> ### West takes Putin’s nuclear threat seriously
> #### Russian president’s ‘escalate-to-de-escalate’ strategy comes after military setbacks and rising pressure from sanctions
> Western capitals have long been anxious about Moscow’s military doctrine, which allows it to use nuclear weapons to end a conflict as part of its “escalate to de-escalate” strategy. So when on Sunday Russian president Vladimir Putin put strategic nuclear forces on high alert, they took it seriously.
> Putin’s decision to prepare Russia’s nuclear weapons for increased launch readiness sparked immediate condemnation from the US and Nato that it had made the world “much more dangerous”.*
> “This is not only an unnecessary step for him [Putin] to take but an escalatory one,” said a senior US defence official. “Unnecessary because Russia has never been under threat by the west or by Nato and certainly wasn’t under any threat by Ukraine. And escalatory because it is clearly potentially putting at play forces that, if there’s a miscalculation, could make things much, much more dangerous.”
> Announced amid an invasion of Ukraine that has struggled to achieve Moscow’s primary objectives and a day after the US, EU and other western allies unveiled potentially crippling economic sanctions, it signalled the Kremlin felt that it had no option but to intensify its threats, analysts said.
> “There’s a real possibility Putin could turn to nuclear weapons if he continues to experience military setbacks and sees the diplomatic and political situation crumbling,” said Caitlin Talmadge, a nuclear policy expert at Georgetown University.
> “It’s not just a response to how his conventional campaign [in Ukraine] is going but to these other developments, with sanctions and Germany sending weapons to Ukraine,” she added. “The entire picture to him looks pretty bleak. If he wanted to use tactical nuclear weapons to achieve [his aims] in Ukraine, he could do that.”
> Putin’s order, which applies to Russia’s traditional nuclear deterrent and its new hypersonic missiles, does not mean he is ordering preparations for a nuclear strike.
> But according to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, published in 2020, the Kremlin “reserves the right to use nuclear weapons”, including “for the prevention of an escalation of military actions and their termination on conditions that are acceptable for the Russian Federation and/or its allies”.
> Western countries interpreted that as a lowering of the bar for the use of nuclear weapons: until 2020, Moscow’s stated policy was to use nuclear weapons when “the very existence of the state is threatened”.
Matthew Kroenig, a nuclear expert at the Atlantic Council, said Putin’s response on Sunday was textbook Russian strategy.
> “This really is Russia’s military strategy to backstop conventional aggression with nuclear threats, or what is known as the ‘escalate to de-escalate strategy’. The message to the west, Nato and US is, ‘don’t get involved or we can escalate things to the highest level’,” Kroenig said, adding that he thought Putin was bluffing.
Putin’s decision on Sunday comes after he warned, at the outset of his invasion of Ukraine last Thursday, that any attempt by other countries to “meddle” would be met with consequences, a phrase interpreted to mean possible nuclear attacks.
> Since Thursday’s invasion began, Russia has failed to capture Kyiv or Kharkiv, Ukraine’s two biggest cities, and suffered heavy losses against a far stronger Ukrainian defence than even its allies expected.
In addition, western countries have agreed on a sanctions package that cuts off some Russian banks from the global Swift financial messaging network and attempts to prevent Russia’s central bank from using its $630bn worth of international reserves, the toughest economic restrictions imposed on Moscow.
> …
**Paywall, please post text.**
As we should, he is probably unhinged enough to order the button to be pressed.
The question for me is, is everyone in that chain of command also unhinged enough to follow the order? And is everyone who replaces them after the execution also unhinged enough?
When Russia is pushed out of Ukraine, will he go all “If I can’t have it, no one can”?
Never make a threat you are not willing to act on and never fail to act on a threat made to you.
Having said that, you should also try to avoid ending up as a small pile of radioactive ashes.
The invasion so far has been a bit of a disaster, and Putin’s presidency will not survive a failure of this magnitude. He definately seems like the kind of maniac who’ll take down everything if he personally loses.
How should the West respond to this outrageous and despicable threat?
It’s been suggested that our stance should be to talk it down. To say our nuclear readiness hasn’t changed, that we aren’t for-seeing it needing to, that we are a long way from that escalation.
Make it know we are not going to get into a nuclear standoff with Russia. That that isn’t on the cards.
5 comments
While thing is too long to post. Top of article below.
