Future War: Nukes or No Nukes?

US Air Force Global Strike Command recently reported it launched an unarmed intercontinental ballistic missile from California to test the defense system.

Earlier, President Putin ordered tactical nuclear weapons drills in response to what he called “provocative statements and threats” by Western officials over possible deployments of Western military forces in Ukraine.

Escalation is evident. Nuclear escalation is part of the game. Are we fast approaching a new Cuban missile crisis or the present day situation is far worse?

Few years ago, yours truly (co)authored an article on how Moscow envisages future war with the West and whether it includes a nuclear component. That was before the current phase of the Ukraine crisis. Has anything changed?

"Discussion of a direct military conflict between great powers does not entirely exclude the use of nuclear weapons. In fact, Russia’s leadership and expert community are virtually unanimous in assessing that the limited use of nuclear arms is more likely today than it was a few years ago.

Contemporary Russian thinking on the issue dates back to the 1960s, when Soviet military literature, in response to the American doctrine of limited nuclear war, envisaged the use of tactical nuclear arms over a short period of time to localize military action to one or several operational theatres. This concept evolved further in the 1970s – both in the Soviet Union and in the United States – due to the emergence of precision weapons that were believed capable of serving the same purpose as tactical nuclear arms.

Yet the dominant view within Russian decision-making circles is that a nuclear war between Russia and the US is unlikely not because the might of American weapons deters the Russians from attacking the US – and vice versa – but because the two do not really see a direct war, let alone the use of nuclear weapons, as the most effective tool of targeting and ultimately weakening the adversary. The contemporary Russian argument suggests that if elites are determined to launch a war, there is little that can deter them, including nuclear weapons.

Yet a combination of psychological, political, military and technological factors could still encourage them to seek
other means of attaining their goals, ones that might be more effective from a political standpoint. This, in turn, paves the way for the view that other types of peer-to-peer strategic competition, including indirect, non-military engagements, are more probable."