Moscow has dismissed claims that Kiev’s sponsors somehow restrict its use of weaponry NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has argued that members of the US-led military bloc should let Ukraine …
Opinion pieces on the Internet and political saber rattling by low level politicians does not a nuclear policy make.
States actually have quite a few different ways of signaling they are serious about potentially ending the world as we know it, and Russia is currently using none of them.
As an example, the Russian state’s own published nuclear policy has remained unchanged for over a decade and still explicitly prohibits nuclear first use in cases like this. Currently high level Russian politicians including Putin continue to reference said defense policy in response to questions about the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine. If they were seriously considering using said nuclear weapons in Ukraine, they would be unambiguously signaling through changing these documents and other such methods that other governments actually take seriously.
More to the point, breaking the nuclear taboo would be massively harmful to both Russia and Putins own interests. It would at best result in a NATO backed no fly zone over Ukraine while China and Iran completely abandon them, and quite possibly result in a direct conventional or nuclear war with Nato. I simply don’t buy that they would do that with no warning or previous signaling simply because an artillery rocket was manufactured in a different country.
Several NATO members have already okayed this for Ukraine and remain distinctly un-nuked. Plus, of course, the Ukrainians have been doing it with their domestically-produced gear for ages and also haven’t been nuked.
russians have been claiming they’ve been fighting the whole NATO for 2 years so I don’t see this as an escalation.
What you see as an escalation really doesnt matter. Russian state has made it very clear that this would be escalation and would have a response
Opinion pieces on the Internet and political saber rattling by low level politicians does not a nuclear policy make.
States actually have quite a few different ways of signaling they are serious about potentially ending the world as we know it, and Russia is currently using none of them.
As an example, the Russian state’s own published nuclear policy has remained unchanged for over a decade and still explicitly prohibits nuclear first use in cases like this. Currently high level Russian politicians including Putin continue to reference said defense policy in response to questions about the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine. If they were seriously considering using said nuclear weapons in Ukraine, they would be unambiguously signaling through changing these documents and other such methods that other governments actually take seriously.
More to the point, breaking the nuclear taboo would be massively harmful to both Russia and Putins own interests. It would at best result in a NATO backed no fly zone over Ukraine while China and Iran completely abandon them, and quite possibly result in a direct conventional or nuclear war with Nato. I simply don’t buy that they would do that with no warning or previous signaling simply because an artillery rocket was manufactured in a different country.
Several NATO members have already okayed this for Ukraine and remain distinctly un-nuked. Plus, of course, the Ukrainians have been doing it with their domestically-produced gear for ages and also haven’t been nuked.