Full article archived: https://archive.is/pSFTH
> ### West takes Putin’s nuclear threat seriously
> #### Russian president’s ‘escalate-to-de-escalate’ strategy comes after military setbacks and rising pressure from sanctions
> Western capitals have long been anxious about Moscow’s military doctrine, which allows it to use nuclear weapons to end a conflict as part of its “escalate to de-escalate” strategy. So when on Sunday Russian president Vladimir Putin put strategic nuclear forces on high alert, they took it seriously.
> Putin’s decision to prepare Russia’s nuclear weapons for increased launch readiness sparked immediate condemnation from the US and Nato that it had made the world “much more dangerous”.*
> “This is not only an unnecessary step for him [Putin] to take but an escalatory one,” said a senior US defence official. “Unnecessary because Russia has never been under threat by the west or by Nato and certainly wasn’t under any threat by Ukraine. And escalatory because it is clearly potentially putting at play forces that, if there’s a miscalculation, could make things much, much more dangerous.”
> Announced amid an invasion of Ukraine that has struggled to achieve Moscow’s primary objectives and a day after the US, EU and other western allies unveiled potentially crippling economic sanctions, it signalled the Kremlin felt that it had no option but to intensify its threats, analysts said.
> “There’s a real possibility Putin could turn to nuclear weapons if he continues to experience military setbacks and sees the diplomatic and political situation crumbling,” said Caitlin Talmadge, a nuclear policy expert at Georgetown University.
> “It’s not just a response to how his conventional campaign [in Ukraine] is going but to these other developments, with sanctions and Germany sending weapons to Ukraine,” she added. “The entire picture to him looks pretty bleak. If he wanted to use tactical nuclear weapons to achieve [his aims] in Ukraine, he could do that.”
> Putin’s order, which applies to Russia’s traditional nuclear deterrent and its new hypersonic missiles, does not mean he is ordering preparations for a nuclear strike.
> But according to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, published in 2020, the Kremlin “reserves the right to use nuclear weapons”, including “for the prevention of an escalation of military actions and their termination on conditions that are acceptable for the Russian Federation and/or its allies”.
> Western countries interpreted that as a lowering of the bar for the use of nuclear weapons: until 2020, Moscow’s stated policy was to use nuclear weapons when “the very existence of the state is threatened”.
Matthew Kroenig, a nuclear expert at the Atlantic Council, said Putin’s response on Sunday was textbook Russian strategy.
> “This really is Russia’s military strategy to backstop conventional aggression with nuclear threats, or what is known as the ‘escalate to de-escalate strategy’. The message to the west, Nato and US is, ‘don’t get involved or we can escalate things to the highest level’,” Kroenig said, adding that he thought Putin was bluffing.
Putin’s decision on Sunday comes after he warned, at the outset of his invasion of Ukraine last Thursday, that any attempt by other countries to “meddle” would be met with consequences, a phrase interpreted to mean possible nuclear attacks.
> Since Thursday’s invasion began, Russia has failed to capture Kyiv or Kharkiv, Ukraine’s two biggest cities, and suffered heavy losses against a far stronger Ukrainian defence than even its allies expected.
In addition, western countries have agreed on a sanctions package that cuts off some Russian banks from the global Swift financial messaging network and attempts to prevent Russia’s central bank from using its $630bn worth of international reserves, the toughest economic restrictions imposed on Moscow.
> …
**Paywall, please post text.**
As we should, he is probably unhinged enough to order the button to be pressed.
The question for me is, is everyone in that chain of command also unhinged enough to follow the order? And is everyone who replaces them after the execution also unhinged enough?
When Russia is pushed out of Ukraine, will he go all “If I can’t have it, no one can”?
Never make a threat you are not willing to act on and never fail to act on a threat made to you.
Having said that, you should also try to avoid ending up as a small pile of radioactive ashes.
The invasion so far has been a bit of a disaster, and Putin’s presidency will not survive a failure of this magnitude. He definately seems like the kind of maniac who’ll take down everything if he personally loses.
How should the West respond to this outrageous and despicable threat?
It’s been suggested that our stance should be to talk it down. To say our nuclear readiness hasn’t changed, that we aren’t for-seeing it needing to, that we are a long way from that escalation.
Make it know we are not going to get into a nuclear standoff with Russia. That that isn’t on the cards.