As of: 4/4/2022 5:21 am
Russia’s barely disguised threats with nuclear weapons show how real the dangers of a deployment are – and how necessary disarmament negotiations with all states in possession of nuclear weapons are.
“The prospect of a nuclear conflict that was once unthinkable is now back within the realm of possibility,” UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned in mid-March. He expressed the fears of many about the developments in Russia’s war against Ukraine – and also the concerns about a possible nuclear armament worldwide.
Few wars, if any, have been started with such nuclear threats as the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, writes Olga Oliker in Foreign Affairs magazine. She is Director of the Europe and Central Asia Program of the independent organization International Crisis Group.
This refers not only to statements made by the Russian leadership, but also to military activities: five days before the invasion, the Russian deterrence forces demonstrated their capabilities in a military exercise. President Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian ruler Alexander Lukashenko personally monitored the progress. Among other things, ICBMs and cruise missiles that can carry nuclear warheads were launched.
After that, Putin had these deterrence forces put on high alert. More kills followed, which experts classify as routine exercises, but follow them closely. In addition, Swedish television reported that two out of four Russian fighter jets that recently violated Swedish airspace were armed with nuclear missiles.
threats and false claims
At the beginning of the invasion, he openly declared that Putin wants to prevent NATO from directly intervening in Ukraine: Any interference from outside has consequences “that you have never experienced in your history.” He also compared economic sanctions against Russia to a declaration of war. According to Oliker, Putin may even want to get the West to persuade Ukraine to submit.
She also sees Putin’s attempt to persuade Ukraine itself to capitulate or at least to make extensive concessions at the negotiating table with the “spectre of a nuclear escalation”. This is supported by false claims by Putin that Ukraine is building nuclear weapons or “dirty bombs” with material from its own nuclear power plants, which has raised suspicions of false flag operations.
Use of nuclear weapons without a military purpose
Since the Ukrainians are undeterred and their armed forces are now even pushing back the Russian troops in some areas, the question arises as to Putin’s next steps. His spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, has twice emphasized that nuclear weapons would only be used if Russia’s existence was threatened – in line with Russian military doctrine. But the Russian leadership had also denied considering an invasion of Ukraine.
Assessments by experts such as Oliker seem credible, according to which the use of nuclear weapons in the current situation would serve no military purpose other than shock and horror, for which Russia still has other means at its disposal.
The consequences, however, would be devastating. Not only a global outlawing of Russia would be expected. Above all, massive repercussions for the country’s own population would have to be feared, regardless of whether a tactical nuclear weapon is used over the Ukraine, the Baltic Sea or the Black Sea – scenarios that specialists from the Modern War Institute in the USA, among others, are discussing.
Even these comparatively small warheads can have the same effect as the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, according to Oliker. The fallout would spread hundreds of kilometers or more, depending on the wind direction to Russia or NATO countries. The latter could be interpreted as an attack on NATO and increase the pressure so much that the alliance intervenes directly in Ukraine. This is exactly what Putin wants to prevent given the inferiority of his conventional weapons. NATO, Germany, the USA and other allies have so far ruled this out.
Despite all the mutual distrust, there was still certainty that NATO and Russia wanted to prevent a direct confrontation. As long as there is no escalation through verbal threats and military action in this direction, Oliker sees a low risk of using nuclear weapons, even if the danger is real.
Nuclear War Games
The threatening gestures and discussions about it have an impact beyond the war in Ukraine. Nuclear weapons expert Pavel Podvig, who works at the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research in Geneva, sees the danger that “nuclear war games” will make the use of nuclear weapons appear normal and that it will only be a matter of political calculation and military benefit.
Many states are looking closely at the success with which Putin can use his nuclear arsenal as a means of pressure to achieve his imperial goals against neighboring Ukraine and the defense alliance NATO. In addition to the question of benefits and the need to procure one’s own nuclear missiles, the question is what agreements with security guarantees are still worth.
Russia broke the Budapest Memorandum when it annexed Crimea in 2014. Since 1994, it has guaranteed sovereignty and territorial integrity to Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus in exchange for relinquishing their nuclear weapons. In a referendum on February 27, ruler Alexander Lukashenko, who is under massive pressure from Russia, decided that the ban on nuclear weapons would be removed from the constitution and that Belarus would give up its neutral status.
Mutual deterrence
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which came into force in 1970, still has 191 signatory states. According to this, only the USA, Russia, China, France and Great Britain may possess nuclear weapons and serve them for defensive purposes, to deter and prevent war. The five states must also work against the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The five renewed this promise at the beginning of this year.
Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea are also considered nuclear powers. They are not contracting states. Negotiations with Iran have recently stalled.
Since Russia and the United States together own more than 90 percent of the more than 13,000 nuclear warheads worldwide, it is primarily up to them to promote transparency, control and disarmament. According to the Stiftung für Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP), both have around 4,000 nuclear warheads in their active inventory.
A distinction is made between strategic nuclear weapons that reach targets far away and have a high destructive power. Tactical nuclear weapons, on the other hand, have short to medium ranges. Their number is not regulated in contracts. According to former Colonel Wolfgang Richter, a military expert at the SWP, Russia and the USA have reached an informal agreement in recent years to reduce their number. According to Oliker, Russia has about 2,000 such tactical nuclear weapons.
Despite all the tensions, both sides renewed the New Start contract in 2021, thus preventing it from expiring. This agreement limits the number of strategic nuclear weapons and delivery systems that can reach each other’s territory, either from their own territory or from submarines. This agreed balance is intended to deter Russia and the US from a strategic nuclear attack, a first strike, by guaranteeing the second strike capability of both sides, Richter said.
include China
However, in order to maintain this “strategic stability”, a follow-up agreement must now be concluded within five years. New technologies such as hypersonic missiles would then have to be taken into account. The INF treaty banning land-based medium-range missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers must also be renegotiated. It expired in 2019.
In both cases it is also a matter of including at least China with its growing nuclear potential. The US insisted. But it also plays a role in Russia’s security policy. In 2007, the governments of both countries tried to extend the INF treaty to other countries within the framework of the UN. But not only China, also France and Great Britain refused. India was also unwilling to participate, also with a view to rival China.
Putin’s sparse statements show how real the danger of using nuclear weapons is. The war against Ukraine could lead to nuclear armament or convince the world community to avert the nuclear dangers with new agreements – also depending on how successful Putin is.