Putin's new nuclear doctrine: how dangerous is it?
Vladimir Putin has signed the changes to Russia's nuclear doctrine that were announced in September into law. According to the document, any attack by a non-nuclear power supported by a nuclear power would be considered a joint attack on Russia. The threshold for Russia to respond using nuclear weapons has also been lowered. Media assessments of what the changes mean are sharply divided.
Gearing up for the duel with Trump
The Kremlin is getting ready for a diplomatic showdown, writes La Repubblica:
“The Kremlin's threat is directed at Joe Biden but is actually addressed to his successor, laying two opposing cards on the table: Putin's willingness to explore potential proposals by Trump aimed at ending the war in Ukraine, and his determination to use nuclear weapons should Russia find itself 'in danger'. This is the beginning of the unpredictable and brutal showdown between Trump and Putin. ... It could lead to a new Yalta, with spheres of influence in Europe, Africa and the Middle East being redefined to end the current conflicts, or it could degenerate into a head-on clash between two leaders ready to do whatever it takes to prevail against their adversary.”
As serious as the Cuban missile crisis
The situation is as serious as it has ever been, says Népszava:
“With this message, which the Russian president obviously formulated in response to Washington, he has brought the world just as close to the outbreak of nuclear war as it was last in 1962, during the Cuban missile crisis. There are subtle differences between the situation then and now, but only subtle ones. ... If it is not possible to reverse the situation in the near future and steer the process towards a negotiated solution, then in theory Putin will have the possibility to use nuclear weapons in such a way that the opponent may not be brought to its knees but would respond with traditional weapons in order to avoid a nuclear world war.”
No real change in the level of threat
According to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, nothing fundamental changes with the new doctrine:
“What counts is not the wording but the way it is interpreted by those in power. ... Ever since Putin had the Russian nuclear forces put on standby during the annexation of Crimea in the spring of 2014, he has been playing with the threat of using nuclear weapons to bolster conventional military aggression. The West's caution in providing military support to Ukraine is the - well-founded - reaction to this. The fact that the Kremlin is now defining the conditions for the use of nuclear weapons more broadly and a little more vaguely therefore makes little difference to the actual threat posed.”
Muscle-flexing for the home crowd
The nuclear doctrine is just propaganda for domestic consumption, Corriere della Sera explains:
“After the news from the US on Friday, Russian television immediately flexed the muscles of patriotic pride. ... 'All it takes is three well-placed missiles and the entire British civilisation will collapse and be destroyed forever,' said a military expert on the first state channel, pointing to a map showing all the capitals and sensitive locations in Europe that are within reach of his country's missiles. ... It's small consolation that some clever media and individuals who really know the intentions of Putin and his inner circle continue to rule out the use of the ultra-weapon. This is the wind that has been blowing in Russia for years.”