How Likely Is the Use of Nuclear Weapons by Russia?

This photograph taken at a forensic expert center in an undisclosed location in Ukraine on November 24, 2024, shows parts of a missile that were collected for examination at the impact site in the town of Dnipro following an attack on November 21. (Photo by Roman PILIPEY / AFP)
This photograph taken at a forensic expert center in an undisclosed location in Ukraine on November 24, 2024, shows parts of a missile that were collected for examination at the impact site in the town of Dnipro following an attack on November 21. (Photo by Roman PILIPEY / AFP)
TT

How Likely Is the Use of Nuclear Weapons by Russia?

This photograph taken at a forensic expert center in an undisclosed location in Ukraine on November 24, 2024, shows parts of a missile that were collected for examination at the impact site in the town of Dnipro following an attack on November 21. (Photo by Roman PILIPEY / AFP)
This photograph taken at a forensic expert center in an undisclosed location in Ukraine on November 24, 2024, shows parts of a missile that were collected for examination at the impact site in the town of Dnipro following an attack on November 21. (Photo by Roman PILIPEY / AFP)

On 24 February 2022, in a televised speech heralding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin issued what was interpreted as a threat to use nuclear weapons against NATO countries should they interfere.

“Russia will respond immediately,” he said, “and the consequences will be such as you have never seen in your entire history.”

Then on 27 February 2022, Putin ordered Russia to move nuclear forces to a “special mode of combat duty’, which has a significant meaning in terms of the protocols to launch nuclear weapons from Russia.”

Dr. Patricia Lewis, director of the International Security program at Chatham House, wrote in a report that according to Russian nuclear weapons experts, Russia’s command and control system cannot transmit launch orders in peacetime, so increasing the status to “combat” allows a launch order to go through and be put into effect.

She said Putin made stronger nuclear threats in September 2022, following months of violent conflict and gains made by a Ukrainian counterattack.

“He indicated a stretch in Russian nuclear doctrine, lowering the threshold for nuclear weapons use from an existential threat to Russia to a threat to its territorial integrity,” Lewis wrote.

In November 2022, according to much later reports, the US and allies detected manoeuvres that suggested Russian nuclear forces were being mobilized.

Lewis said that after a flurry of diplomatic activity, China’s President Xi Jinping stepped in to calm the situation and speak against the use of nuclear weapons.

In September 2024, Putin announced an update of the 2020 Russian nuclear doctrine. The update was published on 19 November 2024 and formally reduced the threshold for nuclear weapons use.

According to Lewis, the 2020 doctrine said that Russia could use nuclear weapons “in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy.”

On 21 November 2024, Russia attacked Dnipro in Ukraine using a new ballistic missile for the first time.

She said Putin announced the missile as the ‘Oreshnik’, which is understood to be a nuclear-capable, intermediate-range ballistic missile which has a theoretical range of below 5,500km.

Lewis added that Russia has fired conventionally armed nuclear-capable missiles at Ukraine throughout the war, but the Oreshnik is much faster and harder to defend against, and suggests an escalatory intent by Russia.

Nuclear Response During Cold War

In her report, Lewis said that nuclear weapons deterrence was developed in the Cold War primarily on the basis of what was called ‘mutually assured destruction’ (MAD).

The idea behind MAD is that the horror and destruction from nuclear weapons is enough to deter aggressive action and war, she added.

But the application of deterrence theory to post-cold war realities is far more complicated in the era of cyberattacks and AI, which could interfere with the command and control of nuclear weapons.

In light of these risks, presidents Biden and Xi issued a joint statement from the 2024 G20 summit affirming the need to maintain human control over the decision to use nuclear weapons.

The US and Russia exchange information on their strategic, long-range nuclear missiles under the New START agreement – a treaty to reduce and monitor nuclear weapons between the two countries which is set to expire in February 2026.

But, Lewis said, with the US decision to exit the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 2019, there are no longer any agreements between the US and Russia regulating the number or the deployment of ground-launched nuclear missiles with a range of 500-5,500 km.

She said short-range nuclear weapons were withdrawn and put in storage as a result of the 1991 Presidential Nuclear Initiatives but are not subject to any legal restraints.

The 10th NPT Review Conference was held in 2022 in New York. The issue of nuclear weapons threats and the targeting of nuclear power stations in Ukraine were central to the debate.

Lewis noted that a document was carefully crafted to finely balance concerns about the three pillars of the treaty – non-proliferation, nuclear disarmament and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. But Russia withdrew its agreement on the last day of the conference, scuppering progress.

“It was believed that if Russia were to use nuclear weapons it would likely be in Ukraine, using short range, lower yield ‘battlefield’ nuclear weapons,” she said, adding that Russia is thought to have more than 1,000 in reserve.

“These would have to be taken from storage and either connected to missiles, placed in bombers, or as shell in artillery,” Lewis wrote.

Increasingly the rhetoric from Russia suggests nuclear threats are a more direct threat to NATO – not only Ukraine – and could refer to longer range, higher yield nuclear weapons.

