(Moscow) – Russia has officially revised its nuclear doctrine, with President Vladimir Putin approving changes that lower the threshold for deploying nuclear weapons. The doctrine now permits retaliation against non-nuclear attacks on Russian soil if the aggressor is supported by a nuclear-armed state. Experts say this revision directly targets Ukraine and its Western backers, reflecting an escalating reliance on nuclear deterrence as the war drags on.
The Kremlin announced these updates after the U.S. granted Ukraine permission to use ATACMS missiles on Russian targets. Hours later, Moscow accused Kyiv of attacking a military facility in Bryansk using U.S.-supplied weapons. This timing, analysts suggest, underscores Russia’s aim to deter further Western military aid to Ukraine by introducing ambiguity around its nuclear response.
Russia’s new doctrine marks the first update since 2020 and significantly broadens the scenarios for nuclear use. Previously, such weapons were reserved for scenarios where Russia’s very existence was threatened. Now, a “critical threat to sovereignty or territorial integrity” suffices—language deliberately vague, according to nuclear arms expert Pavel Podvig. He noted that this ambiguity appears designed to increase uncertainty and hesitation among Kyiv’s allies.
Concurrently, reports surfaced of an alleged Russian ICBM launch targeting Ukraine, originating from the Astrakhan region. Ukraine’s military claimed the missile was used during overnight strikes on Dnipro, though Western officials later suggested that shorter-range missiles had likely been employed. Kyiv described the event as a test run for ICBM capabilities, with President Volodymyr Zelensky accusing Russia of using Ukraine as a “weapons testing ground.”
Experts have expressed skepticism over the alleged ICBM use. Andrey Baklitskiy, a researcher at the UN Institute for Disarmament Research, remarked that deploying an ICBM in such a scenario would be “unprecedented and senseless.” A shorter-range weapon could achieve the same results at significantly lower cost, he added.
The international response to these developments has been severe. EU and British officials condemned the actions, with UK representatives calling them reckless and depraved if confirmed. NATO, which has added two new member states since the war began, continues to expand its support for Ukraine despite Russia’s increasingly hostile rhetoric.
Analysts believe Putin’s nuclear saber-rattling is primarily aimed at creating fear rather than actionable plans. The Kremlin has made over 200 nuclear threats since the war began, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Experts, however, warn that constant threats risk eroding their credibility.
While Putin continues to project strength, some critics, including former Russian diplomat Boris Bondarev, argue that any actual nuclear deployment would bypass doctrine entirely. “Putin doesn’t need justification—if he decides to use [nuclear weapons], he’ll simply issue the order,” Bondarev stated.
Russia’s moves, seen as desperate attempts to regain leverage, highlight the widening gap between its grand threats and the reality of a faltering war effort. As NATO grows stronger and Ukraine’s resistance remains steadfast, Moscow’s nuclear rhetoric increasingly resembles a tool of intimidation rather than a viable strategy.
Key Features of Russia’s Revised Nuclear Doctrine
| Criteria for Use | Previous Doctrine (2020) | Revised Doctrine (2024) |
|---|---|---|
| Existential Threat | Required | No longer required |
| Sovereignty Threat | Not mentioned | Included |
| Territorial Integrity Threat | Excluded | Included |
| Ambiguity in Use | Limited | Expanded |