Will Russia resort to using Nuclear weapons? An analysis of Putin's potential choices

Russia’s nuclear doctrine is a set of guidelines that the country follows regarding when and how it might use nuclear weapons. These rules help outline the circumstances under which Moscow would consider using its nuclear arsenal. The doctrine says Russia can use its large nuclear weapons stockpile if it faces any aggression that seriously threatens the country’s sovereignty or territorial integrity. 

On November 19, a new open-ended guideline—a rule or guideline without a fixed end date or clear limitations on its scope—was introduced, following an update approved by President Vladimir Putin just two days after the United States declared it would ease restrictions on Ukraine’s use of long-range weapons. The earlier version of the doctrine set much stricter conditions for nuclear retaliation, allowing it only if Russia’s survival was at risk. 

Also read | Biden approves anti-personnel land mines for Ukraine amid escalating conflict with Russia: Report

The revision, clearly referring to Ukraine and its Western allies, stated that an attack using conventional missiles, drones, or aircraft by a non-nuclear country, backed by a nuclear-armed nation, could justify a nuclear response. The update also extends Russia’s nuclear protection to Belarus, meaning Belarus will now be defended under Russia’s nuclear policies. 

For quite some time, hardliners in Moscow have been pushing President Putin to consider lowering the threshold for using nuclear weapons. Their argument is that Russia should respond more aggressively to the military and financial assistance Ukraine is receiving from the West. This support includes advanced weapons, such as Storm Shadow missiles from Britain and France, which Ukraine has used to strike important Russian targets, such as the Black Sea fleet’s headquarters in Crimea, an area Russia currently occupies. 

The situation seemed to escalate when President Joe Biden, after months of hesitation, finally approved the use of American ATACMS missiles by Ukraine. These missiles allow Ukraine to target areas deep inside Russian territory. In response, Putin warned that this decision would mean NATO is essentially ‘at war’ with Russia. 

Also read | Russia-Ukraine war: US embassy in Kyiv shuts down amid looming airstrike threat

After many months of warnings that were not backed up with real action, Russia’s new strategy could be seen as another empty threat by Western leaders. Over time, the West has pushed the limits set by Putin and found they could cross these ‘red lines’ without facing serious repercussions. This makes it seem Russia’s threats may not be as strong as they first appeared. 

On the first day of the war, Putin warned that any interference would bring consequences “like nothing you’ve ever seen before”. However, since then, the West has provided Ukraine with over $100 billion in aid and significantly boosted its military support. 

Despite this, the move marks a major change in Russia’s nuclear policy. It now leaves more room for interpretation when deciding what counts as a threat to the country’s ‘sovereignty or territorial integrity’. Putin did not see Ukraine’s attack on the Kursk region as a serious threat to Russia’s survival or his leadership. However, he seems to view the ATACMS missile strikes on Russian territory as a much bigger concern that could pose a significant risk to the country or his rule. 

Higher Risk of Russia Using N-Weapons? 

Russia has announced that it has moved some of its nuclear missiles to Belarus and strengthened its already large military forces in Kaliningrad, a small Russian region located between Poland and Lithuania in the Baltic area. In response, neighbouring Poland said it was ready to host NATO nuclear weapons. Putin also stated that Russia’s updated nuclear policy would now cover Belarus, its closest ally, under its nuclear protection. 

Putin has claimed that Russia’s nuclear weapons are more advanced than those of the US and stressed that ‘weapons are made to be used’. Putin has also warned that, if NATO troops are sent to Ukraine, it could lead to a nuclear war. But, so far, this situation has not arisen. 

In September, Russia’s nuclear forces faced a setback when an intercontinental ballistic missile, which Putin had once described as unstoppable, exploded in its silo during a test launch, creating a crater about 60 metres wide at the missile’s launch silo at the Plesetsk Cosmodrome in northern Russia. The RS-28 Sarmat, called Satan II in the West, was one of the ‘super-weapons’ Putin had introduced in 2018. 

Also read | Russia-Ukraine war | Amid shifting political winds Zelensky warns Ukraine 'will lose' without US aid

Although President Biden had previously stated that Russia’s nuclear threats were serious, Putin’s repeated warnings without any follow-through have lessened the impact of his words. NATO has consistently stated that there is no evidence showing Russia is getting ready to use its nuclear weapons. Warnings of a nuclear war from Moscow officials, especially from Dmitry Medvedev—Russia’s former prime minister and president, now deputy head of the national security council—are mostly seen by the West as attempts to discourage NATO from supporting Ukraine, rather than actual serious threats. 

