Key Highlights:
- On Thursday, 9 May Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the West of courting a global conflict
- When the United States employed nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, approximately 110,000 to 210,000 lives were lost
- Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, over 16,500 sanctions have been imposed on Russia by the US, UK, EU, and other nations.
Recently, Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the West of courting a global conflict and asserted that no entity should dare to threaten the world’s most significant nuclear power, as Russia commemorated the Soviet Union’s triumph over Nazi Germany in World War II. As Russian forces continue their advance against Ukraine’s Western-supported troops, Putin criticized the ‘arrogant’ elites of the West, alleging they have overlooked the pivotal role played by the Soviet Union in vanquishing Nazi Germany and have exacerbated conflicts worldwide.
You can also read: Visit Arabian Peninsula? Schengen-Like Visa Waits for You!
While Ukraine and Western powers accuse Putin of pursuing an imperialistic land grab, vowing to resist Russia’s expansionist ambitions, Russia contends that the territories it currently controls in Ukraine, including Crimea and portions of 4 eastern regions, rightfully belong to Russia, having been part of the Russian empire.
Russian officials caution that the situation in Ukraine is entering an increasingly perilous phase. Recent developments have intensified the crisis: US President Joe Biden approved $61 billion in aid to Ukraine, Britain affirmed Ukraine’s right to retaliate against Russia with British weaponry, and French President Emmanuel Macron has not ruled out the possibility of deploying French troops to combat Russian forces.
In response, Russia announced its intention to conduct drills involving the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons as part of a military exercise.
Situations for Ukraine if Putin Pushes the Nuclear Button
Tactical nuclear weapons possess a smaller payload and enhanced precision, rendering them suitable for deployment on the battlefield. When the United States employed nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, approximately 110,000 to 210,000 lives were lost.
However, conducting a nuclear demonstration would not tip the scales in any direction. Western governments likely already possess ample knowledge regarding the capabilities of Russia’s advanced nuclear arsenal.
The maximum destructive power of first-strike warheads reached its zenith, surpassing 15,000 megatons in the early 1980s. At this apex, these weapons could obliterate more than 40% of urban areas globally. Since then, the potency of first strikes has been steadily diminishing over the decades, applicable to both the United States and Russia.
Nevertheless, it remains formidable, exceeding 2,500 megatons, with the capacity to directly devastate nearly 7% of urban regions worldwide. Such a display would not sway Ukraine, which perceives the conflict as existential. Instead, it could bolster Kyiv’s determination and garner increased support from the West, as evidenced by Russia’s recent aerial bombing campaigns.
One unintended consequence could be the strain on Russia’s relationship with China. China has endeavored to maintain a delicate balance, nurturing a strong personal bond between President Xi Jinping and Putin while avoiding outright antagonism from the West.
Employing tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield would unlikely impede the Ukrainian counteroffensive. Even if such weapons made land advances more challenging, Ukraine would likely pivot towards aerial attacks and increasing air defense, strategies proven effective in recent engagements. Additionally, nuclear weapons are less efficient in disrupting Ukrainian energy infrastructure compared to conventional bombing due to their higher yield and lower accuracy.
Breaking the Nuclear Taboo: A Risky Move for Putin, Warns Zagorodnyuk
Former Ukrainian defense minister, Andriy Zagorodnyuk, highlighted that NATO possesses multiple avenues of response should Putin opt for a ‘dire’ course of action. He further cautioned that any consideration of ‘breaking the nuclear taboo’ could potentially trigger reactions from China and India, dealing another significant setback to the Kremlin.
“It might not even need a land operation, the Western coalition could credibly tell the Kremlin that it would hit Russian capabilities with direct missile strikes and airstrikes, destroying its military facilities and disabling its Black Sea fleet. It could threaten to cut all its communications with electronic warfare and arrange a cyber-blackout against the entire Russian military.”
- Andriy Zagorodnyuk, Former Defence Minister, Ukrainian
It’s noteworthy to mention, that since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, over 16,500 sanctions have been imposed on Russia by the US, UK, EU, and other nations. Approximately $350 billion (£276 billion) in foreign currency reserves, roughly half of its total reserves, have been frozen, along with about 70% of the assets of Russian banks. Additionally, the US and UK have implemented bans on Russian oil and natural gas.
In 2022, the first year of the conflict, Russia’s economy experienced a 2.1% contraction. Assessing the overall impact on Russia’s economy is challenging, with estimates placing the cost of sanctions between 0.2% and 2% of GDP annually.
Why Putin’s Avoidance Strategy Could Backfire?
Utilizing nuclear weapons would heighten the risk of direct involvement by the United States and NATO in the conflict, something Putin has actively sought to avoid since the war’s inception.
This could lead to calls within NATO to extend the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Europe beyond the limited measures outlined in the Biden administration’s Nuclear Posture Review (NPR). Given the potential exacerbation of the US-Russian non-strategic capabilities disparity by deployments in Belarus and the looming nuclear expansion by China, a reassessment through a new NPR might be necessary.
Regardless of one’s assessment of the likelihood of Russia’s nuclear use, it’s crucial to bolster deterrence by clearly conveying to the Russians that any such action would incur significant consequences. These consequences could include a rapid and decisive military response, intensified economic sanctions, and further diplomatic isolation of Russia, should they violate the nuclear taboo.
Above all, Moscow must grasp that the United States and its allies remain resolute in their support for arming and training Ukrainian armed forces in their quest to uphold their nation’s independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.
In the face of escalating tensions and the looming specter of nuclear brinkmanship, it’s imperative to recognize the perilous path ahead. As Russian President Vladimir Putin rattles sabers and the West braces for potential fallout, the stakes have never been higher. The mere suggestion of utilizing nuclear weapons threatens to unravel the delicate fabric of global stability, inviting catastrophic consequences that no nation can afford to ignore.
