top of page

RUSSIA'S FIRST STRIKE POLICY

Oct 20

6 min read

2

12

0


The Russian government's first-strike policy regarding nuclear weapons refers to its strategic doctrine, which allows for the preemptive use of nuclear weapons in certain circumstances, particularly when facing existential threats, that as certain Russian officials put it “threaten the existence of the state”. This doctrine is rooted in the concept of deterrence, wherein the primary objective is to dissuade adversaries from engaging in aggressive actions by signaling a willingness to employ nuclear capabilities if deemed necessary. However, this policy has become a grey area as Russia declared a “special military operation” in Ukraine and invaded on the 24th of February 2022. As the war has become more prolonged than Putin expected, the possibility of Ukraine threatening the territory of Russia became more realistic. With the Kharkiv counter-attack in the late summer and early fall of 2022, the conversation about nuclear weapons resurfaced. This counter-offensive solidified the understanding that the war was only getting started and that Russia would not have as easy a time as they had thought in trying to take control of Ukraine.


With the recent Kursk offense, this possibility came to a realization. As the Ukrainian military captured roughly 950 sq km of internationally recognized Russian territory, calls grew louder for Putin to employ nuclear weapons, or at least threaten to use them. Putin then threatened to use the nukes he had positioned in Belarus months beforehand. The nukes were not under Belarusian control but were under the control of the Russians operating in Belarus. Belarus leader, Alexander Lukashenko is a de facto dictator and Russian puppet. That's the only reason Putin can place nuclear weapons on foreign soil in the first place. The move to place WMDs on foreign soil for the first time since the collapse of the USSR is monumental and not lost on the minds of NATO and Ukrainian leaders. There have been many red lines, whether or not this one is real is sure to be tested. We hope Putin is pulling the usual bluff. The consequences are too high to be wrong.


To understand the following information, you will need to know about the Donbas. The Donbas is an area in Ukraine consisting of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. Oblasts act as states or provinces do in the United States or Canada with governors and elected officials. When most think of Ukraine they think of wheat fields, but the Donbas is quite different. The Donbas has a rich coal industry and considerably less farming than the rest of the country. Much of Ukraine's heavy industry is concentrated in the Donbas and exported by rail west, or through the Black Sea port in Mariupol. As you can see below the area in a green color is the Donbas.


Donbas in green

There's also the complicated factor of Russian nuclear use on its own territory. The way the nuclear doctrine is written in Russia makes it so they can deploy nuclear weapons if they believe that there is an imminent threat to destroy the Russian state. The way it is worded was to ensure that if there was an invasion, and Russia had already ceded much of its land, it could use the nukes in a last-ditch effort. There is a loophole though. On September 30, 2022, Russia signed a referendum that made the Donbas part of the Russian Federation. Even though this referendum was a sham and no one in the international community recognized it as legitimate it provided justification to employ the use of nuclear weapons as under Russian law the Donbas is part of the Russian Federation. This loophole, which is not recognized by any legitimate nation, is only a ploy Russia used so Putin could justify nuclear use to his own people. It's as simple as Putin needing probable cause. 


So, the next logical question is: How would Ukraine and the West respond if Putin decided to go nuclear? And while there is no one-fits-all answer for this, it could be one of 3 commonly agreed-upon options. Option 1, NATO decides to use conventional means to intervene in the war. This would entail sending NATO troops into Ukraine to conduct major operations by sea, air, and land. These operations would most likely include destroying what is left of the Black Sea fleet, having an effective no-fly zone over Ukrainian airspace, and deploying troops to the eastern front of Ukraine. Given what we know about Western troops and their training, it’s fair to say with as few as 100 thousand troops in Ukraine, the tides would turn rapidly in favor of Western forces. 100k troops would be roughly a 35% increase in the ground troops on the Ukrainian side. Plenty of troops to change an operational position. Option 2, NATO has no response. In this situation, NATO would simply back down as the fears of escalation become too much. This could become a more likely option if the United States were to withdraw from NATO. NATO withdrawal from the United States only becomes likely if Donald Trump were elected to office. The idea of withdrawing the United States from NATO has been an idea Trump has been insisting on since his last term in office. If the U.S. were no longer in NATO then NATO may not feel as sure of making large-scale declarations toward any major powers. Following a U.S. withdrawal, NATO would likely be severely weakened. Probably not beyond repair but it would need time to recuperate. If there is no response from NATO, the likelihood of a direct attack on NATO in Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania increases dramatically. Putin would recognize the moment of weakness and likely try to make a move to take the Baltic states, to use them as leverage in potential future negotiations. Option 3, NATO launches a nuclear counterattack. This is the least likely of the 3 to happen as the risk for escalation into all-out nuclear exchanges is extremely high. However, this strategy has been proposed because it would show Putin the West isn't bluffing. The question of the hour is: Is it more dangerous not to retaliate and show weakness, inviting more attacks, or is it more dangerous to attack and risk retaliation? This is not a groundbreaking question as this very concept is at the heart of much of negotiations including hostage negotiations and political negotiations. If Putin thinks he has no way out because the West is going to nuke him, then the situation becomes dangerous very fast. A man at the end of his rope with no options but self-destruction is not a position Russia or the United States wants for itself or another. Mutually assured destruction is the only guarantee in that situation. However, it could be some of these options, pieces of these options, none of them, or all at different times. There are so many factors it's hard to say what the outcome will be. There are simply too many questions to fully narrow down what the West's reaction would be.


As of the time of writing this, there has been only provocation of nuclear weapon use. We all hope that the realization of atomic use never comes to pass. People in the United States and abroad need to stay vigilant as it will surely affect everyone if the war were to go nuclear. Unfortunately, the risk of escalation in the conflict is not as far off as people think it is. It would only take one misstep to cause major damage. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists set the Doomsday Clock at 90 seconds to midnight, and for good reason.


Sponsor


Being safe online is important. With all the scams and Hackers trying to steal your personal information, it is key that you can keep yourself and your loved ones safe. Scamers steal 12.5 billion dollars from people each year and unfortunately, the number is rising. Keep yourself protected on up to 10 devices with Nord Threat Protection anti virus. I use the service myself to stay safe online. I recommend it to anyone who spends time surfing the web or sending emails as phishing email scams have risen in the last few years. The 8 dollars a month could save you thousands. Get peace of mind and protection by clicking my sponsored link below to learn more and enjoy a discount on Nord Threat Protection.


Learn more: Nord Threat Protection — https://go.nordvpn.net/aff_c?offer_id=725&aff_id=112007&url_id=22219&source=https://www.thenoblepursuits.com/


Comments

Share Your ThoughtsBe the first to write a comment.
bottom of page