Are Putin’s ‘Irresponsible’ Nuclear Threats Credible?

Vladimir Putin’s ambiguous signaling about his atomic intentions so far in the Ukraine war took a more formal turn when he announced a loosening of Russia’s nuclear doctrine.

Putin did not mention Ukraine by name, but his message a strike from a non-nuclear state backed by a nuclear-armed one may be deemed a “joint attack” was seen as a threat to use nuclear weapons and stoked the debate that the Kremlin likely sought.

New NATO chief Mark Rutte called the rhetoric Putin expressed at Russia’s Security Council on September 25 “reckless and irresponsible” while playing down any threat that the Doomsday Clock was any closer to midnight.

But the sly hints of Putin’s warning of nuclear weapon use, which are amplified by propagandists, could now be made tangible by a change in the foundation document stipulating the conditions over how Moscow uses its arsenal.

“It’s a reflection of actually how war is changing and the importance of the drone, which in future, could carry a nuclear warhead,” Mark Galeotti, senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), told Newsweek.

“The Russians are beginning to get their heads round a possible post-ceasefire situation in the war in which they would basically try and freeze the frontline in the long term,” he said.

Nuclear Doctrine

Russia’s nuclear doctrine says that atomic weapons could be used in the case of first strikes or attacks that represent an existential threat to Russia, although such a threat is not clearly defined.

Putin said last week that Russia would consider using nuclear weapons if it detected the start of a massive launch of missiles, aircraft and drones into its territory, which was a “critical threat” to its sovereignty.

“This notion that a non-nuclear state that is being supported and backed by a nuclear state could trigger a nuclear response is a pretty transparent way of saying, ‘if Ukraine launches some kind of major offensive in those circumstances, we reserve unto ourselves the right to be able to go nuclear in response,'” said Galeotti.

Ironically, Putin’s latest atomic intimidation comes on the heels of a failed test of Russia’s strategic RS-Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), which can strike targets thousands of miles away.

But he had boasted in June about how Russia had “many more” tactical nuclear weapons than Europe, which are smaller warheads that could be used on the battlefield.

Since the war started in February 2022, the prospect of using tactical nuclear weapons in the war has been dismissed as not offering any battlefield advantage. Satellite technology would also give the West warning of any imminent nuclear move.

“Moving nuclear warheads to mate with missiles is a logistical problem and would provide western intelligence agencies with firm evidence that Putin is serious about his threat to use nuclear weapons,” Dan Caldwell, a professor of Political Science Emeritus at Pepperdine University, told Newsweek.

“Of course, such a move could also be a bluff on Putin’s part, but such a bluff would be dangerous because it would move the world closer to the use of nuclear weapons.”

Peter Rutland, a professor of Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies at Wesleyan University, said Putin’s comments do not represent a substantial change in Russia’s doctrinal position.

“Russia claims that the war is going well for them, with incremental territorial gains in Donbas and a harsh winter looming in Ukraine given the damaged energy infrastructure,” Rutland told Newsweek.

Meanwhile, David Silbey, a military expert and history professor at Cornell University, told Newsweek that Putin wants to try to get them to go slow with releasing restrictions on the Ukrainian use of deep strike weapons.”

“Putin doesn’t want to destroy Ukraine; he wants to conquer it,” he said, “Russia is winning, currently, and there’s no need for him to escalate drastically given that.”

In an article for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Mariana Budjeryn, a senior research associate with the Project on Managing the Atom (MTA), said that Russia might use nuclear weapons not when it’s losing—as Ukraine’s allies might fear—but when it has the upper hand.

She posited a scenario comparable to the World War II bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in which Russia had broken through Ukraine’s defensive lines and launched a nuclear-armed missile on a Ukrainian city, demanding Kyiv’s surrender.

“Continued resistance from Kyiv would be suddenly rendered foolhardy, if not suicidal,” she wrote in the article published Wednesday.

Washington’s Support

Putin’s approach to the war will likely be shaped by the mood music coming from Washington following the United States presidential election. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was there last week lobbying for more weapons and an end to restrictions on using them for long-range strikes in Russia.

He also met former President Donald Trump, who has said that the U.S. needs to get out of the war and has criticized Zelensky for failing to reach a ceasefire with Russia.

“One of the possibilities is that there is some kind of a ceasefire, “said Galeotti, “and so the Russians are essentially trying to put themselves in a situation in which that ceasefire is as advantageous to them as possible.”

Galeotti, who hosts the In Moscow’s Shadows podcast, said that in a scenario in which there is a ceasefire during which Ukraine looks like it is to break by massing forces to retake territory, Russia could signal its intent by preparing tactical nuclear weapons and launch systems. While that could still just be signaling by Moscow, “the threat potential of that will be turbocharged by what Putin has already said.”

“He is a rational actor,” Galeotti said, “but he knows full well that his appetite for risk is probably a little greater than that of the West.”