September 26, 2024

Institute for the Study of War: As Biden and Zelenskyy prepare to meet, Putin again threatens nuclear confrontation

Institute for the Study of War

Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to threaten the possibility of a nuclear confrontation between Russia and the West in order to exert further control over Western decision-making and discourage the West from allowing Ukraine to use Western-provided weapons to strike military objects in Russia. Putin claimed during the first public meeting of the Russian Security Council’s standing conference on nuclear deterrence on September 25 that Russia is adjusting its nuclear doctrine to introduce “clarifications” regarding necessary preconditions for Russia to use a nuclear weapon. Putin shared two “clarifications” to the nuclear doctrine: that the Kremlin will consider using nuclear weapons in the case of “aggression against Russia by a non-nuclear state with support or participation from a nuclear state” or in the case of “the receipt of reliable information about the massive launch of air and space weapons” against Russia and these weapons crossing Russia’s borders. Putin specified that these “air and space weapons” that could justify Russian nuclear weapons use include strategic and tactical aviation, cruise missiles, drones, and/or hypersonic missiles. Putin likely intends for the hyper-specificity of his nuclear threats to breathe new life into the Kremlin’s tired nuclear saber-rattling information operation and generate a new wave of panic among Western policymakers during a particularly critical moment in Western policy discussions about Ukraine’s ability to use Western-provided weapons. Kremlin officials routinely invoke thinly veiled threats of nuclear confrontation between Russia and the West during key moments in Western political debates regarding further military assistance to Ukraine — such as the ongoing debate about Ukraine’s right to use Western-provided systems to conduct long-range strikes against Russian military objects — to induce fear among decision makers. US Central Intelligence Agency Director (CIA) William Burns cautioned Western policymakers on September 7 against fearing boilerplate Russian nuclear saber-rattling, and ISW has long identified Russia’s nuclear saber-rattling as part of the Kremlin’s effort to promote Western self-deterrence and not as indicative of Russia’s willingness to use nuclear weapons. ISW continues to assess that Russia is very unlikely to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine or elsewhere.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned that Russia is preparing for potential strikes against Ukraine’s three remaining operational nuclear power plants ahead of the coming winter, highlighting the Kremlin’s unwillingness to engage in good-faith negotiations and continued commitment to the destruction of the Ukrainian state and its people. Zelensky gave speeches to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and General Assembly (UNGA) on September 25 stating that Ukrainian intelligence found that Russia aims to target Ukraine’s three operational nuclear power plants in order to degrade Ukraine’s energy infrastructure and power generation capacity before winter 2024–2025 and cause “nuclear disaster.” Zelensky recently noted that Russia is using unspecified Chinese satellites to photograph Ukraine’s nuclear power plants in preparation for strikes and emphasized in his UNGA speech that Russia’s previous winter strike campaigns against Ukrainian energy infrastructure have already destroyed Ukraine’s thermal power generation capacity and severely degraded its hydroelectric power generation capacity. Russian authorities and sources have repeatedly falsely accused Ukrainian forces of targeting Russian and Russian-occupied nuclear power plants likely as part of Russia’s overarching informational effort to falsely paint Ukraine and the Zelensky government as illegitimate actors and war criminals with whom Russia cannot engage in peace negotiations. Zelensky’s UN speeches also emphasized the principles of international law and the UN Charter as the main avenue through which Ukraine can achieve peace and highlighted the illegality of Russia’s war under international law alongside Russia’s ongoing destabilizing global efforts to enhance its war in Ukraine.

Key Takeaways:

Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to threaten the possibility of a nuclear confrontation between Russia and the West in order to exert further control over Western decision-making and discourage the West from allowing Ukraine to use Western-provided weapons to strike military objects in Russia.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned that Russia is preparing for potential strikes against Ukraine’s three remaining operational nuclear power plants ahead of the coming winter, highlighting the Kremlin’s unwillingness to engage in good-faith negotiations and continued commitment to the destruction of the Ukrainian state and its people.

A Russian company is reportedly collaborating with entities in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to develop an attack drone for Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Russia continues to deepen its relationship with Iran’s Axis of Resistance, this time reportedly via Iran-brokered talks facilitating Russian missile transfers to Yemen’s Houthi rebels.

Neither Russian nor Ukrainian forces made confirmed advances in Kursk Oblast.

Ukrainian forces continued to regain positions in Vovchansk.

Russian forces advanced northwest of Kreminna, in Toretsk, and southeast of Pokrovsk.

Russian forces reportedly advanced within and around Vuhledar (southwest of Donetsk City) amid continued offensive efforts to seize the settlement.

Veterans of Russia’s war in Ukraine continue to commit crimes upon returning to Russia.

(For full report:  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-september-25-2024 )

Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.