Putin’s Revised Nuclear Doctrine: Implications for Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Russian President Vladimir Putin has approved a revised nuclear doctrine. This new doctrine allows Russia to use its nuclear capabilities if faced with conventional weapons. An example includes Ukraine potentially using US-supplied ATACMS missiles against Russian territory, a claim Moscow made after six missiles struck the Bryansk region.

The updated nuclear policy lowers the threshold for deploying nuclear weapons. Previously, the “Basic Principles of State Policy on Nuclear Deterrence” was established in 2020. The latest version outlines specific scenarios where Russia might use its nuclear arsenal, emphasizing nuclear weapons as a form of deterrence.

Experts believe an actual nuclear response from Russia is unlikely. Michael Cohen, an associate professor at the Australian National University, argues that Putin’s threats are intended to manipulate Western support for Ukraine but do not indicate a genuine readiness to use nuclear arms. He suggests that a nuclear strike would provoke strong reactions from the United States, resulting in significant consequences for Russia.

Dr. Jenny Mathers from Aberystwyth University supports this view, stating that Putin often raises alarms but fails to escalate situations as expected. The doctrine does mention potential nuclear use in response to conventional aggression threatening Russia’s sovereignty. This includes attacks by non-nuclear states supported by nuclear powers.

How might the new nuclear policy impact Western military assistance to Ukraine?

Interview with Michael Cohen, Associate Professor at the Australian National University, on Russia’s Revised Nuclear Doctrine

News Director: Thank you for joining us, Professor Cohen. Recent reports indicate that Russian President Vladimir Putin has approved a revised nuclear doctrine that lowers the threshold for deploying nuclear weapons. Can you elaborate on the implications of this new policy?

Michael Cohen: Thank you for having me. The revised nuclear doctrine certainly raises eyebrows given its explicit mention of potential nuclear use in scenarios involving conventional aggression against Russia. This shift indicates that Moscow is willing to use nuclear threats strategically, likely aimed at deterring further military assistance to Ukraine from the West. However, it’s crucial to remember that while the rhetoric is alarming, actual use of nuclear weapons is still very unlikely.

News Director: You mentioned that this doctrine appears to be a strategic maneuver. Can you explain why you believe Putin’s threats are more about manipulation than genuine intentions?

Michael Cohen: Absolutely. Putin’s nuclear threats serve as a tool for influencing Western policies—particularly to gain leverage over nations providing military support to Ukraine. The risk of retaliation from the U.S. and its allies is significant if Russia were to actually deploy nuclear weapons. Such an action would not only provoke military repercussions but also isolate Russia further on the global stage, which calls into question whether Moscow would actually go that far.

News Director: Dr. Jenny Mathers from Aberystwyth University shares a similar perspective, highlighting that Putin often raises alarms but doesn’t escalate as anticipated. Why do you think that is?

Michael Cohen: That’s a key point. Historically, Putin has utilized threats to rally domestic support and project strength internationally. However, he tends to back down when faced with the prospect of severe consequences. The current doctrine does mention responding to conventional aggression—especially when it threatens national sovereignty—but it’s crucial to contextualize this with previous behavior where he has chosen not to escalate situations even when tensions peak.

News Director: With the recent claim that Ukraine could use U.S.-supplied ATACMS missiles, how do you see this affecting the dynamics of the conflict?

Michael Cohen: The acknowledgment by Russia that western-supplied missiles could trigger a nuclear response marks a significant escalation in their rhetoric. It indicates Moscow’s sensitivity to the quantities and capabilities being provided to Ukraine. As both sides continue to demonstrate resolve and capabilities, I expect we’ll see intense fighting in the coming months. This kind of signaling is critical for both nations as they fortify relations with their allies.

News Director: what do you think will occur in the near future regarding the conflict and the updated nuclear policy?

Michael Cohen: It’s likely that we will see an increase in military operations from both Russia and Ukraine, as each side seeks to assert their position and gain international support. The updated nuclear doctrine acts as a backdrop to this ongoing conflict, serving as a reminder of the stakes involved. However, I believe neither side truly wants to escalate to nuclear conflict, but rather both will utilize various tactics in conventional warfare to achieve their objectives without crossing that line.

News Director: Thank you for your insights, Professor Cohen. Your expertise sheds light on the complexities of this situation.

Michael Cohen: Thank you for having me.

The Kremlin has indicated that Ukrainian strikes using advanced Western missiles could lead to a nuclear response. This marks the first time Russia has explicitly acknowledged such a possibility in its rhetoric. Experts anticipate ongoing conflict, with both sides resorting to various warfare tactics.

Cohen expects intense fighting in the months ahead as both Ukraine and Russia send strong signals to their respective allies. He emphasizes that both nations will push hard to demonstrate their resolve and capabilities.