Still, Washington remains cautious about the risk of escalation. In August, John Kirby, the White House National Security Adviser, reportedly said they were always concerned about the possibility that the conflict in Ukraine could escalate and spread across Europe. 

In November, reports revealed that former British prime minister Liz Truss was deeply worried in October 2022 that Putin may launch a nuclear attack. In the final days of her time as prime minister, officials were even checking weather maps and preparing for potential radiation cases in the UK. One of the toughest challenges for Western governments is trying to figure out what Putin is thinking. 

In recent years, talk about nuclear weapons has become so common in Russia that it may make it easier, mentally, for them to consider actually using them. There are also worries about Putin’s mental state. Gleb Pavlovsky, a former Kremlin adviser who passed away last year, said after the Ukraine war began that Putin’s mindset had worsened during his time in power. Pavlovsky said Putin was now “reacting to the pictures in his own head”. 

Why Putin May Consider Using N-Weapons 

Faced with the possibility of a long, drawn-out war, Putin, who has full control over Russia’s large stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons, may decide that only a powerful strike using the most dangerous weapon he has could prevent Russia from facing defeat and disgrace. Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller nuclear bombs designed for use on battlefields to target specific military objectives, rather than destroying large areas, such as cities, or causing widespread devastation. 

In Putin’s view, a serious threat to his rule, rather than to Russia as a whole, could be enough for him to consider using nuclear weapons against Ukraine or the West. Putin will celebrate 25 years in power on New Year’s Eve, and his supporters have depicted him as the symbol of Russia, itself. According to media reports, Vyacheslav Volodin, speaker of the Russian parliament, went on record to say that, if Putin exists, Russia exists. No Putin, no Russia! 

From a Western perspective, it would not make much sense for Russia to use nuclear weapons. Tactical nuclear weapons, which have a shorter range and less power, would cause massive destruction but would not necessarily give Putin a quick victory. Using strategic nuclear weapons, which can completely destroy entire cities, would almost definitely trigger a huge response from the West and could even lead to a Third World War. 

Putin may not care about the lives of Ukrainian civilians, but would he really be willing to doom his own young children—whose existence was revealed this month—to spending years in a nuclear bunker deep in Siberia? For Putin, using nuclear weapons could be his way of challenging the West. His message would, possibly, be: “Because you keep supplying Kyiv with more advanced weapons to attack Russian forces, I have no other option.” 

Leaked military documents obtained by the Financial Times in February showed Russia had prepared plans to use tactical nuclear weapons early in a conflict with a major power. This is part of a strategy aimed at creating fear and pressure. The documents described possible situations where Russia would use nuclear strikes in response to an invasion. They also mentioned other goals, such as preventing other countries from using force, stopping military conflicts from getting worse, and making Russia’s navy stronger. 

The collection of 29 secret documents, created between 2008 and 2014, when Putin was either president or prime minister, is still believed to be relevant to Russia’s current military strategy. These files suggest a much lower threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons than Russian officials have publicly acknowledged. 

What Prevents the Use of Tactical N-Weapons? 

There are two main reasons: the first is China. President Xi has publicly declared and, possibly, privately warned Putin that nuclear weapons should never be used. China is a key strategic partner for Russia and their alliance has strengthened significantly since the start of the war in Ukraine. The Chinese leader has never criticized his Russian counterpart for the invasion of Ukraine. However, despite their growing partnership, China has not provided military assistance to Russia so far. 

He is also working to present himself as a peacemaker, aiming to negotiate a solution that could end the war through diplomacy. This effort not only seeks to resolve the conflict, but also helps him enhance his image and influence on the international stage. Putin understands that, if he decides to launch a nuclear attack—even a small one—it could seriously harm, or even completely ruin, his partnership with China. 

Interestingly, the secret documents mentioned earlier show that Moscow harbours a strong mistrust of China. They even outline possible scenarios where Russia may use nuclear weapons if China were to invade. Although the two countries have grown into strong allies since those plans were made, with China’s financial backing helping Russia cope with Western sanctions after the Ukraine war, Russia has still been strengthening its defences in the east. 

