Putin’s Nuclear Threats Lack Weight as an Offensive into Crimea Seems Likely

Russian and Ukrainian forces continue to battle, as the war stretches into its second year. Source for photo: Openverse

On March 25, 2023, Vladimir Putin made public his intention to transfer Russian nuclear weapons to Belarus in the ongoing war with Ukraine. This announcement was met with backlash from NATO, as well as Ukraine, who appealed to the United Nations Security Council for action. Through this decision, along with the announcement that Russia may move strategic nuclear arms to Belarus, President Putin is trying to make it seem that this conflict could quickly turn nuclear. However, past precedent and current pressures on the Russian president make it unlikely that his nuclear weapon moves are more than political posturing.

The weapons Putin has moved into Belarus are meant to be used in battlefield operations. While this move has been hinted at for some time, the British decision to supply Ukraine with new anti-tank weaponry finally pushed Putin to make his move. Putin argues that the depleted uranium within these arms could endanger both Ukrainians and Russian soldiers. However, according to the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), “Western anti-tank munitions commonly contain depleted uranium, which the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) notes is ‘very suitable for military uses.’” It is likely that the recent British arms shipment provided Putin justification to make a move that has long been in the cards.

This decision also precedes what is likely to be a very active period in the war, with campaigns set to begin on both sides. While Putin reportedly plans to move Russian forces both into new offensives and supportive operations, Ukraine’s military – bolstered by “an influx of powerful weapons” – threatens to push into Crimea. In anticipation of this, the Washington Post reports that Russia has begun strengthening its defenses in Crimea – where a large network of trenches and anti-tank defenses at key choke points prepare the Russian military for an attack by land or sea. In the past, Putin has signaled his intention to protect Russia’s hold on Crimea with nuclear force, regarding its importance to Russian military policy as suitable justification for use of nuclear weapons.

However, it is unlikely, even with the possible campaign into Crimea, that Putin will deploy nuclear weapons. While Putin’s threats of nuclear retaliation are meant to stifle support for Ukraine, these threats are likely to fall on deaf ears. Since none of the earlier strikes into Russia’s occupied territory – like those into Crimea – generated a nuclear response from Russia, Putin’s current threats come off as disingenuous. Furthermore, in a recent summit between Putin and Xi Jinping of China, Xi reportedly strongly discouraged Putin from turning to his nuclear arsenal. Russia’s dependence on China has increased as a result of widespread sanctions levied at the start of the war in Ukraine. Specifically, China has dramatically increased purchases of Russian fossil fuels. While China, deterred by possible western retaliation, has not supplied Russia with arms, this leverage allows China to exert greater influence over Russia’s war policies, specifically in regards to nuclear weapons. All of these factors create a situation where Putin’s arsenal in Belarus will likely do little to affect battlefield operations.

Therefore, the lack of pressure behind Putin’s threats allows western support of the Ukrainian war effort to continue unhindered. The pervasive sanctions levied against Russia, as well as consistent military support from the United States and its allies, have weakened the Russian war effort and allowed Ukrainian forces to act more effectively. Past reporting found that Russian soldiers are quickly becoming aloof and hostile towards each other, indicating a weakening force. However, other sources, including ISW reporting from April 15, suggest that Russian forces are steadily growing. Thus, as has been true throughout the war, western aid will continue to be necessary in ensuring a Ukrainian victory. However, continued support will rely on whether or not the west heeds Putin’s warnings or sees them as just empty threats.