By: Kalyani Janakiraman
The author is a first-year master's student at the Jindal School of International Affairs. She can be reached at 24jsia-krjanakiraman@jgu.edu.in
Image Source: REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov/File Photo
Introduction
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine is verging on its 948th day, and it has witnessed a significant
escalation in rhetoric surrounding nuclear policy, particularly from Russia. President Vladimir
Putin recently revised Russia’s nuclear doctrine, asserting that any conventional attack on
Russia, particularly if supported by nuclear power, would be deemed a 'joint attack' (Reuters,
2024). This declaration raises the stakes in an already fraught geopolitical climate, as it signals
Russia’s willingness to resort to nuclear capabilities in the face of perceived threats. Russia’s
nuclear doctrine is understood as ‘escalate to deescalate’ (Glantz, 2022; Ven Bruusgaard,
2020), this is a form of deterrence that the Kremlin engages in, up until the point that the threshold is crossed, and nuclear weapons are actively used in conflict. However, with the changes to the new doctrine, one can understand it through the lens of this principle, as it forces your opponent to make a strategic and decisive move.
Bruusgaard believes that the ‘escalate to deescalate’ policy is reflective of a sort of conventional
inferiority that the Kremlin faces. She posits that the perceived vulnerabilities in conventional
means of weaponry paired with fragile economic conditions could potentially explain when
and how Russia goes into conflict. Significant hardware upgrades and organisational changes
had transformed Russian conventional forces, as the invasion of Ukraine and subsequent
operations demonstrated (Bruusgaard, 2020). Regardless of what chamber of the Russian
conflict mechanism the rumbles of war come from, Russia still maintains its stance that it is
for peace and security.
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov emphasized that Russia is committed to peace but only
if its security concerns are adequately addressed (Al Jazeera, 2024). This positioning reflects a
broader narrative within Russia that portrays itself as a defender against Western encroachment,
intensifying the atmosphere of mutual suspicion and confrontation. This encroachment is an
underlying theme that has carried itself forward from the Cold War to the present day, wherein
Russia and the U.S. (China and other South Asian powers recently) compete for spheres of
influence exceeding their territory. If Ukraine becomes a member of NATO, then Russia would
be surrounded by perceived threats, which could hamper its security. It is with this
understanding that Russia engaged in open conflict with Ukraine, to secure the geographical
region and maintain influence over the same. This is the rhetoric Russia engages with, to put it
simplistically, to justify its actions against Ukraine.
In contrast, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has taken to the international stage,
specifically addressing the United Nations Security Council to advocate for a more assertive
stance against Russian aggression (Al Jazeera, 2024). Zelenskyy declared that negotiations
would not suffice to end the war, rather Russia must be 'forced into peace' as the sole aggressor.
This assertion highlights Zelenskyy’s belief that diplomatic talks are insufficient considering
Russia’s violations of international norms. He seeks to build support for what he terms a 'victory
plan', emphasising that peace cannot be achieved through concessions or complacency.
Both leaders are navigating a complex landscape shaped by their respective national interests
and security concerns. While Zelenskyy rallies support from Ukraine's allies, advocating for
military assistance and emphasizing the need to reclaim sovereignty, Putin’s nuclear rhetoric
aims to deter further Western involvement and signal a readiness to escalate the conflict.
Zelenskyy has also condemned countries like North Korea and Iran for providing arms to
Russia, framing them as 'de facto accomplices' in this conflict (ibid.).
Conclusion
As the war continues to unfold, the contrasting approach of Russia and Ukraine reveals deep-seated tensions and the challenge of achieving lasting peace. Zelenskyy's efforts at the UN
serve not only to secure military aid but also to maintain global focus on Ukraine’s plight, while
Putin’s revisions of nuclear doctrine underscore the perilous dynamics that could potentially
escalate into a broader confrontation. The news of formalization only makes this threat serious
(Reuters, 2024). The parallel narratives of aggression and resistance illustrate the urgent need
for diplomatic intervention to prevent the catastrophic consequences of miscalculation in this
charged geopolitical arena. Erath notes that if such nuclear blackmail works, it sets precedence
for a pattern for future conflicts, it indicates that such strategies work effectively and could
cause a spillover effect of proliferation for deterrence purposes (Letman, 2023).
In the ongoing discussions between the United States and Ukraine, President Zelenskyy
continues to push his victory plan, which emphasizes military provisions, including long-range
weapons, to defeat Russia. While POTUS Biden has agreed to supply additional long-range
munitions like JSOW (Joint Standoff Weapon), he remains firm on prohibiting their use within
Russian territory, fearing retaliation (Sky News, 2024). JSOW has a deterrent effect like the
'escalate to de-escalate' policy. Zelenskyy's plan, which seeks further military support and
permission to launch strikes into Russia, has faced criticism from the Biden administration for
its lack of a comprehensive diplomatic strategy. As Ukraine seeks to gain military advantage,
the U.S. remains focused on cautious escalation, balancing robust military aid with concerns
over nuclear escalation, signalled by Russia’s recent revisions to its nuclear doctrine.
Bibliography
1. Al Jazeera, (2024, September 25). Zelenskyy tells UN that Russia must be ‘forced
into peace’. Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/9/25/zelenskyytells-
un-that-russia-must-be-forced-into-peace
2. Glantz, M., & Yacoubian, M. (2022, October 5). Is Russia escalating to de-escalate?
United States Institute of Peace. https://www.usip.org/publications/2022/10/russiaescalating-
de-escalate
3. Letman, J. (2024). Are nuclear-armed nations entering a new arms race in 2024?
Experts weigh in. Truthout. https://truthout.org/articles/are-nuclear-armed-nationsentering-
a-new-arms race-in-2024-experts-weigh-in/
4. Reuters, (2024, September 29). Kremlin says Russia’s updated nuclear doctrine is
being formalised. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kremlin-saysrussias-
updated-nuclear-doctrine-is-being-formalised-2024-09-29/
5. Sky News, (2024, September 27). Russia-Ukraine war: Putin makes ‘signifcant’
attempt to ‘redraw red lines’ on using nukes. Sky News. Sky News.
6. Ven Bruusgaard, K. (2020). Russian nuclear strategy and conventional
inferiority. Journal of Strategic Studies, 44(1), 3–35.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author (s). They do not reflect the views or opinions of Diplomania or its members.
Comments