In a military simulation, Russia planned how it might respond to a potential attack by China. In this scenario, Russia was referred to as the ‘Northern Federation’, while China was called ‘the South’. The exercise imagined a situation where China launched an invasion and prepared to send a second wave of troops. To stop this, Russia considered the use of a small, tactical nuclear strike. 

It is important to note that this was purely a theoretical exercise and not an actual event. However, it highlights how nations, even allies, sometimes prepare for worst-case scenarios to safeguard their interests. The document states the commander-in-chief has ordered the use of nuclear weapons if the enemy sends in additional troops and ‘the South’ poses a serious threat of advancing further towards the main target. 

The second reason is how the US and NATO may react. Putin may convince himself that using nuclear weapons in Ukraine will not trigger a nuclear or military response from the West. This is because Ukraine is not a NATO member and is not protected under Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty, which guarantees mutual defence for its members. This means that, if any member of NATO is attacked, it is treated as an attack on the entire alliance. 

The US has warned that, if Putin uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine, it would lead to ‘catastrophic consequences’ for Russia. The exact nature of these consequences has not been clearly explained. However, it raises the question of whether it could result in a direct conflict between NATO and Russia. Before considering the use of nuclear weapons, Putin must carefully think about this potential risk. 

Has there been any change? 

Easing restrictions on the use of ATACMS is the latest step in a series of increasing military support from Western countries. The weapons supplied by the US-led coalition of 50 countries have significantly boosted Ukraine’s military strength and firepower. American F-16 fighter jets are already in action, and Ukraine has used advanced American missiles to target Putin’s forces, including Russian troops gathered near border areas. 

Donald Trump’s election in the US may have marked the end of the seemingly endless supply of weapons. He has promised to end the war within 24 hours of assuming office. Some believe he may pressure Zelensky into negotiations by threatening to stop all US aid. Trump has often criticized NATO, stating he would allow Russia to act freely against member-countries that fail to meet their spending commitments. 

Last year, Putin took a significant step that seemed to be preparation for a possible nuclear attack by sending the first set of tactical nuclear systems to Belarus, a neighbouring country allied with Russia. This marked the first time since the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991 that Moscow had stationed nuclear missiles outside its borders. 

Could Russia Deploy N-Weapons in Space? 

As attention moves away from the immediate threat of using nuclear weapons on the battlefield, there are rising concerns that Putin may already be thinking about placing a nuclear device in Earth’s orbit. Putin has a strong fascination with advanced weapons, which is clear from his open support for hypersonic missiles, as well as nuclear-powered cruise missiles and torpedoes that are said to have unlimited range. 

Putting nuclear devices into orbit—in clear violation of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty which Russia has signed—possibly to target America’s satellite systems, would showcase Russia’s increasing military aggression and turn space into a new area of conflict. This would push the US to create and deploy new defence systems in space, further escalating the arms race between the major powers and making it even more dangerous. 

Countries, such as Russia, China, India, North Korea and Iran, are investing heavily in space technology, particularly in weapons that can target satellites. This poses a serious risk to America’s global satellite communication network, which is essential for the US military’s navigation, precision attacks and overall command and control systems. 

What Are Russia’s Current N-Capabilities? 

Russia still has a powerful nuclear arsenal, even though it has signed several arms control treaties since the Cold War ended. The Federation of American Scientists says Russia’s N-weapons stockpile, the world’s largest, comprises 5,580 warheads. Some of these are tactical nuclear weapons meant for use on the battlefield, while others are built to wipe out entire cities. 

In 2023, Putin announced that Russia would withdraw from its last nuclear arms control agreement with the US, the New Start treaty, which was the last arms control agreement between Moscow and Washington. It was designed to limit the number of long-range nuclear missiles, warheads and launch systems that both countries could have, aiming to reduce the risk of a nuclear arms race. Earlier, President Trump had withdrawn from a treaty on intermediate-range weapons, claiming Russia had violated its terms. 

By stepping away from this agreement, Russia is no longer obligated to follow these restrictions. This decision could lead to an increase in nuclear weapons and heighten tensions between the two nations, raising concerns about global security and stability. The move marks a significant shift in efforts to control nuclear arms and maintain balance between the world’s two largest nuclear powers. 

Putin’s decision to suspend Russia’s participation in the treaty does not mean Russia cannot rejoin it before it expires in 2026. However, the Kremlin has made it clear that it will not discuss a new nuclear agreement as long as NATO continues to supply weapons to Ukraine. 

Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.