along with India, Brazil, South Africa, and others – wants an imminent and unconditional end to the hostilities. We need to assure them that strengthening our deterrent is the only way to prevent the general nuclear war to which Washington’s mad and reckless strategy is leading the world.
"At the same time, the US has long sought to separate the conflict in Ukraine from discussions of strategic stability and arms control. This would allow it to simultaneously wage war against Russia and obtain guarantees of its own security from Moscow. Understandably, this approach has not been successful. The US has realized this, but it wants to present itself to the international community as a promoter of global security – while framing Russia as an arsonist. It’s a simple trick, but exposing it in the majority countries of the world – I would like to emphasize these words – requires our attention and a concerted effort. The dialogue of trust with our partners must be continued and deepened.
"If we are talking about Moscow’s next steps, they are less predictable than the previously announced correction of the nuclear doctrine. They will depend, among other things, on the enemy’s reaction to the president’s remarks yesterday. But it is clear that we will have to move from verbal warnings and demonstrations to practical measures. No one is going to say publicly what kind of action it will entail, and when and where it could happen."
In the European Union, the statements of the Russian leader Vladimir Putin, who proposed changes to the country's nuclear doctrine, allowing a nuclear strike through a massive air attack, are considered "reckless and irresponsible". The Guardian wrote about this 27 September 2024 with reference to AFP. EU foreign policy spokesman Peter Stano said that Putin "is not the first to gamble with his nuclear arsenal" and his threats are "strongly rejected" there. Speaking at the UN General Assembly in New York, Stano added that the Russian leader's latest statements are "just a continuation" of his "very irresponsible and unacceptable behavior." The changes to the nuclear doctrine that he is proposing show that Putin's position is becoming even more "reckless", the EU spokesman believes.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken criticized the proposed amendment on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. "It's totally irresponsible, and I think many in the world have spoken clearly about that when he's been rattling the nuclear saber, including China in the past," Blinken said in an interview with MSNBC.
Kremlin leader Dmytro Peskov's press secretary previously stated that Putin's words "not only can, but must be considered a signal of the West," the propaganda TASS quoted him as saying.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on 28 September 2024 told the United Nations that it was senseless to ignore alternatives to Ukraine's peace proposals, warning the West of the danger of trying to "fight to victory with a nuclear power." Addressing the U.N. General Assembly, Lavrov took aim at backers of Ukraine who support Kyiv's peace proposal. "I'm not going to talk here about the senselessness and the danger of the very idea of trying to fight to victory with a nuclear power, which is what Russia is," Lavrov said. "Equally senseless, the Western backers of Kyiv swearing that there is no alternative to negotiations based on the infamous peace formula." Invoking Western allies' plans in the 1940s to "destroy" the Soviet Union, he accused the West of trying to deal a "strategic defeat" to Russia in Ukraine. "The current Anglo-Saxon strategists are not hiding their ideas. For now they do, it's true, hope to defeat Russia using the illegitimate neo-Nazi Kyiv regime, but they're already preparing Europe for it to also throw itself into this suicidal escapade," Lavrov said.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has denounced Western schemes to destroy Russia in his speech to the United Nations. "A strategic defeat has been declared as the goal for Russia, similar to what London and Washington planned in May 1945, when they developed 'Operation Unthinkable' aimed at destroying the USSR, even before the end of World War II," Lavrov told a meeting of the UN General Assembly. "Back then, it was kept in strict secrecy, but today's Anglo-Saxon strategists do not hide their intentions, although they still hope to defeat Russia through the illegitimate neo-Nazi regime in Kiev," he added. "They are also preparing Europe to jump into this suicidal adventure. I won't go into the senselessness and danger of the idea of fighting to the finish against a nuclear power like Russia," Lavrov said.
A decision by the West to allow Ukraine to launch long-range strikes deep into Russia with foreign-made weapons could force Moscow to resort to the nuclear option, a Russian lawmaker said 28 Septembe 2024. In an interview with RIA Novosti, Andrey Kartapolov, who heads the parliamentary defense committee, commented on Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent proposal to update the country’s nuclear doctrine.
According to Kartapolov, if the West gives the green light for the use of long-range assets against internationally recognized Russian territory, all options could be on the table when it comes to a possible response. “This [the approval] may become the cause, but the decision will be made by the Supreme Commander,” he said. Still, there could be other factors at play when the decision on whether to use nuclear weapons is made, and for this reason it is impossible to say whether they would actually be used, Kartapolov said. He also suggested that this ambiguity surrounding Putin’s announcement caused some panic in the West.
