With each new report, Russia’s nuclear capability grows more ominous. Conversely, Americans are becoming desensitized to the disquieting assessments of a chief adversary and threat to the US. Over the past four years, nuclear threats have grown, but national security leaders appear not to have embraced the peril with enthusiasm equal to the danger. There has been a palpable malaise if not a desperate attempt to sustain the status quo. There is no sense of urgency to address a menacing nuclear foe like Russia.
Russia Has Warned the West
It’s not that there haven’t been persistent warnings about the nuclear threats. However, this most recent report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) portrays a foreboding menace that should be on President-elect Trump’s list of to-dos on day one. Real Clear Defense carried an article titled “Report to Congress on Russia’s Nuclear Weapons” by the US Naval Institute (USNI) on the CRS report. USNI offered that Russia has built up its nonstrategic nuclear arsenal, “describing these weapons as an offset to US and NATO conventional superiority.” There’s a bit of irony with this point of view.
During the Cold War, the roles were reversed. NATO and the US believed developing tactical nuclear weapons was crucial to defend against the Soviet Union’s vastly superior number of tanks, artillery, and ground troops. The Allies assessed that the Soviet Union would use its advantage in tanks and other mechanized forces to move quickly through a lowland area known as the Fulda Gap. It was the direct path from East Germany into West Germany (before consolidation) through the town of Fulda (hence the name) to engage the NATO defenses. Because the NATO leadership did not believe containing the larger, fast-moving Soviet and Warsaw Bloc armies was possible, resorting to tactical nuclear weapons was one option.
In its November 22 assessment, the CRS called the Russian nuclear challenge an “acute threat.” By definition, that could mean American national security is facing grave danger. The CRS assessment of the Kremlin’s posture for the imminent use of tactical nukes can be broken down into four indicators:
- Russia has the quantity of nuclear weapons to strike first.
- Moscow recently modified its nuclear doctrine and employment plans to lower the threshold for using atomic weapons.
- The Kremlin pulled out of further nuclear arms control negotiations.
- Russian President Vladimir Putin has become more vocal in his signaling a willingness to employ nukes.
We’ve long known Russia has been modernizing its nuclear capability at a much more rapid pace than the US. The magnitude of Moscow’s programs to develop more capable delivery systems is particularly troubling. Independent nongovernment analysts assess the Kremlin’s tactical nuclear warhead inventory to be 1,558. “In 2018, President Putin announced that Russia was developing new delivery vehicles, including an ICBM- (Intercontinental Ballistic Missile) mounted hypersonic glide vehicle, a nuclear-powered cruise, and a nuclear-capable autonomous underwater system,” CRS explained.
Liberty Nation News reported recently that “Putin also authorized the use of an experimental intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) in an air attack on Ukraine. Reports assert the IRBM, called Oreshnik by the Russians, was based on the Russian RS-26 Rubezh intercontinental ballistic missile.” The Russians claim the Oreshnik can defeat any Western anti-missile defense.
Regarding the recent revision to the Russian doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons, the CRS report explains:
“The document also states that Russia considers ‘an aggression’ by ‘any nonnuclear state, but with participation or with support from a nuclear state’ a ‘joint attack’ against Russia. Russian political and military leaders have articulated a ‘strategic deterrence’ concept that combines nonmilitary means. Nonnuclear capabilities, and nuclear weapons in a spectrum of continuous actions aimed at deterrence, escalation management, and warfighting.”
This clearly is a reference to US and NATO support to Ukraine, providing long-range missiles capable of reaching into Russia.
The third indicator of Russia’s more likely inclination to resort to nuclear weapons is that there are no existing agreed-to norms of behavior in arms control. In an announcement in February 2023, Putin suspended any further Russian participation in renewing the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) talks. Currently, START limits the US and Russia to 800 nuclear delivery platforms and 1,550 actively deployed nuclear warheads. Without even the symbolism of an arms control treaty, Putin has no restraint on growing Russia’s strategic and tactical nuclear capability – and he may have already begun that process. Russia withdrew ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in November 2023.
Believe Your Enemies
Lastly, according to well-known author and spokesperson on current events, Diane Bederman, “One of the lessons that I took from his [Machiavelli] writings: if someone says they are going to kill you — believe them.” To that end, “since February 2022, President Putin has invoked Russia’s nuclear weapons in an apparent attempt to deter Western military intervention against Russia in Ukraine,” the CRS report explains. “Russia may continue its nuclear signaling to the West as the war in Ukraine progresses.” Believing Putin is bluffing is a dangerous gambit. The problem for the US is predicting when the nuclear signaling becomes a nuclear strike.
The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliate.
