Are we on the brink of WWIII? What If Putin Launches Nuclear Strikes? | Global Catastrophe Explained

Putin signs law allowing a nuclear strike: Kremlin leader lowers threshold for justifying nuke launch amid growing WW3 fears as Ukraine fires US-made ATACMS into Russia for first time
Putin said in September that Russia’s nuclear doctrine was going to be updated
Vladimir Putin this morning signed off on an updated version of the Kremlin’s nuclear doctrine that broadens the scope for Moscow to turn to its fearsome atomic arsenal on the same day that US-made missiles rained down on Russian soil.

 

 

 

 

 

The new document, which replaces the previous iteration outlined in 2020, allows Putin’s strategic forces to deploy their devastating weapons if Russia or Belarus is threatened by a non-nuclear nation supported by a nuclear power.
Threats that could warrant a nuclear response from Russia’s leadership include an attack with conventional missiles, drones or other aircraft, according to the updated document.
Ukraine’s strike on an ammunition depot in Russia’s Bryansk region this morning with US-supplied ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) meets these criteria, with Moscow saying that it marks a ‘new phase of the Western war’.
‘This is, of course, a signal that they want to escalate,’ Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking at a G20 press conference in Brazil, said of the strike.
‘We will be taking this as a qualitatively new phase of the Western war against Russia. And we will react accordingly,’ he added, accusing Washington of helping Kyiv operate the missiles.
Lavrov also urged the West to read the decree signed by Putin, saying in a stark warning: ‘I hope that they will read this doctrine… in its entirety.’

 

 

 

 

 

But Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky has dismissed Putin’s so-called ‘red lines’ and the provision of ATACMS — which boasts an operational range of up to 190 miles — has brought hundreds of prized Russian military and logistics assets within range of Kyiv’s crosshairs.
The Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a US think-tank, has established a list of nearly 250 high-value military and paramilitary targets within range of the weapons that could be demolished by Ukraine.
Among the main targets that the ISW assesses Ukraine may seek to strike include a slew of brigade and division headquarters, artillery and missile units central to Russia’s air defence capabilities, logistics hubs supplying Putin’s units on the frontlines, and as many as 16 Russian air bases.The ATACMS strike in Bryansk on what is the 1,000th day of war in Ukraine triggered a fiery explosion at an ammunition depot in Karachev around 75 miles from the Ukrainian border.

Eyewitnesses along with Russian and Ukrainian military bloggers first reported the attack, with anonymous Ukrainian military officials later telling RBC Ukraine the strike was conducted with the US-manufactured ATACMS.
Are we on the brink of WWIII?

 

 

 

 

Kyiv is yet to officially confirm the ATACMS strike, but Russia’s Defence Ministry claimed they shot down five missiles. A sixth missile was damaged but ultimately landed on the military facility, it said.
The punishing strike comes just three days after Ukraine received the green light from the Biden administration to turn the weapons on targets inside Russia.
In anticipation of Ukraine receiving permission to use ATACMS, Russia’s air force is said to have redeployed many of its fighter jets and strategic bomber aircraft away from the airbases in range of the missiles to sites further east.
But there are still more than 200 military facilities that could be battered by the US-manufactured munitions from positions along the 800-mile-long frontline.
Among the first likely targets for Ukrainian strikes could be the Kuzminka Military Base, a critical staging area for Putin’s forces between the Russian city of Rostov-on-Don and the Ukrainian border which acts as a hub for vehicle storage, troop assembly and operational planning.
Russia’s 381st artillery regiment is also located close to the Kuzminka base along with several logistics centres.
Meanwhile, in Kursk, Kyiv’s troops could seek to target the headquarters of Russia’s 448th Missile Brigade or regional assembly points used to gather troops preparing to push back the Ukrainian incursion in the region.

 

 

 

 

Targeting these sites could cripple Russian logistics, command, and combat support, significantly reducing Moscow’s offensive capabilities in occupied Ukrainian territory​ and harming efforts to retake territory in Kursk.
However, the overall supply of ATACMS missiles to Ukraine is short, so US officials and analysts have questioned whether allowing Ukraine to use the weapons systems is really worth it given the potential consequences that could ensue. Asked on Tuesday if a Ukrainian attack with longer-range US missiles could potentially trigger a nuclear response, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov answered affirmatively.

He pointed to the provision in Russia’s new doctrine that allows Moscow to turn to nuclear weapons following a conventional strike that raises critical threats for the ‘sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia and its ally, Belarus’.
Putin, who today signed the decree formalising Russia’s updated nuclear doctrine, first announced changes to the document in September.
At the time, the Russian president said he would consider Western nations ‘direct participants’ in the war in Ukraine if they were to provide Kyiv with the ability to strike targets inside Russia.

 

 

 

 

 

He also suggested he may provide Russian missiles to Western adversaries to strike Western targets abroad as a course of retaliation.
Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at the Defense Priorities think tank, was critical of the Biden administration’s decision to approve the use of ATACMS on targets in Russia.
‘Expanding Ukraine’s ability to launch offensive strikes with Western weapons inside Russia will not alter the trajectory of the war or help Kyiv gain an advantage against a better equipped and more resilient adversary.
‘Any escalation could reverberate on Ukraine itself. With the Biden administration on its way out and the incoming Trump administration indicating an intention to end the war, Putin has little incentive to act with restraint in his retaliation toward Kyiv.’
But proponents of the policy say that even a few strikes deeper inside Russia would force its military to change deployments and expend more of its resources.