Russia’s various nuclear threats are having the opposite effect than intended, according to Western officials who feel additional pressure to ensure that the Kremlin can’t use nuclear weapons to gain a victory that the Russian military has not achieved with conventional weapons.
“I really don’t see any countries changing their course because of this fear campaign,” a senior European official said. “On the contrary, I see that for many, even playing with this whole nuclear topic has been a sort of red flag … something that has rather increased the determination to make sure that Russia won’t get its way.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin has made several references to Russian nuclear forces throughout the war, including a claim that American use of nuclear weapons to defeat Japan set “a precedent.” That remark raised the specter of a Russian nuclear strike against Ukrainian forces, which have been liberating Ukrainian territory in defiance of Putin’s putative annexation, but Western officials fear the consequences of backing down in the face of such a threat.
“That precedent would mean that Putin and … every other leader in the world would see that all you have to do is threaten to use a nuclear weapon,” former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor told the Washington Examiner. “And that would be the case for Putin again. All he would see is that he has to put this nuclear revolver on the table and NATO appeases him.”
‘MADNESS’: PUTIN PLAYS NUCLEAR MIND GAMES AS WAR PRESSURE BUILDS ON KREMLIN
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg made a similar argument on Wednesday as he affirmed that the trans-Atlantic alliance would “support Ukraine for as long as it takes” to defeat Putin.
“We cannot allow President Putin to win,” Stoltenberg said. “That would be a disaster, a tragedy for Ukrainians, but it would also make us, NATO allies, more vulnerable. Because then the lesson learned from Ukraine for President Putin is that he can achieve his goals by using military force. And that will be a lesson learned not only for him but also for other authoritarian leaders around the world.”
Putin has touted his nuclear arsenal in part to limit Western military support to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s government. The United States, the United Kingdom, and several other members of NATO sent billions of dollars worth of armaments to Ukraine, which allowed Ukrainian forces to repel the Russian assault on Kyiv and gradually initiate a counteroffensive in eastern Ukraine.
“I promised the president that soon the Mars II systems and Panzerhaubitze 2000 will be handed over to Ukraine,” German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier said Tuesday during a visit to Kyiv, referring to rocket systems and howitzers. “Many people want an end to the war, a truce. But, as [Zelenksy] said, Ukraine wants to achieve a just peace. I share this opinion: There will be no true peace without justice, and an unjust peace can only cause a new war.”
The purported risk of provoking Russia has curbed Western aid somewhat, as Biden’s team has declined to provide long-range munitions, and German Defense Minister Christian Lambrecht has balked at the idea of sending “Western-built infantry fighting vehicles or main battle tanks.” Yet European Union high representative Josep Borrell, the economic and political bloc’s top diplomat, also warned that “the Russian Army will be annihilated” if Putin uses nuclear weapons. The unfolding story of the war — the discovery of Russian atrocities in occupied territory and the destruction of Mariupol, along with Ukraine’s resilience in the conflict — has diminished Putin’s capacity to intimidate, some would argue.
“So many red lines have been crossed that crossing the nuclear red line would, I’m sure, be met with absolutely catastrophic consequences to them and would not be met with the kind of shock and paralyzation that it would have been met with in February,” the first senior European official said. “I just feel that this Russian doctrine of ‘escalate to de-escalate’ has lost quite a bit of its old magic.”
Western anxiety about Russia’s nuclear options has continued to fester, in part due to Moscow’s recent claims that Ukraine plans to use a “dirty bomb” against the Russian forces struggling to continue occupying Ukrainian territory. France, the U.K., and the U.S. have denounced the allegation as “transparently false,” but Stoltenberg has acknowledged his concern that Russia might be planning to do what it accuses Ukraine of plotting.
“This fake about the dirty bomb was a clear indication that the Russian side was appearing to do something in Ukraine, and that was simply testing … see what the response would be from Western countries,” a second senior European official said.
President Joe Biden emphasized that “it would be a serious, serious mistake” for Russia to use a dirty bomb, continuing a pattern of public warnings that many European officials regard as key to deterring Putin.
“At this point, they are blackmailing, and the stronger the reaction will be from our side — mainly the U.S., the U.K., France, and Germany to some extent — the smaller the possibility that they will really do it,” said a third senior European official who specializes in alliance policies regarding Russia. “We need to explain to them that it’s not a good option even to have a gun on the table. It’s simply something which is not acceptable.”
Such a confrontational approach may seem to increase the danger of a clash in the short term, but many Western officials and analysts express confidence that a nuclear-powered victory for Russia would lead to more war and more risk of nuclear confrontation.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“If they get their way out of this conflict by blackmailing anyone into submission, the consequences will be truly global,” the first senior European official said. “And we are going to have more problems with Russia, and we are going to have more problems with other would-be or semiofficial or [fully armed] nuclear powers.”
