Kremlin to revise nuclear doctrine amid escalating tensions over Ukraine
Since the beginning of the invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin has repeatedly threatened the use of nuclear weapons. However, these threats have not deterred the West from providing aid to Ukraine, nor have they stopped Ukraine itself from launching an offensive in the Kursk region. Now, Russia intends to change its nuclear doctrine, which means the principles governing the use of nuclear weapons.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov, quoted on Sunday by Russian state media, announced that the Kremlin will change its nuclear doctrine in response to the alleged "intensification of the course by Western opponents" regarding Ukraine.
Reuters reports that the current doctrine, decreed in 2020 by Vladimir Putin, envisages the use of nuclear weapons in response to a nuclear or conventional attack if it threatens the existence of the Russian state.
However, in June, Putin suggested that the doctrine could be changed, and nationalist commentators voiced the opinion that the criteria for using nuclear weapons should be lowered to "sober up" Russia's Western enemies, according to Reuters. Ryabkov's statement is the clearest signal yet that changes will be introduced.
Another threat from Putin?
The deputy head of Russian diplomacy claims that the work is already at an advanced stage and that amendments are clearly in the pipeline.
Since launching the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Putin has repeatedly threatened the West with the use of nuclear weapons. He also announced the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus.
These threats - notes Reuters - have not deterred the United States or their allies from increasing military aid to Ukraine to levels that would have been unimaginable before the outbreak of this war, including providing tanks, long-range missiles, and F-16 fighters.
Where is the "red line"?
They also have not deterred - as "The Wall Street Journal" notes - Ukraine from attacking Russia. The "WSJ" highlights that for decades, the theory of nuclear escalation suggested that countries possessing atomic weapons are largely immune to attacks because the aggressor risks triggering Armageddon.
Meanwhile, although Ukraine occupies a part of Russian territory, neither side seems to consider the Kursk region to be strategically important, so Ukraine's attack - however embarrassing for the Kremlin - does not show signs of crossing a Russian red line.
Nikolai Sokov, a former Soviet and Russian arms control negotiator, explained in an interview with the "WSJ" that nobody really knows the Russian red line—they never specified it. We might find out later that we crossed the red line two months ago, added Sokov, who currently informs Western military leaders about Russian strategic thinking.
According to Sokov, the Kremlin and President Vladimir Putin seem to consider threats to their regime as sovereign threats to Russia. Seen from this perspective, significant Ukrainian gains or Russian losses could provoke nuclear escalation - although it would likely begin with more frequent use of conventional weapons rather than a nuclear attack.
Ukraine breaks the taboo
The "WSJ" describes Ukraine's attack on the Kursk region as a demonstration that taboos can be broken without tragic consequences. Part of this goal is to convince the White House that Ukraine should be allowed to use more lethal and precise U.S. weapons to attack Russia. However, many Western officials remain cautious, particularly in Washington and Berlin, because Putin is unpredictable.
Nuclear strategies and defining the opponent's red lines remain a high-stakes game - notes the "WSJ".
Christopher Chivvis, an expert at the American think tank RAND Corporation, who has assessed nuclear risks, describes it as like walking in the dark towards a cliff. We know it’s out there somewhere, but we don't know exactly where, he added.