For example in his 21 September 2022 speech, Putin accused NATO states of nuclear blackmail, referring to alleged “statements made by some high-ranking representatives of the leading NATO countries on the possibility and admissibility of using weapons of mass destruction – nuclear weapons – against Russia.”

Putin added: “In the event of a threat to the territorial integrity of our country and to defend Russia and our people, we will certainly make use of all weapon systems available to us. This is not a bluff.”

There have been no expressed nuclear weapons threats from NATO states.

NATO does rely on nuclear weapons as a form of deterrence and has recently committed to significantly strengthen its longer-term deterrence and defence posture in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The current UK Labor government has repeatedly reiterated its commitment to British nuclear weapons – including before the July 2024 election, according to Lewis.

Therefore, she said, any movement to ready and deploy Russian nuclear weapons would be seen and monitored by US and others’ satellites, which can see through cloud cover and at night – as indeed appears to have happened in late 2022.

Lewis concluded that depending on other intelligence and analysis – and the failure of all diplomatic attempts to dissuade Russia – NATO countries may decide to intervene to prevent launch by bombing storage sites and missile deployment sites in advance.



Russia Expresses Concern Over the Spread of Iran War to the Caspian

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov attends a joint press conference with Kenyan Foreign Minister Musalia Mudavadii following their talks in Moscow, Russia, 16 March 2026. (EPA/Tatyana Makeyeva / Pool)
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov attends a joint press conference with Kenyan Foreign Minister Musalia Mudavadii following their talks in Moscow, Russia, 16 March 2026. (EPA/Tatyana Makeyeva / Pool)
TT

Russia Expresses Concern Over the Spread of Iran War to the Caspian

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov attends a joint press conference with Kenyan Foreign Minister Musalia Mudavadii following their talks in Moscow, Russia, 16 March 2026. (EPA/Tatyana Makeyeva / Pool)
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov attends a joint press conference with Kenyan Foreign Minister Musalia Mudavadii following their talks in Moscow, Russia, 16 March 2026. (EPA/Tatyana Makeyeva / Pool)

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke to Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi on Monday and expressed concern ‌over ‌the spread ‌of ⁠the Iran war to the ⁠Caspian Sea.

"Mutual concern was expressed about the dangerous ⁠spread of the ‌conflict ‌provoked by ‌Washington and ‌Tel Aviv to the Caspian Sea area," Russia's ‌foreign ministry said.

Lavrov also said that ⁠attacks ⁠on Iran's nuclear infrastructure including Bushehr posed "unacceptable risks to the safety of Russian personnel and are fraught with catastrophic environmental consequences".

Araghchi and Lavrov held their call after US President Donald Trump revealed Washington and Tehran had held "very good and productive conversations regarding a complete and total resolution of our hostilities."

Lavrov called for an "immediate cessation of hostilities and a political settlement that takes into account the legitimate interests of all parties involved, above all Iran," the Russian foreign ministry said in a readout of the call, which it said was initiated by Tehran.


Trump Postpones Military Strikes on Iranian Power Plants

Iranian Red Crescent emergency workers use a bulldozer to clear rubble from a residential building that was hit in an earlier US-Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, Monday, March 23, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
Iranian Red Crescent emergency workers use a bulldozer to clear rubble from a residential building that was hit in an earlier US-Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, Monday, March 23, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
TT

Trump Postpones Military Strikes on Iranian Power Plants

Iranian Red Crescent emergency workers use a bulldozer to clear rubble from a residential building that was hit in an earlier US-Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, Monday, March 23, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
Iranian Red Crescent emergency workers use a bulldozer to clear rubble from a residential building that was hit in an earlier US-Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, Monday, March 23, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)

President Donald Trump said on Monday the US has ⁠had good and ⁠productive conversations with Iran ⁠and he will order the military to postpone any military strikes against ⁠Iranian power ⁠plants and energy infrastructure.

Trump's move followed a threat by Iran to attack Israel's power plants and those supplying ⁠US bases across the region if the US targets Iran's power network.

The United States and Iran "have had, over the last two days, very good and productive conversations regarding a complete and total resolution of our hostilities in the Middle East," Trump wrote, in all capitals, early Monday on his Truth Social platform.

"Based on the tenor and tone" of the talks, "witch (sic) will continue throughout the week, I have instructed the Department of War to postpone any and all military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for a five day period, subject to the success of the ongoing meetings," he added.


Moscow Bets on Tehran’s Resilience, Western Rift

The Russian President attends events marking “Defender of the Fatherland Day” in Moscow on February 23 (AP)
The Russian President attends events marking “Defender of the Fatherland Day” in Moscow on February 23 (AP)
TT

Moscow Bets on Tehran’s Resilience, Western Rift

The Russian President attends events marking “Defender of the Fatherland Day” in Moscow on February 23 (AP)
The Russian President attends events marking “Defender of the Fatherland Day” in Moscow on February 23 (AP)

The Kremlin’s expectations appeared markedly pessimistic in the fourth week of the Iran war, as confidence grew that Russia’s ability to influence the conflict was waning and that the repercussions for one of its key partners could be severe.