“Our former Western partners became nervous, because this is a serious argument,” the MP said. Ukraine has long implored the West to lift restrictions on the use of foreign-supplied long-range weapons against Russia, but so far to little avail. In May, the US allowed Kiev to use American-made weapons to hit targets in Russia but only within a very limited range, a decision made in response to Moscow’s advance in Ukraine’s Kharkov Region.
It is not the first time that Russian President Vladimir Putin has frightened the world with nuclear threats. And he may or may not actually use nuclear weapons, says Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in an interview with Fox News 29 September 2024. “Nobody knows what's in his head really. He could use nuclear in any country in any time. Or not. I'm not sure that he will do it. I'm not sure... I'm sharing with you what I think, but I'm not Putin, God bless,” the president said.
Zelenskyy emphasized that he could not know exactly what Putin's intentions were. “Because he is not always adequate, because any adequate people can't just, you know, come to Ukraine and did what he did. He loves his life I think, way of life. And the way he's managing lives of others... That's why I think he has to be afraid to use nuclear weapon,” the head of state added.
NATO is not worried about Russia’s recently announced updates to its nuclear doctrine, the outgoing secretary general of the US-led military bloc, Jens Stoltenberg, said 30 September 2024. NATO has not detected any changes in Russia’s nuclear posture “that requires any changes from our side,” Stoltenberg told Reuters on Monday, in his last interview from the NATO headquarters in Brussels. He was replaced by former Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte.
”What we have seen is a pattern of reckless Russian nuclear rhetoric and messaging, and this fits into that pattern,” the Norwegian politician said. “Every time we have stepped up our support with new types of weapons – battle tanks, long-range fires or F-16s – the Russians have tried to prevent us.” Because the West has not been deterred by Russian messaging so far, Stoltenberg argued, the nuclear doctrine update “should not prevent NATO allies from supporting Ukraine.”
Stoltenberg acknowledged that there was “no silver bullet” that could change the battlefield dynamics. NATO can’t change Putin’s mind about Ukraine, he said, but “I think we can change his calculus” by making the cost of continuing the fight too high. ”In a war, there are no risk-free options,” Stoltenberg said, when asked whether continued military aid to Kiev risked a direct confrontation with Russia. From NATO’s standpoint, he argued, a Russian victory in Ukraine would indicate to other countries that using military force and threatening the bloc is acceptable. “Then [Putin] gets what he wants and that will make us all more vulnerable,” he added.
President Vladimir Putin made a chilling declaration when he proposed changes to Russia’s nuclear war policies. One of the most concerning was the possibility of mobilising the country’s nuclear arsenal if another nuclear power supports a non-nuclear state’s attack on Russia. The comments marked a clear escalation in Moscow’s rhetoric, but some experts say there is a world of difference between Putin’s declarations and the hidden rules of nuclear doctrine.
The significance of Putin’s September 25 statement is not easy to decipher. Ever since the start of the war in Ukraine, the Russian leader has repeatedly threatened to bring nuclear weapons into the conflict. So much so that the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists – a journal on nuclear security and monitor of the Doomsday Clock – recently published yet another updated timeline of the many times Russia has escalated its nuclear talk. The first such threat can be traced to February 24, 2022 – the same day Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
This time, however, the world seemed to pay more attention. In Britain, the BBC headlined with “Putin proposes new rules for using nuclear weapons” and US public broadcaster PBS declared that “Putin lowers nuclear response threshold”. These reactions stemmed from the fact that Russia revised its nuclear doctrine to add three new points in conjunction with Putin’s speech, according to Ulrich Kuhn, head of the arms control and emerging technologies programme at the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg.
In his declaration at Russia’s Security Council, Putin said that Moscow now reserves the right to use nuclear weapons if an ally – i.e., Belarus – comes under attack. For the first time, Putin also specified what types of attacks might trigger a Russian nuclear response, saying the scope will be widened to cover any attack that poses an “existential threat” to Russia. This means that large-scale drone attacks may join long-range ballistic missile attacks in being considered triggers. Finally, Putin announced that any nuclear power (such as the UK, France or the United States) that is seen as supporting a non-nuclear power (such as Ukraine) in conventional attacks inside Russia will be held just as responsible as the attacker, and potentially trigger a nuclear response.
This means that the supporting country could become a target in itself, said Sarah Tzinieris, a specialist in international security and nuclear non-proliferation at King's College in London. “And not only would it be targeted, but it would also be potentially targeted with nuclear weapons," she said. This shift could quickly turn the war in Ukraine into a global conflict. “This doesn't necessarily change anything strategically,” Tzinieris said. “This is very much about rhetoric."
