The Russian president, Vladimir Putinapproved today a new nuclear doctrine that allows responses with nuclear weapons to conventional attacks that threaten the sovereignty of Russia y Belarus.
“The decision on the use of nuclear weapons is made by the president of the Russian Federation”the document states, alluding to Putin, who is also supreme commander of the Armed Forces.
The doctrine, which replaces the one enacted in 2020, authorizes a nuclear attack in the event that the enemy conventional attack poses “a critical threat to the sovereignty and (or) territorial integrity” of the countries that make up the Russia-Belarus State Union.
Furthermore, the aggression of a country that lacks atomic weapons, but that has the support -whether or not it involves its direct participation- of a nuclear power, will be considered a “joint attack”.
The doctrine, published on the legal information portal of the Russian State, expands the category of military alliances against which Russia will apply the nuclear deterrence strategy.
«The aggression of any State belonging to a military coalition (bloc, alliance) against the Russian Federation and (or) its allies is viewed as an aggression of the coalition as a whole»he points out.
These last two clauses are considered by analysts as a clear warning to USA and the I’LL TAKEin case they decide to get directly involved in the conflict in Ukraine.
Russia may also resort to nuclear weapons in the event of a “massive attack” with warplanes, cruise missiles, hypersonics, drones and other unmanned devices that violate the country’s airspace.
For the first time, the document refers not only to enemy aviation and hypersonic devices, but also to drones, an instrument of war that has gained great popularity in recent years.
In turn, Russia will implement nuclear deterrent measures in the event that a potential enemy has missile defense systems, medium and short-range cruise missiles, among other weapons, that can be used against Russia.
Also in the event that existing military alliances integrate new members, which would bring their military infrastructure dangerously closer to the Russian borders; and the planning and holding of large-scale military exercises near Russian borders.
In clear allusion to the Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad -surrounded by NATO countries-, another point refers to the adoption of deterrence measures in the event that the potential enemy takes actions to “isolate part of Russia’s territory”, which would include blocking access to transport routes. vital communication.
At the same time, the doctrine emphasizes that Russia sees nuclear weapons as “an instrument of deterrence” of a defensive nature, the use of which is an “extreme and forced measure.”
The local press considers that the new doctrine means that the Kremlin has lowered the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, since the previous one allowed the use of atomic weapons only if the very existence of the Russian State was threatened.
Of course, the new doctrine does not automatically represent either an increase in the strategic arsenal or an early nuclear test by Russia, although Moscow has prepared a military range in Novaya Zemlya, the scene of the last Soviet atomic test in 1990.
“The updated foundations of the nuclear deterrence policy have been published in a timely manner,” presidential spokesman Dmitri Peskov said in his daily telephone press conference.
Putin had announced the changes in nuclear doctrine at the end of September in an attempt to dissuade NATO from allowing kyiv to use long-range weapons against targets in Russian territory, but he promulgated it just as 1,000 days of fighting in Ukraine.
Furthermore, the announcement comes after the president of the United States, Joe Bidenaccording to the Western press, made this decision, in the case of the border region of Kurskafter resisting for months to satisfy the demands of the Ukrainian president, Volodímir Zelenski.
Putin, who approved the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus after the start of the war, had warned that this decision will mean that the US and NATO “are at war with Russia.” EFE (I)
#Russia #authorizes #nuclear #responses #conventional #attacks
**How does Russia’s expanded definition of nuclear retaliation, potentially including responses to conventional attacks or actions by non-nuclear states supported by nuclear powers, change the dynamics of international deterrence and risk of escalation?**
## World Today News: Special Interview: Russia’s New Nuclear Doctrine
**Introduction:**
Welcome to World Today News, where we delve into the pressing issues shaping our world. Today, we discuss Russia’s newly approved nuclear doctrine, a development with far-reaching global ramifications.
Joining us are two distinguished guests:
* **Dr. Anya Petrova, Senior Fellow at the Center for International Security Studies**: Dr. Petrova brings years of expertise on Russian military strategy and nuclear posture.
* **Ambassador David Evans, Former US Ambassador to Russia**: Ambassador Evans offers unique insight into US-Russia relations and the implications of this new doctrine.
Let’s begin by exploring the core changes in Russia’s nuclear doctrine.
**Section 1: Threat Perception & Threshold for Use**
* **To Dr. Petrova**: The new doctrine expands the circumstances under which Russia may consider nuclear retaliation, including conventional attacks and involvement of non-nuclear states backed by nuclear powers. Could you elaborate on how this shift reflects Russia’s current threat perception and geopolitical goals?
* **To Ambassador Evans**:
The article suggests the Kremlin has lowered the threshold for nuclear weapon use. Do you share this assessment, and what implications does this have for international security and diplomacy?
* **General discussion**: What are the potential consequences of blurring the lines between conventional and nuclear conflict?
**Section 2: The Role of Alliances and NATO Expansion**
* **To Ambassador Evans**: The new doctrine explicitly targets military alliances, specifically mentioning NATO.
How do you interpret this in the context of ongoing tensions between Russia and the West, especially regarding Ukraine?
* **To Dr. Petrova**:
The document lists NATO expansion and military exercises near Russia’s borders as triggers for nuclear deterrence measures. Is this a signal that Russia feels increasingly encircled by NATO, and could this lead to further escalatory actions?
* **General discussion**:
How does this new doctrine impact the delicate balance of power in Europe and the potential for future conflicts?
**Section 3: Domestic and International Reactions**
* **To Dr. Petrova**:
How has the Russian public and the international community reacted to this new doctrine? What do these reactions tell us about the perceived legitimacy of this move?
* **To Ambassador Evans**:
What response, if any, should the United States and its allies take to this development? Should this trigger renewed dialogue or intensified sanctions against Russia?
* **General discussion**:
What are the potential long-term consequences for arms control and global non-proliferation efforts?
**Conclusion**
We thank Dr. Petrova and Ambassador Evans for their invaluable insights into this complex and concerning issue.
The world is watching closely as Russia navigates this new chapter in its nuclear posture.
It remains to be seen how this new doctrine will shape global security and the future of international relations.
