Today marks the tenth day of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, following power struggles and economic games of cat-and-mouse between Russia and the West. What was initially an exercise in statism and diplomatic bargaining crossed the threshold into action when Putin, facing an impasse, deployed troops over the border into the sovereign nation of Ukraine. The invasion came after weeks of mounting tensions as the United States and European allies attempted to bargain with Russia, addressing its demand to bar neighboring Ukraine from joining the NATO states.
Earlier this week, Putin upped the ante, calling for Russia’s nuclear capabilities to be put on high alert. Russia is the world’s leader in nuclear reserves, and this latest development represents a further turn away from diplomacy and a startling acceleration of the threat Russia poses to the global community. The Russian troops massed on Ukraine’s borders were initially leverage for diplomacy. When this failed, Putin ordered a full-scale invasion. In the impasse created by NATO’s insistence on Ukraine’s right to self-determination, Russia abandoned diplomacy and went ahead with force.
These rapid developments beg the question of what escalation in modern conflicts looks like, leaving the West to determine the appropriate level of engagement. “Putin likens Western sanctions to war as Russian assault traps Ukrainian civilians,” a Reuters headline reports. In Putin’s calculated estimation, economic sanctions imposed by the United States and its allies constitute an aggression against Russia, and merit aggressive response. Now, the West must approach with deliberateness and delicacy the threat of nuclear war.
Putin’s order to conjure the nuclear capacities of his country indicates his tenuous position in the conflict, amidst NATO sanctions and unanticipatedly stalwart resistance from Ukraine. The dramatic escalation of tensions followed new Western sanctions that forced Putin’s Central Bank to raise its key rate to save the ruble from collapse, the AP reports. These realities prompted Putin to launch a “special mode of combat” and ready his nuclear armament, according to the PBS NewsHour. However, Putin’s order departs from Russian law that establishes the criteria for use of nuclear weapons: these capabilities may be deployed when the state is in mortal jeopardy; to counteract the use of similar force against it; in event of an attack by ballistic missiles by adversaries against particular military sites of the Russian Federation. As of yet, none of the criteria have been met to justify mobilizing nuclear force.
Since the specter of the conflict first materialized, the U.S. has vowed to remain uninvolved. But the speed with which Russia has threatened to initiate the nuclear option complicates the terms for U.S. involvement. If nearby NATO nations like Latvia and Lithuania are imperiled, the U.S. will be compelled to act; likewise, if nuclear war becomes an impending possibility, U.S. response is compulsory.
“Concern about the role of nuclear weapons is perfectly understandable,” offers Tom Nichols of The Atlantic, “now that a paranoid dictator has led Russia into a major war in the middle of Europe, attacking a country that shares a border with four of America’s NATO allies.” Nichols concurs with President Biden that a “nuclear crisis is unlikely, but not impossible.”
Thus far, much of the conflict has hinged on balancing energy needs and energy sector sanctions. This week, Russia strategically attacked a Ukrainian nuclear power plant, prompting Ukraine to appeal to the global community on the basis of the reach of the threat.
The Associate Press reports, “Russian forces shelled Europe’s largest nuclear plant early Friday, sparking a fire as they pressed their attack on a crucial energy-producing Ukrainian city.” Just as deploying troops to Ukraine’s borders represented a menacing bargaining chip for Russia in East-West diplomacy, the order to ready the country’s offensive nuclear capacities generates leverage for Russia’s unmet demands. But in this case, the threat is global. As Russia continues to escalate amidst NATO’s resolve to remain uninvolved, the nuclear option represents a final and cataclysmic possibility for global security. Widely regarded a last resort, the global community looks with trepidation on Putin’s call to ready Russia’s nuclear capabilities.
In the case of Ukraine, shelling is enough of an incentive to bow to Russian demands, but to impel the international community to do the same, Putin has resorted to nuclear threats. The Associated Press affirms this analysis, quoting Ukraine’s embattled president saying that intense shelling was a tactic to force him into concessions. “I believe Russia is trying to put pressure [on Ukraine] with this simple method,” the AP reports Zelenskyy saying. But to squeeze those not in the direct line of its artillery, Russia has levied its reserves, raising the specter of nuclear war. The AP reports that the Kremlin announced “its nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarines and long-range bombers had all been put on high alert.”
In a glimmer of optimism, Putin’s aide Vladimir Medinsky commented on the first talks held between the two sides since the invasion. As reported by the AP, he noted that the delegates “found certain points on which common positions could be foreseen.” Discussions are scheduled to continue.