With limited leverage, the Kremlin’s main options now seem to be avoiding direct involvement while closely monitoring the fallout, particularly signs of widening divisions between Washington and European capitals — and what one veteran Russian diplomat described as “driving the final wedge” into transatlantic relations.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov summed up the mood: “No reasonable person would dare predict how the situation in the Middle East will evolve, but it is clear that things are moving toward the worse.”

From the outset, Russian assessments have focused on two key assumptions: that air strikes alone cannot topple Iran’s political system, regardless of their scale, and that ending the war without a costly ground intervention would be difficult for the attacking parties.

A second assumption is that any cessation of hostilities would resemble the outcome of the brief 12-day war of 2025, with each side claiming success without achieving its ultimate objectives, particularly Israel’s stated goal of dismantling Iran’s ruling system.

Such a scenario would suit Moscow, even if Iran were to emerge weakened but still cohesive under its leadership.

Despite increasingly pessimistic forecasts about a potential geographic expansion of the conflict, Moscow believes Tehran has so far absorbed the initial blow and shifted the confrontation into a war of attrition. Russian officials are also banking on possible internal developments within Washington and Tel Aviv, as well as growing divergences with European allies.

Peskov has repeatedly stressed that military operations against Iran have led to greater cohesion among the Iranian people around their leadership, adding that attempts at regime change tend to produce the opposite effect.

He also condemned ongoing assassination campaigns targeting Iranian leaders, calling the situation “abnormal” and warning of “serious consequences.” In a pointed remark, he added that Iran is “actively defending itself against attacks on its territory.”

These statements underline Russia’s primary bet: that Iran’s internal stability will hold, while divisions deepen among its adversaries.

Putin’s mediation effort

President Vladimir Putin initially sought to use the crisis to bolster Russia’s diplomatic standing by proposing rapid mediation to halt the war.

During the first week, he held a series of calls with regional leaders, criticizing Iranian strikes on Gulf countries while emphasizing Moscow’s ability to send “direct messages” to Tehran.

Russia also revived earlier proposals discussed in Oman concerning Iran’s nuclear capabilities and missile program. Moscow offered to take control of enriched uranium and transfer it to Russian territory, while guaranteeing that Iran’s missile capabilities would not be used against Israel or neighboring states.

The proposal was also raised during Putin’s only call with US President Donald Trump in the second week of the war. However, it failed to gain traction in either Tel Aviv — which insists on a military solution — or Washington, where Trump signaled that Putin should first resolve the Ukraine conflict before seeking a role elsewhere.

Limited support for Iran

Against this backdrop, the Kremlin’s options for meaningful intervention appear extremely limited. Complicating matters are accusations that Moscow has provided valuable intelligence support to Iran.

These claims gained weight when US presidential envoy Steve Witkoff reportedly issued a strong warning to Moscow, and the issue was raised directly during the Trump-Putin call.

Nevertheless, Russian circles argue that Moscow has little choice but to continue offering indirect assistance to Tehran while avoiding provoking Washington.

According to Russian media sources, this support takes two main forms: sharing limited intelligence on Israeli movements — carefully calibrated to avoid harming US interests — and providing indirect backing through private companies specializing in cyber technologies, an area where Russia and China have made significant advances.

European repercussions

Another key aspect of Russia’s strategy is its close monitoring of how the war is affecting Ukraine and European positions, which Moscow still sees as the main obstacle to ending the conflict on its terms.

There is little concealment of Russian satisfaction at Europe’s difficulties amid the war, particularly fears over rising oil and gas prices and the prospect of easing sanctions on Moscow to offset supply shortages.

Kremlin commentary suggests that European priorities are shifting, with energy costs replacing Ukraine at the top of government agendas.

Veteran Russian diplomat Alexander Yakovenko argued that the Middle East crisis, combined with the fallout from Ukraine, is intensifying tensions within the transatlantic alliance.

He pointed to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz rejecting a US request to help secure the Strait of Hormuz as evidence of deepening strains. Trump, he noted, responded by describing NATO as a “paper tiger.”

According to Yakovenko, the coming weeks will be decisive for the Iran conflict and its broader consequences. He added that transatlantic relations are facing a severe crisis, with disagreements over Ukraine fueling European opposition to Trump, a factor that could influence the US midterm elections in November.

More broadly, he warned that a US setback in Iran would weaken Washington’s position vis-à-vis Beijing, noting that China has already used export controls on rare earth minerals to counter US trade pressure.

In this context, Yakovenko sees the emergence of three dominant global powers — the United States, China and Russia — with Europe increasingly sidelined.

Such a shift, he suggested, would echo the post-World War II Yalta-Potsdam order, albeit with China replacing Britain, marking the end of two centuries of Western containment of Russia.