The Russian leadership's threats of the use of nuclear weapons have become almost everyday. They've been uttered by different people. Last October, Sergei Karaganov's call to use a nuclear weapon in Eastern Europe caused a minor stir. While we might ask who cares, Karaganov seems to have a good idea of what's trending with his boss and his close circle.

Another frequent nuclear saber-rattler is Dmitry Medvedev, even though one might discount his efforts as attempts to appear taller by jumping up and down. A representative of Russia's Security Council even urged setting off a demonstrative nuclear blast to showcase Moscow's resolve.

Russia recently held tactical nuclear exercises, which type of warheads have apparently been moved to Belarus. While Vladimir Putin referred to the maneuvers as routine and nothing special, they were the first exercises since the end of the Soviet Union that likely saw tactical warheads moved around. And provided Russia really did move tactical nukes to Belarus, also the first time such weapons have been taken outside Russia since the end of the Soviet period.

Use of tactical nuclear weapons has been practiced on the theoretical level before. For example, during the Zapad exercise aimed against NATO members as well as separately against Sweden. The latter example is perhaps more telling as it took place in 2013 when Sweden was a NATO partner state but wasn't even talking about joining the alliance yet. Sweden is not a nuclear power and Russia has previously pledged never to use nuclear weapons against such states.

These are just a few examples of how Russia says one thing and does something else entirely, whereas things like rules, laws etc. do not constitute obstacles for the Kremlin. This February, the Financial Times got access to leaked nuclear documents that painted a picture of Moscow's thinking.

The chief thing, while hardly surprising, is that Russia has considerably lowered the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons. And while the threshold has been lowered, nuclear rhetoric is reaching new heights.

Medvedev has threatened to end civilization should Russia lose in Ukraine. While Putin told the Federation Council this February that Russia would use nuclear weapons to destroy all of civilization should Western militaries come to Ukraine's aid. He has also tied the war to his wider goal – securing Russia's global sovereignty, even though it would perhaps be more accurate to say global dominion or supremacy.

Big ideas for a small man one might say. Putting all of this together, we're left with a picture where Russia is prepared to use nuclear weapons to achieve its desired position in the world. And I do believe that is how they really see it.

Experts say that the threshold for using nuclear weapons, especially tactical ones, is the lowest among all nuclear powers in Russia. Of course, there is no way to be absolutely certain as we do not know the thresholds of North Korea or Israel for that matter. But coming back to the Financial Times, according to them, Russia really seems to be quite prepared to use tactical nuclear weapons.

The documents are from 2008-2015. According to them, using nuclear weapons first is justified when Russian military losses result in a situation where the armed forces may be unable to fend off a major offensive or when Russian statehood is critically threatened.

Other conditions to warrant the use of nuclear weapons include a situation where a fifth of Russia's fleet of submarines carrying strategic nuclear missiles or 30 percent of Russia's nuclear-powered submarines, three or more cruisers or three airfields have been destroyed, or when the enemy has simultaneously hit terrestrial operational and reserve command centers.

On the backdrop of such a technical list comes Russia's public-facing official position that it will only preemptively use nuclear weapons in a situation where an aggression against Russia using conventional weapons threatens the existence of the state.

This has been specified by Putin's decree from 2020. The latter speaks of threats to sovereignty and territorial integrity. In this context, we should also reevaluate claims that Crimea and parts of Eastern Ukraine are now a part of the Russian Federation as the regulation isn't hard to interpret in a way where attacking these territories amounts to attacking Russia's territorial integrity.

Russia's nuclear rhetoric has caused anxiety in both USA and Europe. This is reflected in two ways. One reaction is to ramp up one's own nuclear capabilities and missile defense systems. The other culminates in calls not to escalate the situation.

But the latter is precisely what Russia wants. Their calculation is that the West's political playing field is all doves willing to agree to anything to avoid nuclear war. Security and defense experts who take a somewhat more realistic view are trying to channel efforts into restoring slumbering preparedness for a nuclear conflict, concluding that giving in to bullies will only motivate them to push harder.

Russia has reportedly achieved 95 percent of its nuclear modernization program and it does not plan to stop when it hits 100 percent. The U.S. is only starting relevant actions. Let us also not forget that Russia has around 1,900 tactical warheads against NATO's 230, whereas 100 of the latter are U.S. aircraft bombs left behind in Europe... A lot of Russia's nuclear warheads are attached to missiles.

Finally, a few words on timing. We are moving closer to the Ukrainian peace conference in Switzerland, which Russia is trying to foil. At the same time, Putin is once against talking about being open to peace but only on Russia's conditions and based on the current position of the front line. In other words, Russia would keep what it has conquered and the rest would be a matter of talks. These are attempts to influence the peace forum through threats according to which no matter what you discuss and decide there, Russia already has a nuclear strike in store for you and all of mankind.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!