Of late Vladimir Putin has shifted Russia’s nuclear doctrine to a more directly and openly retaliatory posture in response to any attack by Ukraine or any NATO country using longer-range US missiles. It represents Russia’s sense of reactive ire and fulmination coupled with a resolve of sabre-rattling that is conspicuous by its verbalisation of adopting a nuclear path. This maelstrom if unleashed is enough to obliterate not only Ukraine but a large chunk of the European landmass, not to speak of incalculable disaster that might descend on millions of civilian populations including Russians.

Already the war has caused severe dislocation if seen through the lens of the refugee crisis and dire humanitarian situation, as access to basic public amenities and social protection have been severely disrupted. The American attitude, especially Joe Biden’s decision to clear the use of missiles on Russian territory, is an open provocation to Putin and his cohorts who take pride in the fantasy of Russia’s resurgence into a mighty “continent-spanning empire”. Already, Biden’s foreign policy has proved to be a flop show, with the US’ humiliating retreat from Afghanistan. Similarly, its relationship with Iran has plummeted to the nadir. China and North Korea also figure among other prominent revisionists who are threatening the post-Cold War liberal world order. Russia faces tremendous pressure at home as it grapples with the simmering wrath of an intensified economic crisis and dissident voices that mock the dream of winning the war. As Ukraine continues to receive sophisticated tranches of weapons from the West, it feels enabled to exert immense pressure on the Russian forces.

Advertisement

There is even talk that Ukraine might succeed in retaking some significant towns from Russian occupation. On the other side, the Russian army seems fatigued because it has been fighting a protracted battle against Ukraine not just for more than three years but because the confrontation began almost a decade ago when Russian-backed separatist groups had launched an offensive against Ukraine. Recent changes in nuclear gear by Putin are, therefore, a clear signal that Russia is losing its patience. That’s why its truculence is becoming conspicuously manifest. However, it is important to decipher the meaning of Russian threats because nuclear blackmailing can boomerang on Russia.

So, if we delve into these pertinent points, in the first instance, it becomes crystal clear that nuclear war is not a cakewalk to be won so easily, hence it is better not to dare stir the hornets’ nest. Second, it appears a little surprising to find such a sweeping change in the behaviour of Russia because prior to 2013-14 we witnessed a sort of mutual understanding towards arms control. In contrast, from 2014 onwards Russia’s relations with the US started to worsen. It was in this context that Russia and China’s capability to use nuclear weapons became an object of serious concern to the West. Thirdly, a concomitant question that crops up is whether a nuclear weapon is merely a technology issue. It will be clear if we follow up on the logic of the developments of both sides.

Now it is clear that the current nuclear behaviour of Russia amounts to an extraordinary and unprecedented posture. Putin’s ultimatum that any attack on its land could draw a nuclear response is alarming indeed because Russia’s nuclear arsenal is fairly awesome. Hence, once started, it is unlikely to restrict the exchange of such destructive tactics. Therefore, Putin too must be aware that nuclear war can by no means be a limited one, save and except it may logically mean application of low-yield nuclear warheads. In that case destruction can be confined to a limited area.

In that sense, the use of nukes amounts to a symbolic posture rather than stoking the fires of a substantial full-scale nuclear conflagration. Here the role of sophisticated technology becomes paramount because it necessitates precision technology and miniature nuclear weapons. But Putin’s attitude seems to go beyond a mere technological question. He is deliberately upping the ante, which is a strategy of domination through escalation of tension around game model to confuse and unnerve the adversary, the West and NATO. It is a psychological game to outwit the opponent rather than undertaking an outright strike because once that happens, even on a limited scale, it is likely to lead to escalation that will envelop both sides.

Putin must be aware that in such a scenario, a unilateral nuclear strike won’t be an ordinary gamble because both sides might end up with irreparable damage. Hence recourse to a nuclear strike cannot be a rationally chosen path of strategic acumen or political aspirations. However, there’s a hidden aspect also. It implies that a shrewd captain always strives to make a virtue out of necessity. So, even if the nuclear path is risk-prone, he might strategize to project the option in the dire need of national security. In that case, the temptation to exploit the nuclear option would prove to be fairly justifiable because then a script would be made that the small states bordering Russia are Western traps and part of a bigger conspiracy to emasculate Russia.

In those circumstances, the use of nuclear weapons to neutralise threats would appear a legitimate option as Putin plays a card of Russia’s victimhood. At present, Russia and the US possess approximately 65-66,000 nuclear weapons and thousands of tactical nuclear weapons. The critical factor lies in the probability that in case of a nuclear confrontation, China and Iran might join the Russian bandwagon. In that eventuality, the West, especially the US needs to be well-prepared although the difficulty lies in the fact that the Russian strategy of assertion through land grab and the Chinese strategy of penetrating another’s maritime zone cannot be so easily reversed. So, it will make the US more restless to push through the geopolitics of small states like Ukraine or Taiwan. But it is circuitous and naive in the sense that it will not bring about a desirable thaw, but might encourage Putin to put up an aggressive posture vis-a-vis the West by lowering Russia’s nuclear threshold.

(The writers are, respectively, Professor, Department of Political Science, SKB University, and Associate Prof (Retd.), Chandernagore Govt. College, Hooghly.)