Could the Ukraine War go Nuclear?
By Nikola Mikovic
As the world awaits US President-elect Donald Trump to end the war in Ukraine, fears of a potential nuclear conflict between Russia and NATO continue to grow. The outgoing Biden administration has increased arms supplies to Kyiv, while Russian officials repeatedly warn about the risk of a nuclear exchange with the United States and its allies. How realistic is such an outcome, and how do other actors – namely China – see the ongoing nuclear saber-rattling?
After Ukraine, with the approval of outgoing US President Joe Biden, began striking internationally recognized territory of the Russian Federation with American-made weapons, Moscow increased its nuclear rhetoric. Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, announced that his country “reserves the right to attack the military installations of states allowing Ukraine to use their weapons to attack Russia.” He also changed Russia’s nuclear doctrine, lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons. Finally, Moscow launched a warning attack on Ukraine using a nuclear-capable intermediate-range missile, the Oreshnik. Although the Oreshnik wasn’t carrying a nuclear or explosive payload, the missile and the message it implied sent shock waves through Europe.
All these measures, however, are unlikely to prevent Kyiv from striking Russian military assets with US-made weapons. According to reports, on November 22, one day after Russia launched the Oreshnik missile, Ukraine again used ATACAMS against Russian military sites, this time in the Krasnodar region. Ukrainian leaders, as well as Western policy-makers, apparently do not seem to take Putin’s threats seriously.
Despite that, Russian officials continue warning of a potential nuclear escalation of the Ukraine war. On December 4, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov stressed that “one should not underestimate the danger of a nuclear scenario developing”, pointing out that there are no “road maps” right now to understand how to act.
Belarus Under Russia’s Nuclear Umbrella
Belarus, Russia’s ally in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) has also repeatedly threatened nuclear response in the event of a potential attack on its territory. According to the Eastern European nation’s President, Alexandr Lukashenko, Minsk will use nuclear weapons “as soon as it is attacked by the West.”
On September 27, he warned that NATO forces, including US and Polish troops, were “positioned along Belarus’ western borders.” Previously, in May, he said that “dozens of Russian nuclear weapons have been deployed in Belarus”, emphasizing that it was “a mistake” that all strategic nuclear weapons left Belarus after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and that Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons “should remain in Belarus.”
Even though Russian nuclear missiles may have been deployed to Belarus, that does not mean that Lukashenko will have the final say when it comes to its potential use. It is Moscow, rather than Minsk, that will decide how to respond to a possible NATO attack on the former Soviet republic. Since Russia has repeatedly demonstrated that it is not willing to use nuclear weapons following the Ukrainian occupation of parts of the Kursk region, as well as Kyiv’s attacks on Russian territory, it remains highly uncertain whether it would launch nuclear strikes on NATO countries if they decide to invade Belarus.
More importantly, if reports are true that Russia’s Chief of General Staff, Valery Gerasimov, called US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. CQ Brown on November 27 to discuss the Ukraine conflict, it indicates that the Kremlin is not truly interested in an uncontrolled escalation that could have dramatic consequences for all actors involved in the Ukraine crisis.
Worried Europe and Cautious China
However, since conflicts can be unpredictable, some European countries have reportedly begun preparing for the worst-case scenario. The Baltic states – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – as well as nations such as Denmark and Norway, are advising their populations on how to cope for three days without power. This also includes maintaining a water supply of nine liters and having a stock of canned food. Other European countries are taking similar measures. Back in September of 2023, Romania began building air-raid shelters near the border with Ukraine. The authorities reportedly aimed to protect the local population from Russian drones and missiles that could fall on Romanian territory after being fired at Ukrainian targets close to the borderline.
It is, however, worth noting that in the winter of 2022, when Europe feared that it could freeze to death without Russian natural gas, Germany – a country that was heavily dependent on Russian energy – made up preparations for emergency cash deliveries in case of a blackout to keep the economy running. Also, neighboring Switzerland drafted emergency proposals to restrict power usage if electricity shortages occur. But no electricity shortages occurred. Thus, the fact that European nations are preparing for a nuclear holocaust, does not necessarily mean that Russia will use tactical nuclear missiles to strike any NATO members.
It is widely believed that China and India – nations that Moscow sees as geopolitical friends – strongly discourage the Kremlin from a potential nuclear escalation of the Ukraine war. Rumors are flying that in 2022, intervention from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping helped avert a nuclear disaster in the Eastern European country, as Russia withdrew from Kherson. However, there is no evidence that the Kremlin, following its strategic withdrawal from Kherson, seriously considered using nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
China, however, still sees a nuclear escalation as an option that should not be ruled out. Traditionally cautious, Beijing has recently renewed its warnings over the potential use of nuclear weapons in the Russia-Ukraine war.
China is paying close attention to the nuclear risks triggered by the Ukraine crisis and has reiterated time and again that nuclear weapons should not be used and nuclear war must not be fought. Under the current circumstances, all parties need to remain calm and exercise restraint, and jointly seek to cool down the situation through dialogue and consultation to reduce strategic risks,
the Chinese Foreign Ministry said on November 28.
Since Moscow remains economically dependent on Beijing, it is unlikely to use nuclear weapons unless it receives at least tacit approval from China. Given that the People’s Republic firmly opposes any nuclear escalation, the chances of Beijing changing its official approach are minimal. That is one of the reasons why the Kremlin will almost certainly seek to avoid using nuclear weapons, regardless of Ukrainian actions. But what if it eventually decides to raise the stakes and launch tactical nuclear missiles at Ukraine in response to what it sees as Kyiv’s provocations?
Some European politicians seem worried about such developments. The winner of the first round of the presidential elections in Romania, controversial political figure Calin Georgescu, said that
Romania has no reason to interfere in the Ukraine war, as it is not Bucharest’s business.
Because of his approach, many Western media outlets have already labeled him as a “pro-Russian” candidate. In reality, his rhetoric about the need to “pay more attention to the Romanian people and only the Romanian people”, is similar to that of US President-elect Donald Trump and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban.
Georgescu and Orban do not want their nations to become collateral damage from a potential nuclear war between Russia and NATO. However, under the current geopolitical circumstances where Donald Trump expects both Moscow and Kyiv to freeze the conflict, allowing the US to pay more attention to developments in the Middle East and potentially also around China, chances of a serious nuclear escalation in Europe remain rather slim. It’s hard to believe that Trump wants the war in Ukraine hanging over his presidency for the next four years. He will do everything he can, even to the detriment of Ukraine and NATO, to end the conflict. Putin and Trump have a degree of mutual respect and admiration for each other. Trump doesn’t have the emotional attachment to Ukraine or the hatred of Russia that his predecessor Joe Biden held. Taken in totality, Trump and Putin seem the least likely American and Russian heads of state to fire nuclear warheads at each other directly or by proxy.
