Putin signs new Russian nuclear doctrine after Biden's arms decision for Ukraine
apnews.com
President Vladimir Putin has signed a revised nuclear doctrine declaring that a conventional attack on Russia by any nation that is supported by a nuclear power will be considered a joint attack.

cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/28311786

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday signed a revised nuclear doctrine declaring that a conventional attack on Russia by any nation that is supported by a nuclear power will be considered a joint attack on his country.

The signing of the doctrine, which says that any massive aerial attack on Russia could trigger a nuclear response, reflects Putin’s readiness to threaten use of the country’s nuclear arsenal to force the West to back down as Moscow presses a slow-moving offensive in Ukraine.

  • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
    21·
    5 hours ago

    They aren’t though. They can drop a few nukes without suffering nuclear retaliation. Any nukes fired at Russia automatically triggers a full scale Russian launch.

    So while Russia could nuke others, others cannot nuke Russia, not without triggering the end of the world.

    • Zron@lemmy.world
      7·
      5 hours ago

      You know the US also has a launch on wanting policy.

      If any of the billion dollar spy satellites see an ICBM launch that’s even vaguely going towards the US, we launch an overwhelming response.

      Russia isn’t going to drop a few nukes and waltz away, because the US has the same system or better in place already. Especially if Russia hits a nato country, we’re all gonna die due to MAD. One bomb breaks MAD.

      • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
        3·
        3 hours ago

        The US does not have a launch-on-warning system in place.

        while the United States maintains the capability to launch nuclear forces under conditions of an ongoing nuclear attack, it does not rely on a launch-under-attack policy to ensure a credible response. Rather, U.S. nuclear forces are postured to withstand an initial attack. In all cases, the United States will maintain a human “in the loop” for all actions critical to informing and executing decisions by the President to initiate and terminate nuclear weapon employment.

        https://media.defense.gov/2022/Oct/27/2003103845/-1/-1/1/2022-NATIONAL-DEFENSE-STRATEGY-NPR-MDR.pdf

        • Zron@lemmy.world
          1·
          2 hours ago

          Just because it’s not mechanically automatic, does not mean it’s not a launch on warning system.

          The key phrase there is “it does not rely on a launch-under-attack policy to ensure credible defense”

          If the US detects a ICBM launch, it will launch a response. It does not matter if the thing that presses the button is a person or an automated program.

          Launch on warning just means a country won’t physically absorb a nuclear strike before launching, but will launch if an enemy launch is detected. It has nothing to do with automatic launch systems.

          • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
            2·
            3 hours ago

            Yes thank you. What I said was that our warning system is not our trigger. Our triggers have people pulling them. I went back and hyphenated it properly for you.

            Unlike Russian nuclear policy in this regard, known a Dead Hand aka Permitr, where the warning system is also the trigger.

    • The Snark Urge@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      5 hours ago

      Bold of you to assume Russia can nuke anybody. Putin would have to do a lot of talking to explain why they had to nuke Ukraine when the war is going sooo great according to all the state media. He isn’t invincible even in Moscow. And if they hit anyone else, then it’s pretty much all over but the crying for all of us.

      • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
        4·
        5 hours ago

        I appreciate this comment because it’s the one thing that might stop Russia. It’s not going to be nuclear deterrence, it’s going to be internal and external pressure.

        I don’t trust Putin to be rational though and neither should anyone else.

        • The Snark Urge@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          5 hours ago

          Kinda it. He’s set up his government to operate like an organized crime syndicate, so our best hope at the moment is to weaken them by degrees and wait for a more risk-averse (or at least more realistic) power player to usurp him.

          • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
            2·
            2 hours ago

            I think counting on a coconspirator to become rational and brave is a hope. He’s president for life though and lives in a literal villain lair. Miles of impassible mountains with one way in on one said, patrolled by heat seaking drones and all matter of radio and seismic sensors, and an frigid ocean patrolled by everything up to nuclear submarines on the other. I’d put about as much faith in it as I would waiting around for natural causes or a jilted lover, a disgruntled chef, or whatever dumb luck might bring the world closer to peace.

            To add to this, I think Russia has already committed to losing at least ten million people if hot war breaks out, and for Putin that would be like no big deal if it got him a good enough strategic advantage, whether it’s pushing back NATO or undermining democracy. That is to say, I hope it won’t take an utter humanitarian catastrophe to rock Putin’s goons hard enough to turn on him.