Russia revamps its nuclear policy: What does this mean? Is a nuclear strike imminent?

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday approved an updated nuclear doctrine that spells out the circumstances that allow him to use Moscow’s atomic arsenal, the world’s largest.

The development comes amid heightened concerns over Western involvement in the Ukraine conflict, with Kremlin officials citing the four-year-old document as a necessary response to recent US military aid for Ukraine .

The new version of the document, titled “Basic Principles of State Policy on Nuclear Deterrence, lowers the threshold for a nuclear strike in response to a broader range of convention attacks on Russia when backed by a nuclear-armed ally.

Moscow claims Ukraine had struck deep inside Russia on Tuesday using US-supplied ATACMS missiles .

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stressed such strikes could potentially be a trigger for a nuclear response under the revised document.

More from Explainers

How ChatGPT is becoming everyone’s BFF and why that’s dangerous This Week in Explainers: How recovering from Gen-Z protests is a Himalayan task for Nepal

Here’s all you need to know about the Russian nuclear doctrine.

Russia’s nuclear doctrine

Putin signed its first iteration in 2020, and he approved the latest version Tuesday, according to the Kremlin.

The document establishes a framework for conditions under which the Kremlin leader could order a strike from the world’s biggest atomic arsenal.

The previous 2020 doctrine said Russia may use nuclear weapons in case of a nuclear attack by an enemy or a conventional attack that threatens the existence of the state.

However, the revamped document said any attack by a non-nuclear power supported by nuclear power would be considered a joint attack, and that any attack by one member of a military bloc would be considered an attack by the entire alliance.

Impact Shorts

More Shorts

Ghaziabad woman dead, pilgrims attacked in bus… How Nepal’s Gen-Z protests turned into a living hell for Indian tourists

Were bodyguards involved in Charlie Kirk’s shooting? The many conspiracies surrounding the killing

It describes nuclear weapons as “a means of deterrence,” noting their use is an “extreme and compelled measure.”

The document declares that Russia “takes all necessary efforts to reduce the nuclear threat and prevent aggravation of interstate relations that could trigger military conflicts, including nuclear ones.”

Such nuclear deterrence is aimed at safeguarding the “sovereignty and territorial integrity of the state,” deterring a potential aggressor, or, “in case of a military conflict, preventing an escalation of hostilities and stopping them on conditions acceptable for the Russian Federation,” the document says.

“Nuclear deterrence is aimed to ensure that any potential adversary realises the inevitability of retribution in case of an aggression against Russia and its allies,” it says.

For those uninitiated, the changes in the doctrine, which have been in the works for months, come two days after Washington’s decision to allow Ukraine to use such longer-range missiles to target Russia. For months, US President Joe Biden has been weighing the risks of such an escalation.

The framework

The doctrine says Moscow could use nuclear weapons “in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction” against Russia or its allies, as well as “in the event of aggression” against Russia and Belarus with conventional weapons that threaten “their sovereignty and/or territorial integrity.”

It adds that nuclear weapons could be used in these scenarios:

2. If reliable information is received about the launch of ballistic missiles targeting the territory of Russia or its allies.

3. If nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction strike the territory of Russia or its allies or are used to hit Russian military units or facilities abroad.

4. If an enemy’s impact on critically important Russian government or military facilities could undermine retaliatory nuclear strike capability.

5. If aggression against Russia or Belarus involving conventional weapons raises a critical threat to their sovereignty and territorial integrity.

6. If reliable information is received about the takeoff or launch of strategic and tactical aircraft, cruise missiles, drones, hypersonic, or other flying vehicles and their crossing the Russian border.

The president can inform military and political leaders of other countries or international organisations “about the readiness to use nuclear weapons,” or that he has already decided to use them.

Possibility of a nuclear strike

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Putin and other Kremlin voices have been warning the West that if Washington allowed Ukraine to fire US, British, and French missiles deep into Russia, Moscow would consider those NATO members to be directly involved in the war in Ukraine.

However, this hasn’t deterred Kyiv’s allies from giving it billions of dollars of advanced weapons.

Russia’s defence ministry said Ukraine had struck  Russia’s Bryansk region with six missiles and that air defence systems intercepted five and damaged one.

Asked Tuesday if such a Ukrainian attack could potentially trigger a nuclear response, Peskov answered affirmatively, underscoring the doctrine’s provision that opens the door after a conventional strike.

Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Centre noted that Peskov’s comments were the first time the Kremlin explicitly acknowledged “the potential use of nuclear weapons as a response to strikes on Russian territory using long-range missiles.”

“Put simply, Peskov openly admits that the Kremlin is currently considering the possibility of a nuclear strike,” she said.

The US has not seen any change to Russia’s nuclear posture, according to The Associated Press, which quoted an unidentified US National Security Council official who was not authorised to comment publicly.

As a result, the Biden administration has “not seen any reason to adjust our own nuclear posture or doctrine in response to Russia’s statements today,” the official added.

Jack Watling, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute defence and security think tank in the UK, said using Western longer-range missiles “certainly will not” trigger Moscow’s nuclear response, as some in the West feared. But he added that “Russia can escalate in a range of ways to impose costs on the West, from undersea sabotage to the employment of proxies to harass trade in the Bab el-Mandeb,” a strait off the Red Sea where attacks on shipping have been attributed to Yemen’s Houthi rebels.

Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Head of Russia’s Security Council chaired by Putin, was even more blunt. Ukraine’s use of NATO missiles for strikes on Russian territory “could be classified as an attack by bloc countries on Russia,” he said.

“In such a scenario, Russia reserves the right to retaliate with weapons of mass destruction against Kyiv and key NATO facilities, wherever they may be located,” he said. “This would amount to World War III.”

Stanovaya said, “The current situation offers Putin a significant temptation to escalate” and marks “an extraordinarily dangerous juncture.” “Putin may seek to present the West with two stark choices: ‘Do you want a nuclear war? You will have it,’ or ‘Let’s end this war on Russia’s terms,’” she posted on X.

That would not interfere with any possible peace initiatives but could reinforce US President-elect Donald Trump’s argument for direct dialogue with Putin, she said, adding, “Simultaneously, it would expose Biden to criticism for being the catalyst of the escalation while potentially discouraging Ukraine from further using long-range missiles.”

With inputs from The Associated Press