David Blagden, a senior lecturer in international security at Britain’s University of Exeter, agreed, noting that despite the tough language, Putin is probably not any closer to pressing the nuclear button than he was before. “To an extent, all declaratory doctrine is just cheap talk … and in this instance, Russia making such a declaration neither increases Russian capabilities nor lessens NATO’s capability to deter,” he said. “It remains just as true that – if Moscow responded to a NATO-backed conventional strike on Russia by escalating to nuclear use – NATO could do the same to Russia.”
A day after Putin made his declaration, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Russia was still in the process of adjusting official documents to take Putin’s comments into account. The Kremlin also announced that it reserved the right not to publish the revised nuclear doctrine. Kuhn said that this makes it even more difficult to assess how much of a threat Putin’s declaration actually constitutes. "Basically the question here is: Does Russia have red lines? Where are those red lines? And if those red lines are being crossed, would that mean that it would almost automatically trigger nuclear use? And the answer to all three questions is: We don't know."
Kuhn explained that the nuclear doctrine, which was established in 2014 and updated in 2020, contains two parts: One that is “declarative” and often made public and a second, top-secret part, consisting of some 100 pages that contains the specifics of when Russia can bring out its nuclear arsenal. “So I wouldn't [be on the] lookout for the first part of that document, the declarative public part of it, in terms of gauging whether that tells us something about whether Russia is using nuclear weapons or not [because] it will probably not tell us much," he said.
Kuhn said "It's an indirect public negotiation process with Kyiv and the West, and it's about making sure that the West does not give Ukraine the right to use these long-range weapons against Russian targets.” The fact that Putin made the declaration just as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was due to meet US President Joe Biden in Washington was no coincidence. Especially since an important point on Zelensky’s agenda was to convince Biden that the US should give Ukraine permission to use its long-range missiles in strikes on Russia.
“I suspect that Biden will be cautious," Tzinieris said, noting that the current geopolitical context – the soaring tensions in the Middle East and China’s increasingly aggressive behaviour towards Taiwan – now needs to be added to the equation if the US wants to avoid further disrupting a world in turmoil. In other words, the content and timing of Putin’s declaration effectively threw quite a few spanners in the works for Zelensky during his US appeal trip.
But the declaration has also served a very domestic purpose, Tzinieris said. By implying that Moscow may now respond to conventional Ukrainian attacks with nuclear weapons, Putin effectively rewrapped one of his favourite messages to the Russian people: that Russia is not fighting a war against Ukraine, but against the West for which Kyiv is serving as a mere vehicle in its bid to destroy Russia. Kuhn said that if Russia would actually decide to bring out its nuclear weapons, it “would lose a significant portion of global support that the regime in Moscow still enjoys in significant countries like China, but also countries that are sitting a bit on the fence, like India and others, and particularly countries in the Global South."
The reason for this, he said, is the global “nuclear taboo” and the fact that nuclear arms haven’t been used for the past 80 years. On Friday, two days after Putin's declaration, Russia allies China and Brazil and a host of other countries released a joint statement saying they opposed the "use or threat" of nuclear weapons over Ukraine. Finally, by using such weapons on Ukraine, Russia would end up nuking its own troops, Kuhn said bluntly.
Blagden said the declaration was a way for Putin to make the Russian nuclear threat more credible, both domestically and externally. This was also underscored by Kremlin spokesman Peskov, who said that it "must be considered a specific signal" by hostile countries. Kuhn simply described it as a "classic deterrence strategy”.
“You warn the other guy that if he doesn’t change course, there will be consequences. Thus, the burden is on the other side and the warning implies that, ‘This is not in my hands anymore – this is fully in your hands; you’re responsible now…’” The real problem, the experts said, is that if the West ignores Putin’s threat, he will appear weak. And if there is one thing authoritarian leaders dislike, it is appearing weak.
Russia is not building up its arsenal of strategic offensive weapons, at least as long as the New START (New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) remains in effect, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on 28 September 2024. "We are not building up our arsenal. This is once again confirmed by our official representatives. The strategic offensive arms treaty between Russia and the United States is in effect until 2026, where the corresponding levels are fixed. We are guided by them, at least while this treaty is in effect. We suspended our participation in it, but said that we will comply with the levels and exchange certain types of information with the Americans," Lavrov said at a press conference after his address to the 79th session of the UN General Assembly.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov stated that Russia's return to compliance with New START would only be possible if the U.S. abandoned its hostile stance towards Moscow. Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov emphasized that dialogue on strategic arms control with the US was impossible as long as Washington maintained its anti-Russian policies.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
