From Novaya gazeta Europe, Sept. 28, 2024, https://novayagazeta.eu/articles/2024/09/28/anonsirovanie-apokalipsisa. Condensed text:

Ever since the Soviet Union achieved nuclear parity with the US, nuclear weapons have been seen as a means of deterrence. Inevitable and assured mutual destruction rendered their practical use impossible, other than on literally the last day of human history. Governments of various countries worried about accidental launches, the harms of nuclear weapons tests (which is why they were eventually banned) and weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. But everyone understood that a sane head of state could neither use nuclear weapons nor seriously threaten to.

But now, as the first quarter of the 21st century draws to a close, Vladimir Putin is declaring a new nuclear doctrine. According to him, Russia now considers itself within its rights to use nuclear weapons basically whenever it wants; this is ensured by the wording of the announced updates, which is vague and open to many different interpretations. In any case, striking Ukraine is allowed: after all, it attacked us and did so with the help of nuclear powers.

The world’s reaction is surprisingly calm. No emergency NATO summit, no putting everything possible on red alert (publicly).

In part, this has to do with the fact that a nuclear doctrine is a pretty meaningless document. You can agree with partners to take on verifiable obligations: to not conduct tests, for example, to cap the power of warheads or not produce particular ones, that sort of thing. These obligations always come with an oversight mechanism: This is not an area where you just take someone’s word for it. But saying that you’ll use [nuclear weapons] in certain cases and not in others is empty talk.

Even if the Bomb (with a capital B) doesn’t lead to the immediate death of humanity, it will turn a new page in history and be exactly the kind of force-majeure that voids all obligations. So it doesn’t really matter what the doctrine says. The USSR said it would never strike first. Would anyone have reined it in if it had? Now Putin is saying he’ll strike whenever he wants. The official piece of paper probably has nothing to do with his actual intentions and capabilities – like any written documents, for that matter: He is a sovereign exactly so that he doesn’t have to consider any limitations. More likely, this is another attempt to blackmail the West, announced right now in order to complicate Zelensky’s negotiations for permission to use Western weapons to strike Russian territory.

But we have to take the words said – not the doctrine – seriously. They indicate that Putin is nervous, that he feels uncertain and is thinking about shuffling the pieces on the board. . . .

And since Putin is saying what he is about the Bomb, that means he is preparing both us and himself for its use. We’re moving from “that’s impossible” to “when and where.”

His internal readiness is also shown by numerous statements from his stooges: the clowns on TV, various experts and other people who speak in unison about how using the Bomb is beneficial and even humane, not just in Ukraine but in general. These experts sense the mood of upper management and express only what will be approved – or, I’m afraid, has already been approved.

So, will he drop the Bomb?

I believe he may. He does not appear to have the moral barrier against using nuclear weapons – the understanding that it is a step toward destroying the planet – that both Khrushchev and Brezhnev had. Putin has already done a lot that seemed impossible for a more or less civilized person. He is definitely not concerned with how many Ukrainians will die, nor does he care how many of them or his own soldiers will die later from radiation.

In fact, he not only may, but “must” (meaning he thinks he must). First, the war is not going as it should. Yes, we’re moving forward, but too slowly. The war has already lasted longer than the siege of Leningrad. And there are problems with manpower. Idiots willing to sign a contract are running out, which is obvious from the ever-growing price tags on invitations to enlist in the Army – and announcing a draft is scary. Second, the Ukrainians were supposed to surrender a long time ago, but they keep fighting and dealing very grievous blows. Third, the population is tired of the war; there is no enthusiasm whatsoever. That means it needs to be wrapped up as soon as possible. With a victory, of course. The Japanese surrendered immediately after the Bomb. Maybe the Ukrainians would surrender, too?

In addition, the Bomb is also needed to solidify prestige among the elites: After all, something has to compensate for the humiliation of [the Ukrainian invasion of] Kursk.

When a mob kingpin feels people’s respect wavering, he has to do something truly terrible – then everyone will understand that he’s still in power. The Bomb is exactly that terrible thing.

Then again, it’s unclear: Does he even have nuclear weapons? After all, there’s a lot of things we’re told exist, but then it turns out they don’t. It was that way in the USSR, too – it seems like a characteristic of dictatorships generally. It’s hard for me to believe that, if everywhere is a mess, and everything that isn’t bolted down has been stolen, the notorious nuclear triad is in order. For a long time, people believed that, sure, there’s chaos everywhere, but everything is good in the Army – look at how awesome the parades are! Then again, it was during a parade that [the T-14 tank] Armata stalled and was never seen again –  But it was not parades, of course, but the war that showed that there is just as much mess and embezzlement in the Army as in any other sector. So, do we now believe in something no one has ever seen – the nuclear triad? Or is it the same as the Armata and the rising standard of living?

I think that not even Putin himself knows whether he has nuclear weapons. After all, he didn’t know the border at Kursk had holes in it, that the Army wasn’t ready for war, that air defense let strikes through. People are afraid to report and, most importantly, he doesn’t want to hear anything bad. So we don’t know what’s there.

But let’s assume they are there. And even ready for combat. Many people are counting on Putin not using them for an absolutely human reason: He’ll be too afraid. We see how much he cares about his health and safety. And since he wants to live, he won’t put his life at risk. The nuclear weapons will remain in storage; rhetoric will be the extent of it.

It would be nice to believe that. But there’s a catch! Using tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine doesn’t entail an automatic end of the world. It would be a local catastrophe, but there would not immediately be nuclear winter or tens of millions of casualties. What would there be instead? Of course, as many assume, a harsh reaction from the West could follow: strikes on missile silos and other sites crucial to a world war; a hunt for those who gave the order; and so on.

But the West has actually never promised any such thing: Some of us simply assumed it would. Nobody said, “If you use nuclear weapons, we’ll destroy all this, and we’ll get you.”

On the contrary, [French President Emmanuel] Macron and [German Chancellor Olaf] Scholz are now, the next day after Putin gave himself permission for everything, calling for caution in statements so as to not provoke an escalation! And Putin has reason to believe that the West’s reaction will once again be limited to words. In fact, someone close to the top officials in Western countries, or those top officials themselves, could decide that since he’s so deranged, he should be given Ukraine. After all, it won’t be forever, he’s not immortal, and after him – as is always the case after a tyrant departs – someone saner will appear. We just have to wait. Maybe this is Putin’s plan for victory?

The outcome of the war between Putin and the West is determined not just by economic and military potential – it is determined by strength of spirit. If the West doesn’t say clearly and convincingly that it will go to any lengths to protect itself, including protecting itself in Ukraine; if it isn’t actually willing to go to any length; if it doesn’t go back to what Churchill represented in World War II, Putin will win in Ukraine. And other countries will be next. First the very close ones, the ones that used to be part of the Empire, where he will still be victorious despite being objectively weaker. And then the ones further away. And it will still end in nuclear war. Or will the West wake up after all?